register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Azz
Administrator
Azz is offline  
Location: South Wales, UK
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 18,570
Male 
 
06-10-2012, 02:04 PM
Originally Posted by Jet&Copper View Post
For everyone else, if you can't figure how you or someone else had cancer yet you aren't inbred, you are either being extremely obtuse or are showing other traits traditionally attributed to inbred individuals
Please keep your insults to yourself. The post has earned you an infraction.
Reply With Quote
Azz
Administrator
Azz is offline  
Location: South Wales, UK
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 18,570
Male 
 
06-10-2012, 05:58 PM
If you have problem with moderation please use the contact a mod or admin section - do not continue to post in the thread causing disruption for everyone else.

Name-calling will not be tolerated - even if you feel someone is 'wasting your time'. Just ignore them, or articulate your posts in an otherwise acceptable manner. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
rubylover
Dogsey Senior
rubylover is offline  
Location: Alberta, Canada
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 285
Female 
 
06-10-2012, 07:07 PM
Originally Posted by smokeybear View Post
Was not the oldest dog (died at 29) a pedigree Sheepdog, Bluey of Australia?
Bluey was born in 1910 and he is described as an Australian cattle-dog (that is an Australian dog used for cattle, not necessarily the currently named breed), or Queensland Heeler depending on the source. That was a dog 'type' not a purebred dog (the reason for alternate names for what he was as well). ACDs were not bred within closed stud books until long after WWII.



"Some of the breeds used to develop the ACD were: the Dingo, Smooth Haired Scotch Merle Collies, the Dalmatian, the Bull Terrier and the Australian Kelpie. The end result was an outstanding herding dog with superior stamina that could work stock quietly yet with enough insistence to get the job done well. One who was willing and quite able to drive cattle across vast distances in the worst weather conditions.

Robert Kaleski drafted the standard for the breed in 1893, which was finally approved in Australia in 1903. The Australian Cattle Dog was fully recognized by the AKC in 1980."


This is similar to the way we refer to Alaskan Huskies - they are a recognized landrace and we USED to call those breeds - but they are not purebred by pedigree.

Originally Posted by smokeybear View Post
And a Wirehaired Dachshund lived to 21 called Chanel?

To name but two.............
Don't know about this guy.

"What are your THOUGHTS and is there any actual evidence out there to support either argument?"
My experience with those I've known and the many I've owned is that mutts and mixbreeds are healthier and live longer. I can't possibly know enough dogs to claim anything scientific, and especially have not known enough purebred dogs.

I find scientific evidense supports that mutts have better odds. Of course, then, predictability on specifics is out the window. Purebreds are better for that.

------------------
Read an interesting blog on this topic recently.
"Are Mixed Breed Dogs Healthier Than Purebreds?

EEEEENT!

WRONG QUESTION!

The proper question would be:

What are the risks of (genetic) disease associated with this breed, and how do they compare with other breeds and mixed breeds as populations? . . . "
more here - http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2...han-purebreds/

Ruby
Reply With Quote
Jet&Copper
Dogsey Veteran
Jet&Copper is offline  
Location: Scotland
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,600
Female 
 
06-10-2012, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by rubylover View Post
Bluey was born in 1910 and he is described as an Australian cattle-dog (that is an Australian dog used for cattle, not necessarily the currently named breed), or Queensland Heeler depending on the source. That was a dog 'type' not a purebred dog (the reason for alternate names for what he was as well). ACDs were not bred within closed stud books until long after WWII.






This is similar to the way we refer to Alaskan Huskies - they are a recognized landrace and we USED to call those breeds - but they are not purebred by pedigree.



Don't know about this guy.



My experience with those I've known and the many I've owned is that mutts and mixbreeds are healthier and live longer. I can't possibly know enough dogs to claim anything scientific, and especially have not known enough purebred dogs.

I find scientific evidense supports that mutts have better odds. Of course, then, predictability on specifics is out the window. Purebreds are better for that.

------------------
Read an interesting blog on this topic recently.
"Are Mixed Breed Dogs Healthier Than Purebreds?

EEEEENT!

WRONG QUESTION!

The proper question would be:

What are the risks of (genetic) disease associated with this breed, and how do they compare with other breeds and mixed breeds as populations? . . . "
more here - http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2...han-purebreds/

Ruby
Brilliant article Rubylover, could not have put it better myself
Reply With Quote
bijou
Dogsey Senior
bijou is offline  
Location: lincolnshire UK
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 591
Female 
 
07-10-2012, 05:00 AM
If we are talking health in terms of genetic fitness of a population, then animals that are outcrossed on a regular basis, as a rule, will be healthier - for reason I have already posted.

..why then is our own species so prone to genetic problems ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders

the oldest dog in the Uk was a line bred pedigree Papillon Shimna Goldfinch bred by exhibitor and judge Sue Jones of Suffolk - Goldfinch lived to the grand old age of 28....that's the equivalent of 158 human years !
Reply With Quote
smokeybear
Dogsey Veteran
smokeybear is offline  
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
Female 
 
07-10-2012, 06:53 AM
After listeing to an interesting article on Radio 4 the other week on epigenetics and seeing it mentioned in the book I leafed through last week I bought "Zoobiquity" to learn more.

