Mixed Breeds Healthier? - No

[aslan]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

From a forwarded email I received today....

This veterinarian should become the spokesperson for the AKC and us dog owners who want to continue our rights as owners. This is in reply to the article with PETA's request that USA Network cancel the broadcasting of Westminster.

Thank you Libbye Miller DVM for stating:

Bravo to USA Network

"Adorable mixed breeds" get cancer, epilepsy, allergies, heart disease, and orthopedic problems just like purebreds. I see it every day in my veterinary practice but mixed breed dogs aren't tracked like the purebreds so they have a reputation as "healthier" that is actually undeserved in many cases."

It is so sad that a lot of folks, including young veterinarians these days, buy into the "hybrid vigor" baloney. The vet schools have been infiltrated by the Animal Rights Extremists, who are teaching them this junk science in order to push their agenda.

All animals have a certain amount of genetic load, which is to say there is absolutely no animal without some genetic problem of some sort of another. Know anyone who wears glasses? Has allergies? Thyroid problems? Weak knees? Flat feet? A skin condition? Arthritis? A gap between their front teeth? These are all genetic imperfections.

No human is genetically "clean." Neither is any individual of any species on earth. So this idea that dogs should not be bred because they might have a genetic problem, and that breeders are somehow "evil" for breeding them, is ridiculous. Every single individual of every single species has at least a few genetic conditions.

To use PETA's logic, all breeding of all kinds (including having human babies) should halt immediately. And to be honest, Ingrid Newkirk (the woman who founded PETA) does believe exactly that. She thinks that humans should become extinct, along with dogs, cats, etc. This ridiculous scenario is precisely what she would like to see happen.

So folks, if that is what you want...if you agree with Ingrid Newkirk's whacky views, send your hard earned money to PETA. They will help to ensure you are not able to own a dog or cat or hamster or any other pet in the future. They will see to it that you can't eat meat or fish or eggs or any type of animal-based nutrition. They will work to shut down places like Sea World, the zoos, etc. so you cannot observe the many wonderful animals on the Earth. Eventually, once they accomplish these things, they may turn their efforts to making it illegal for humans to procreate.

If you don't agree with their extremist views, wise up and start supporting those who truly do love, care for and enjoy interaction with other species here on our little blue planet.

The fanciers of the breeds, those you see exhibiting their dogs at Westminster and other dog shows, work very hard to eliminate serious genetic conditions. They screen their breeding stock with every available test. They research pedigrees before breeding into other lines, to check for similar clearances in those animals. They contribute money to research organizations to further the work being done to track down genetic problems. They contribute blood, cell samples, etc. from their own animals to help with DNA and genome studies. They have made great progress so far, and they continue to work hard at it.

Are there unethical breeders? Certainly, there are. Just as in any group of humans, you will find the good and the bad. United States VP Elect Joe Biden, for example, managed to find a not so good one when he got his new German Shepherd puppy. I don't know who did his research for him, but they obviously didn't do their homework if they were looking for a responsible breeder. Joe has the right to get his dog from whomever he wishes, but if he was trying to set an example of purchasing from a responsible hobby breeder he went off the track this time. That's too bad, but it was his choice.

Unfortunately, breeders like that may be a lot easier to find because of their high volume and high profile. If you are looking for a nice family pet from a breeder who will be there for you forever, you need to do due diligence. You won't get that from a pet store. You won't get that from the guy selling dogs out of his pickup truck in the WalMart parking lot. You won't get that support from a high-volume breeder, either. Yes, it takes a little more time and effort to find someone who really cares and does all the work to breed the healthiest, happiest puppies possible and then stands behind those puppies.

This is a living being that will be part of your family, hopefully, for many years. Isn't it worth a bit of effort to find a breeder who will be there for you and that puppy forever?

And guess what? Shows like Westminster are a very valuable resource for finding breeders who do care and who use the best possible practices, as well as for learning more about the various breeds.

Bravo to USA Network for broadcasting the Westminster Kennel Club show all these years. May they enjoy continued success through the ongoing inclusion of such programs. I will be eagerly watching this year's show!"

 

[Seraphina]

Yes, that is ALL true, but it leaves out little important fact; inbred animals have compromised immune system and that animals bred for exaggerations have other problems.

We need NOT to confuse inherited diseases, problems caused by exaggerations, and health problems caused by pathogens and parasites.

Therefore pug X Whippet is much less likely to have problems that pugs normally get, like fainting due to breathing problems. As far as inherited diseases go, of-course the x bred dog will inherit whatever his parents have, however if you cross 2 breeds with large number of inherited diseases each, BUT different ones, the offspring may carry large number of faulty recessive genes, but as he only has one of each he will not be suffering from any of them. The next generations may not be so lucky though.

