We Have Started Testing

[~Annie~]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

My apologies, I wasn't intending to say 'it's not good enough' - I am genuinely impressed at the things that are happening, just that I'd hate the whippet world to go the way of some other breeds where 'x tested clear' was taken as a suggestion that it was actually genetically clear rather than 'clear when last looked at' which is something quite different.but yes, by all means, a testing and re-testing program to build up a database of disease progression would be an excellent idea.

m

This is a point that I had tried to make ... taken as read that Wendy is right and that the best way to go about ensuring that testing takes off is to take baby steps with what we have for now ... can anyone suggest how we can avoid this misconception amongst those who are less up to speed than others on how all this works?

Annie

 

[doris]

I know some members are frustrated by the 'back and forth' posts, but for someone like me, who doesn't learn things easily, I find it really beneficial - every once in a while, I read a post that has been re-questioned and replied in a different way, and I think 'Ah! Now I get it!'

Mind you, my 'Ah' moments don't happen as much as I'd like :b :lol:

 

[lalena]

one wonders if keeping a detailed log would help initially? start off with your animals ancestors/aunts-uncles/siblings, writing down things like any known conditions, the onset of said conditions, age and known/suspected cause of death etc. then continue this down the line through the offspring of your dogs etc etc. tracing a familial link would be of great help to those pioneering testing.

to begin with, this approach helped with tracing breast cancer. once they knew it ran much higher within certain familes, they could trace which genes were passed down, narrowing the search, until they could identify which key gene was to blame.

to the best of my knowledge, this also helped the aht in identifying in staffords the gene which causes l2-hga, a rather nasty heriditary disease which is also fatal rather early in life, and horrifying until death. now all reputable stafford owners/breeders test their stock, and only breed from clear TO clear animals. as a result there are now several generations which no longer need testing because they are genetically clear, though there are still many, usually uninformed, who havent a clue this conditon exists.

 

[playawhile]

Isn’t an extensive health survey in order before going in the direction of compulsory testing of eyes and hearts? Would it not be wonderful if the breed council in the UK could organise such a survey and then hopefully as many as possible could answer this to get an overall picture of the breed?? This type of health survey has been done about every 5 years in Sweden since 1990 and the results have so far not called for any testing.
Henrik

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Henrik all clubs did get health forms to send out but hardly anything came back to worry the KC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Sorry to hear that!! Did not know you had tried....

Henrik

 

[chelynnah]

I know some members are frustrated by the 'back and forth' posts, but for someone like me, who doesn't learn things easily, I find it really beneficial - every once in a while, I read a post that has been re-questioned and replied in a different way, and I think 'Ah!  Now I get it!'
Mind you, my 'Ah' moments don't happen as much as I'd like  :b   :lol:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

If that's me with my frustration - it's not the back and forth in general that frustrates me, I just REALLY worry that some of it, if read the wrong way, will put people off rather than encourage people to move forward with testing. That's why I really feel it so important to clarify that we need to at least start with what we have.

Wendy (flogging a dead horse :b )

 

[Seraphina]

- it's not the back and forth in general that frustrates me, I just REALLY worry that some of it, if read the wrong way, will put people off rather than encourage people to move forward with testing.  That's why I really feel it so important to clarify that we need to at least start with what we have.
Wendy (flogging a dead horse  :b )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

We all have lot to learn; I have learned a lot in the past few weeks and I realize there is much much more. I think it is very good to keep this discussion going; there will always be another person who has not seen this thread, some may have some info/idea that has not been considered as yet.

Starting a Whippet database where vets could report incidents of inherited problems without naming a dog all the owners should be feasible and legally not problematic.

All what the vet would need to enter the age, sex, condition and when it was diagnosed, with space for notes such as prognoses, outcome

Also to state if the dog was KC registered or not.

 

[doris]

I know some members are frustrated by the 'back and forth' posts, but for someone like me, who doesn't learn things easily, I find it really beneficial - every once in a while, I read a post that has been re-questioned and replied in a different way, and I think 'Ah!  Now I get it!'
Mind you, my 'Ah' moments don't happen as much as I'd like  :b   :lol:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

If that's me with my frustration - it's not the back and forth in general that frustrates me, I just REALLY worry that some of it, if read the wrong way, will put people off rather than encourage people to move forward with testing. That's why I really feel it so important to clarify that we need to at least start with what we have.