It is true that this has been discussed for a few years and indeed Robert Sapolski speaks about it in his EXCELLENT collection of essays "Monkeyluv" without using the term.

It takes that nature v nurture discussion to a further level by considering how infections, toxins, food, other organisms and even cultural practices can turn genes on and off to alter an animal's development.

Apparently studies show that evolution can happen to us during our lifetime and epigenetic changes to our DNA mean that the genes we pass on to our children can differ from the onew we inherited.

Thus as this book is about comparing the similarities between human and animal conditions/illnesses etc this surely is yet ANOTHER factor to consider in the X breed v pedigree debate which makes the debate even more complex.
Reply With Quote
rune
Dogsey Veteran
rune is offline  
Location: cornwall uk
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,132
Female 
 
07-10-2012, 07:47 AM
Thats really interesting.

rune
Reply With Quote
Jet&Copper
Dogsey Veteran
Jet&Copper is offline  
Location: Scotland
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,600
Female 
 
07-10-2012, 08:23 AM
Originally Posted by bijou View Post
..why then is our own species so prone to genetic problems ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders

the oldest dog in the Uk was a line bred pedigree Papillon Shimna Goldfinch bred by exhibitor and judge Sue Jones of Suffolk - Goldfinch lived to the grand old age of 28....that's the equivalent of 158 human years !
What makes you think humans have a monopoly on genetic problems? Or that at least some of our genetic problems aren't due to inbreeding? For a start many populations of humans are subject to founder effect - essentially bottlenecking certain genes and leading to homozygosity.

Did you read the explanations i wrote or just pick out the last sentence? Genetics is about risk factors, for the main. Inbreeding and heterozygosity are just part of the role. As i already stated, somatic cell mutations are a large consideration, as are their environmental problems.

Genetics is a complex field to study - epigentics adding yet another layer to that level of complexity....

I will say it again. All populations suffer from genetic issues. Causing a population to go from hetero to homogeneous however massively stacks the cards against you. Something that is well known in every other breeding programme...
Reply With Quote
Jet&Copper
Dogsey Veteran
Jet&Copper is offline  
Location: Scotland
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,600
Female 
 
07-10-2012, 08:25 AM
Originally Posted by smokeybear View Post
After listeing to an interesting article on Radio 4 the other week on epigenetics and seeing it mentioned in the book I leafed through last week I bought "Zoobiquity" to learn more.

It is true that this has been discussed for a few years and indeed Robert Sapolski speaks about it in his EXCELLENT collection of essays "Monkeyluv" without using the term.

It takes that nature v nurture discussion to a further level by considering how infections, toxins, food, other organisms and even cultural practices can turn genes on and off to alter an animal's development.

Apparently studies show that evolution can happen to us during our lifetime and epigenetic changes to our DNA mean that the genes we pass on to our children can differ from the onew we inherited.

Thus as this book is about comparing the similarities between human and animal conditions/illnesses etc this surely is yet ANOTHER factor to consider in the X breed v pedigree debate which makes the debate even more complex.
SB you have made my morning

Epigenetics is my FAV subject. We can discuss more when im off phone
Reply With Quote
rune
Dogsey Veteran
rune is offline  
Location: cornwall uk
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,132
Female 
 
07-10-2012, 08:34 AM
Originally Posted by Jet&Copper View Post
What makes you think humans have a monopoly on genetic problems, or that at least some of our genetic problems are due to inbreeding? For a start many populations of humans are subject to founder effect - essentially bottlenecking certain genes and leading to homozygosity.

Did you read the explanations i wrote or just pick out the last sentence? Genetics is about risk factors, for the main. Inbreeding and heterozygosity are just part of the role. As i already stated, somatic cell mutations are a large consideration, as are their environmental problems.

Genetics is a complex field to study - epigentics adding yet another layer to that level of complexity....

I will say it again. All populations suffer from genetic issues. Causing a population to go from hetero to homogeneous stacks the cards agsinst you.
There is quite a lot of publicity surrounding cousin marriages in some areas and the effect it is having on the numbers of children with various syndromes, some of which are quite rare. There was a radio 4 programme about it quite recently.

rune
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 5 of 12 « First < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are crossbreeds healthier? Azz Dog Health 25 06-10-2012 12:19 PM
Pedigree V crossbreed health leadstaffs General Dog Chat 4 27-03-2012 11:54 PM
Healthier food options please :D kate_7590 Food & Drink 12 14-11-2010 06:21 PM
Owning a dog = Healthier Children? Deedee1321 General Dog Chat 1 23-09-2010 08:12 AM
Pedigree Vs Crossbreed health benefits Pidge General Dog Chat 61 12-04-2009 01:52 PM

© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top