 

[GotWhippet?]

The most unhealthiest dog I'd ever owned was a mixed breed. Terrier x cocker x god knows what else. Cost us a fortune in vet bills.

And no I am not getting into the COI argument again, I already said it was crap and that's it.

 

[Cartman]

Sounds like Don Burke has struck again 8)

 

[gajo]

Thanks for posting that Lana- a very interesting article and refreshing to see someone being a little more balanced and sane than some of the contributions/opinions on related topics that seem to be popular at the moment around the world.

Lida, I honestly mean no offense because I may be misreading where you sit on all of this. Do you believe that there is any place for line breeding in a relatively healthy breed like the whippet? I'm interested.

 

[Seraphina]

T
Lida, I honestly mean no offense because I may be misreading where you sit on all of this. Do you believe that there is any place for line breeding in a relatively healthy breed like the whippet? I'm interested.

Yes there is, and I do not even object to somebody breeding bit closer, provided that they are doing it for a good reason, that is a reason other than that somebody told them it is a good idea to breed close. There is also big difference between breeding closely related animals, which come from relatively non inbred lines and breed, as so many people in the past did, daughter to sire, then brother to sister from that litter, and then keep bitch from that and breed her back to her grand sire. Or something like that.

I also have always been fighting with anybody who suggested that crossbred dogs are healthier than purebred.

However, to my best knowledge, nobody has done any comprehensive, statistically significant, study on disease occurrence in crossbred and purebred dogs. But there have been done numerous studies on various animals, which all confirmed that being inbred is disadvantageous to the species.

But that was not the point of this article. The way i read it the person who has written it has quoted a vet out of context trying to say that there is nothing wrong with breeding practices that produce exaggerated dogs. The reason i read it that way was that this article had something to do with some network first deciding not to televise Westminster Show, which was done due to the BBC program about all the health problems in purebred dogs, and then reversing their decision.

I did not read the whole thing Lana posted, I just assumed that she posted the whole article, as I read it few days ago. Therefore I mentioned that while it is true that crossbred dog can get cancer and many other illnesses, there are health problems, caused by particular exaggeration that would be improved if the exaggeration was reduced. Or do you disagree that if you take a bitch pug that cannot breath properly and mate her to a dog that also cannot breath properly, and then a JRT also gets her, and the litter is half crossbred and half purebred, it is very likely that the crossbred pups will breath easier?

 

[Seraphina]

While trying to find the original article, I found apology and acknowledgment that Libbye Miller, DVM has only said the first paragraph:

“Adorable mixed breeds” get cancer, epilepsy, allergies, heart disease, and

orthopedic problems just like purebreds. I see it every day in my veterinary

practice but mixed breed dogs aren’t tracked like the purebreds so they have

a reputation as “healthier” that is actually undeserved in many cases.”

The rest was written by somebody else on some forum

No vet would say thing like:

It is so sad that a lot of folks, including young veterinarians these days, buy into the "hybrid vigor" baloney. The vet schools have been infiltrated by the Animal Rights Extremists, who are teaching them this junk science in order to push their agenda.

 

[aslan]

My apologies for 'misquoting' - it was difficult to tell where the vet's comment started and finished - and I actually moved the headline of the article down because I thought that the quotation marks had been left off everything after the initial quote. I assumed that only the first two lines were written by somebody else as an intro to the whole piece - sorry, I've misread it.

 

[Hula]

It is so sad that a lot of folks, including young veterinarians these days, buy into the "hybrid vigor" baloney. The vet schools have been infiltrated by the Animal Rights Extremists, who are teaching them this junk science in order to push their agenda.

As the Mother of a recently qualified vet I can assure you that this statement is not true . Even if it were vets are more than capable of thinking for themselves . They do not just accept what is taught to them without giving it any thought

 

[seaspot_run]

A couple of vets through the years have said to me that if everyone had Whippets, they'd go broke.

 

[Seraphina]

My apologies for 'misquoting' - it was difficult to tell where the vet's comment started and finished - and I actually moved the headline of the article down because I thought that the quotation marks had been left off everything after the initial quote. I assumed that only the first two lines were written by somebody else as an intro to the whole piece - sorry, I've misread it.

Lana, sorry I was NOT suggesting that you were misquoting Libbye Miller, the author of the article did, and she was forced to publish an apology. The way she wrote it was taken by many that she was quoting or paraphrasing Libbye Miller. When in fact all the sweeping generalized half truth are her own opinions.