Wendy (flogging a dead horse :b )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Sorry Wendy, I didn't mean you directly, I probably shouldn't have used the word 'frustrated' as it does sound like I'm quoting you.

What I'm trying to say is, I can't be the only person who finds some of this stuff difficult to understand (I HOPE!!!). I've had whippets for a few years now, they are the breed for me and I hope to have them forever - that's why I'm ploughing through these threads even if I do find some of the posts tough going!

I know you are worried that it might put some people off, but I see it as, the more people understand it, the easier it will be for them to ask the right questions.

 

[Eceni]

Starting a Whippet database where vets could report incidents of inherited problems without naming a dog all the owners should be feasible and legally not problematic.
All what the vet would need to enter the age, sex, condition and when it was diagnosed, with space for notes such as prognoses, outcome

Also to state if the dog was KC registered or not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

That would certainly begin to collate data on incidence, frequency, morbidity and mortality rates (morbidity is numbers affected with any given pathology, mortality is numbers dying)

it wouldn't, however, help at all in reducing the incidence - that would need the breeding.

I may be being naive, but is there any legal problem with recording the pedigree name of a dog when it comes in for treatment/diagnosis?

m

 

[liza]

Starting a Whippet database where vets could report incidents of inherited problems without naming a dog all the owners should be feasible and legally not problematic.

All what the vet would need to enter the age, sex, condition and when it was diagnosed, with space for notes such as prognoses, outcome

Also to state if the dog was KC registered or not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

That would certainly begin to collate data on incidence, frequency, morbidity and mortality rates (morbidity is numbers affected with any given pathology, mortality is numbers dying)

it wouldn't, however, help at all in reducing the incidence - that would need the breeding.

I may be being naive, but is there any legal problem with recording the pedigree name of a dog when it comes in for treatment/diagnosis?

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

my bitch kaymark kiss - n - tell katie will be having her heart tested at the end of november at oxon i have got to take her kc registration with her

[SIZE=8pt]edited to bring new comment outside the quotes[/SIZE]

 

[Seraphina]

I may be being naive, but is there any legal problem with recording the pedigree name of a dog when it comes in for treatment/diagnosis?
m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

To enter identifying info in a database accessible to various people without the breeder's and/or owner's permission would definitely have legal repercussion.

If vets could not report every case then we could never establish the incidence of diseases in the breed. Of course, there could be a provision for entering the pedigree with owner's or breeder's permission.

 

[BlackMoon Magic]

Don't worry Doris! I am like you on this one...I read and re read to make sure I am understanding this properly!

Though I would like to say thatk you to everyone who is doing their best to explain this as it is VERY important to me as I have a lovely bitch I will be breeding soon. I am begining her testing now and truely want to make sure I am testing for the right things. I couldn't imagine loosing her at a young age.....she is my little shadow! :wub:

So please don't stop this conversations, I am enjoying all the information!

 

[Eceni]

I may be being naive, but is there any legal problem with recording the pedigree name of a dog when it comes in for treatment/diagnosis?
m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

To enter identifying info in a database accessible to various people without the breeder's and/or owner's permission would definitely have legal repercussion.

If vets could not report every case then we could never establish the incidence of diseases in the breed. Of course, there could be a provision for entering the pedigree with owner's or breeder's permission.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

OK, I am entirely naive here, but under what law is data-gathering illegal? It's been done in a range of other breeds and species - I'm thinking of quarter horses and the HYPP gene which was identified in a particular line in the US - in fact traced back to a particular sire in which the mutation appeared; double muscling in Belgian Blue cattle; the known line of 'Rage Syndrome' in red cocker spaniels of show type... and I'm sure there was work being done on specific lines of Flat Coated Retrievers who had a predisposition to certain carcinomas when I was last in the oncology department at the vet school.

If I buy a dog, then I own it. If I choose to give its name to anyone else in an effort to generate useful data, then which particular law is going to stop me - and them from collating the data?

and

without this particular data, then the entire exercise is of fairly limited value - suppose it is established that cardiac condition X is appearing at 50% higher than the national average in whippets - then to control it at all either every breeding whippet will have to be tested (and potentially their siblings and offspring, depending on the heritability of the disease)

OR

the entire data gathering exercise would have to be repeated WITH the relevant pedigree information - which would lose time and lead to more pups potentially being produced with fatal or injurious pathology. And that's only for heart defects.

