@jengosmonkey
LOL this is a really important convo to be having! I'm honored that it takes place on my thread 😆 and yes, I absolutely agree with the points y'all are making.
People do need to know where their pups are coming from and whether they were responsibly bred. To think of it coldly, I wouldn't buy a house without looking into its history and possible problems, or I might face ridiculous stress, expense, and emotional trauma from subsequent issues that come up later. As a consumer, one should do their homework not only on the breed but on the breeder.
A breeder who produces puppies carelessly is basically a horrible human being in my book. It was a huge, thoroughly thought out moral decision for me not to adopt but to buy a purebred puppy, as I've worked with rescues before. I took this step with the possible goal of being a custodian. If a breeder is irresponsible in all the aforementioned ways, not only are they producing dogs with a higher possibility of suffering, muddying this ancient breed, and swindling people, they are needlessly taking potential homes away from dogs that need one AND frequently causing dogs to be abandoned! If there weren't any PMs or BYBs, imagine how many people would get schooled by rescue folk and responsible breeders into taking dog-parenting seriously before they ever took one home!
Sorry for the rant; I COMPLETELY understand the internal screaming that happens within some of you when you find out a pup is from a mill or crap breeder. If people like you and I keep yelling about it, we will change a few minds, which make all the difference to a few dogs which is better than no dogs 🙂
Hello from Edmonton, AB!
-
This is not a 100% test, only a Marker test. Anything is possible given the statistics, however, I don't believe any dog that has been tested has morphed from Probable Carrier into Fanconi Afflicted. I could be wrong, as we could all be, but so far, the results of the dogs that were tested are carrying their own weight.
-
I have a rescue dog at home that tested probably affected. He just turned two in November and he is not spilling sugar at this time. I fully expect him to do so just as my other dogs that did have Fanconi tested probably affected. So far I have not had any problems with the results of the tests I have received on my rescue dogs.
-
Hey, I just came across this thread, you want to meet some Basenjis? We live just east of Sherwood Park, we have 3 Basenjis - all rescues.
-
That would be wonderful! I can email you if you give me your addy, or you could contact me at raeschuller@hotmail.com and we can arrange something.
Thank you thank you thank you. -
Corion - the quote you mentioned was mine - I am speaking about the UK Kennel Club. We don't have the experience here in Fanconi Syndrome as it is a relatively rare disease in Basnejis in this country.
-
Patty, is it because your folks don't test?? or there is REALLY no fanconi?
not trying to be bitch, I am not a breeder, I am just understanding that its everywhere in basenji lines, and if the test is done, its found -
I think thatthe majority of our breeders are testing now but there are still some who don't. The few I know intimately who don't test, to my knowledge, have never had a basenji with Fanconi. Not to say that we haven't got Affected dogs but not many because we have so many fewer Basenjis. For years now the Basenji has not been a popular breed here so registrations are relatively low.
This has always been my puzzle because I've never had a basenji affected with Fanoni and nor anything that could have been fanconi but misdiagnosed as something else. When I had my oldies tested (the test hadn't been available while I was still breeding) I was surpirised to find that one was clear and one a carrier. I must have been breeding carriers or clears only for years! I just don't understand how this is so.
To show the difference between the relative size of the UK and the US Basenji population we currently haven't any in Rescue and for several years had none. In recent years we've had as many as 6 but this is quite rare.
I don't know what our registration figures are for 2009 but if you're interested I can check for you.
-
I think thatthe majority of our breeders are testing now but there are still some who don't. The few I know intimately who don't test, to my knowledge, have never had a basenji with Fanconi. Not to say that we haven't got Affected dogs but not many because we have so many fewer Basenjis. For years now the Basenji has not been a popular breed here so registrations are relatively low.
This has always been my puzzle because I've never had a basenji affected with Fanoni and nor anything that could have been fanconi but misdiagnosed as something else. When I had my oldies tested (the test hadn't been available while I was still breeding) I was surpirised to find that one was clear and one a carrier. I must have been breeding carriers or clears only for years! I just don't understand how this is so.
To show the difference between the relative size of the UK and the US Basenji population we currently haven't any in Rescue and for several years had none. In recent years we've had as many as 6 but this is quite rare.
I don't know what our registration figures are for 2009 but if you're interested I can check for you.
No different then many in the US that have been breeding for years only to find out with the DNA test that they have just about all Carriers. Luck of the drawl… when you have a recessive gene. And some of the offspring of those dogs came back as Affected, at least one being in Germany. Many other in the UK tested and found Carriers... one that place a pup here in the US that test Affected...
If you are lucky enough in the "luck of the recessive drawl" to have been breeding Carriers to Clears... and then being lucky enough to take a Clear to a Carrier... not at all hard to understand... but without the test, it would have caught up to many pretty quickly.
And the number of Affected?... I would disagree with you... because Dr. Gonto has said many times that there are a number of Affected in the UK, judging by the number of people that have contacted him. And I am not trying to point fingers, just stating fact because everyone that has a Basenji was/is in the same boat. The best news is that we have a test... and looking at the results in the OFA database they ring true. Yes there are a few that could be questionable.... and with any luck we will soon get a direct test. But right now, this is the best we have and it is a hell of a lot better then having nothing before the linkage test came out.
Again.. all IMO
-
"The few I know intimately who don't test, to my knowledge, have never had a basenji with Fanconi"
Patty, im sorry but i think that is a wee bit misleading - it is well documented that that one of this particular breeders dogs has sired not only Prob Affected in the UK(owned by a forum member who is actually sensible, responsible and tests her stock), but i understand also (from a dog the breeder exported) dogs who not only tested prob affected, but actually have developed Fanconi.