If we add in the entire auto-immune spectrum (from autoimmune arthritis to steroid responsive meningitis) and the 'wobbler syndrome' reported by letter in this month's "Dogs Today" (if it exists) then the work load rises exponentially. Vets are busy people and they'll shortly be inundated with similar forms from every breed. If we don't collect data efficiently and clearly, it'll be a mess.

Surely it's in everyone's interests for this data to be gathered accurately and fast, so that the results are meaningful and useful?

m (confused about the law, but happy to be educated)

 

[~Annie~]

I may be being naive, but is there any legal problem with recording the pedigree name of a dog when it comes in for treatment/diagnosis?
m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

To enter identifying info in a database accessible to various people without the breeder's and/or owner's permission would definitely have legal repercussion.

If vets could not report every case then we could never establish the incidence of diseases in the breed. Of course, there could be a provision for entering the pedigree with owner's or breeder's permission.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

OK, I am entirely naive here, but under what law is data-gathering illegal? It's been done in a range of other breeds and species - I'm thinking of quarter horses and the HYPP gene which was identified in a particular line in the US - in fact traced back to a particular sire in which the mutation appeared; double muscling in Belgian Blue cattle; the known line of 'Rage Syndrome' in red cocker spaniels of show type... and I'm sure there was work being done on specific lines of Flat Coated Retrievers who had a predisposition to certain carcinomas when I was last in the oncology department at the vet school.

If I buy a dog, then I own it. If I choose to give its name to anyone else in an effort to generate useful data, then which particular law is going to stop me - and them from collating the data?

and

without this particular data, then the entire exercise is of fairly limited value - suppose it is established that cardiac condition X is appearing at 50% higher than the national average in whippets - then to control it at all either every breeding whippet will have to be tested (and potentially their siblings and offspring, depending on the heritability of the disease)

OR

the entire data gathering exercise would have to be repeated WITH the relevant pedigree information - which would lose time and lead to more pups potentially being produced with fatal or injurious pathology. And that's only for heart defects.

If we add in the entire auto-immune spectrum (from autoimmune arthritis to steroid responsive meningitis) and the 'wobbler syndrome' reported by letter in this month's "Dogs Today" (if it exists) then the work load rises exponentially. Vets are busy people and they'll shortly be inundated with similar forms from every breed. If we don't collect data efficiently and clearly, it'll be a mess.

Surely it's in everyone's interests for this data to be gathered accurately and fast, so that the results are meaningful and useful?

m (confused about the law, but happy to be educated)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Data protection legislation requires bodies holding personal information (names, addresses, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, health information, etc. etc. etc.) to comply with eight principles of good information handling and to meet one of six conditions.

The eight principles require that personal information is:

processed fairly and lawfully

processed for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and not further processed in any way that is incompatible with the original purpose

adequate, relevant and not excessive

accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date

kept for no longer than is necessary for the purpose for which it is being used

processed in line with the rights of individuals

kept secure with appropriate technical and organisational measures taken to protect the information

not transferred outside the European Economic Area (the European Union member states plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) unless there is adequate protection for the personal information being transferred

The six conditions include having the individual's consent or having a legitimate interest in using their personal information.

As it is not owners or breeders names but dogs names (although obviously breeders and some owners can be identified from the dogs name) and dogs health information that is relevant here I'm not sure the Act even applies, but if it does the body holding and using the data should have no difficulty meeting the requirements of the Data Protection Act.

Annie

 

[Seraphina]

Surely it's in everyone's interests for this data to be gathered accurately and fast, so that the results are meaningful and useful?
m (confused about the law, but happy to be educated)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Sorry, I am posting in hurry; my floors are being re-sanded and re-surfaced, so for the past 3 days I only have access to my computer for a little while before the next coat, and in this moment I waiting for the guy to walk in any minute.

I did not mean to say that i know the law on this, but surely all professionals like doctors vets etc. are unable to release any identifying info without consent.

Another point is that vets in general do not know the dog's registered name. Owners of pedigreed registered dogs' also do not know their dogs' pedigree names. They may have the papers somewhere at home or they may have lost them. I often sell pups to people who already have a Whippet; i always ask where did the dog come from and 9 out of 10 only remember vaguely the suburb where they bought the dog. Some now and then remember prefix, or at least can pronounce it closely enough for me to guess, but I have not met one owner of a pet who actually knew his/her registered name.

Yes, I agree it would be lovely if we could get all the vets to cooperate, and all the info would come with pedigree name. But as it is if we just can get some idea of the problems that are there, then at least we know what we should start testing for.