-
Tanza - I agree with you and thanks for your comments. Yes, agreed we have been lucky considering the number of 'carrier' results form the test.
When Dr Gonto gave a seminar on Fanconi (prior to the Linkage test, of course) here, he did say say, as I remember that he had had 9 past and present. To me although very tragic, this is quite a low number compared with others suffering or dying from other inherited diseases. Perhaps that is the same in the US? Only yourselves will know. We are just lucky in that there is a linkage test and hopefully soon, a 'proper' test to enable us to eliminate Fanconi Syndrome. We don't seem to be so lucky with other diseases.
At present I don't have the current figures of tested 'affected' in the UK but will query this with our health coordinator.
Scott, I haven't mentioned names nor would I ever do so as its against my principles to spread any rumours. You are jumping to the conclusion that I meant a certain person as you mentioned someone on this Forum who has an affected sired by his/her dog , if I'm correct. I did refer, however, to some who I know/have known intimately!
However, as I also said there must be some of us (as also in the US) who have been fortunate enough to apparently have only ever bred carriers to clears for years! Personally I prefer to choose older sires and this could be one of the factors. The KC in its wisdom has also now prevented us from waiting to put bitches in whelp in later years, necessitating early starts for their first litters.
-
Patty, I apologise if i have picked you up incorrectly. Its just that there are so few litters born in the UK since the test was made available that its very easy to see who are those who have bred the small handful of litters without testing parents
Scott
-
Scott, no need to apologise!
-
Scott, I'm not sure if it's me your talking about with the Prob Affected dog from a sire of a breeder who doesn't test. If it is, it's not a problem. I had that litter before the test was made available. I also know of a litter born late last year, a Ind x Ind mating, which has produced a Prob Affected pup. IMO there was no need for this mating to take place as it's not worth the risk. I am now searching hard for a Clear dog for my carrier bitch but it's not easy.
I have compiled a spreadsheet of all UK stock. I am getting my details from the OFA website and noting all UK dogs and whether they are Clear, Carrier, Ind or Aff. It is interesting to see the percentage of Affected stock. So far, and I have not updated my list for a couple of months due to the swab shortage etc, there is about 7% of all TESTED stock showing as Prob Affected. I do not have the list to hand so this is from memory.
-
Hi vicki - yes it was you i was referring to as the owner of a dog sired by one owned by someone who doest test - and of course prior to the test there was no way of knowing so it certainly wasnt a dig at you - my gripe is with those who do not test now that one is available. I agree that there is no need to carry out unsafe breeding i.e. any mating that could produce affected pups. And if people go to the bother of testing - then why do matings that can produce affecteds? its beyond me.
Thats great news about compiling test results - it would make very interesting reading - and i have to say 7% is not an insignificant percentage to test as prob affected. It would be interesting to know out of that percentage how many have went on to develop Fanconi.
-
The one problem with the % of Affected is that there are many that were spilling before the test was available, so those were never tested, so it would be a higher percentage had they been tested and in the database. Not a huge number, but certainly would change the results.
-
I wonder what percentage of Basenjis suffer from heart problems, epilepsy, IPSID, thyroid problems, liver problems, temperament problems, early aging etc - each possibly higher than 7% (which although not insignificant, is certainly not high) and as I posted before not high enough to concern the KC. There are a very significant number of Basenjis who die at 13 - this seems a much more major problem to me. We must all remember that horrible as Fanconi Syndrome is, it is treatable and I understand with much success.
-
I wonder what percentage of Basenjis suffer from heart problems, epilepsy, IPSID, thyroid problems, liver problems, temperament problems, early aging etc - each possibly higher than 7% (which although not insignificant, is certainly not high) and as I posted before not high enough to concern the KC. There are a very significant number of Basenjis who die at 13 - this seems a much more major problem to me. We must all remember that horrible as Fanconi Syndrome is, it is treatable and I understand with much success.
Treatable???
By that I assume you mean stuffing pills down a dogs throat in hopes they keep them down and not go on a starvation diet, or better yet, just continually puke any and everything you can get into their system, even if for only nanoseconds.
I am not sure how good that sounds to you, but I have been there, done that, and there is NO breeding worth the remote possibility of this situation!
Temperament issues can be culled from breeding easily…spay/neuter them... and put down the ones that are a liability.
Thyroid problems are a little harder, as one could test normal today, but low tomorrow, and then normal again next week.
Fanconi... TESTING is the only answer at this point.Don't kid yourself.
Until you have lived with a Fanconi Affected dog, you truly have no idea how horrific the disease can be to said dog. -
Kathy is very right…this fanconi is awful..for the dog, for the human, AWFUL.
I have been there as well.
I won't own a fanconi b again...its just to hard on the dog and on the family. -
And I agree, can treat, yes… is it fun...NOT... ask anyone that has had to stuff 15 to 35pills a day down a dog.... and while some do really well on the treatment, many do not... Kathy can attest to that... her Benny did not... and I know many others that both do well and do not do well. And how many pet owners are dedicated enough to make sure they figure out a way to stuff those pills down?... Hard enough for breeders and many of them don't want to do that either...
-
Its not only the pills, its the volume of pee these dogs have to do. My boy would stand over the water dish and drink until I thougth he would explode. Then he would be full of water and no way he could hold it. Most folks are not able to set up a place for a fanconi dog to pee, unless the dog is outside. It something seldom spoken off. BUT its also an issue.
