much better!!!
Puppy neutering!
-
For proper physical developement, the most recent studies show it is best to wait with any breed of dog until after 14 months old and for large - giant breeds after 18 months.
-
For proper physical developement, the most recent studies show it is best to wait with any breed of dog until after 14 months old and for large - giant breeds after 18 months.
Can you please post a link to some of these studies for us?
-
Here you go:
http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html
For canine athletes, I currently recommend that dogs and bitches be spayed or neutered after 14 months of age.
These articles refer more to early neutering, but the studies cited are quite interesting. Neutering is not such a benign thing as we have been led to believe.
-
Early neutering in pets has become the norm here too. I understand the reasons as no matter how careful people are accidents can and do happen.
However I have always been against neutering at too early an age although this is not a popular opinion. Personally, I have never had a dog neutered before a minimum of 7 years and the majority of Basenjis I've owned are never neutered. When asked for advice I recommend that the particular dog is at least mature.
-
Thanks for providing those I dont have any website links - I got my info from a canine sports rehabber that I met at a schutzhund seminar and am planning on taking her online courses in preperation for my Afghan hound who I hope to course and do agility with
-
At one time, we were trying to make the decision ourselves of whether to neuter our male at a younger age or not. The first link posted here is from December of 2008. That article titled " Is Early Neutering Hurting Pets?" references information contained in a prior article " Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete One Veterinarin's Opinion
" is several years old (2005). The title of the article Clearly states that it is one Vet's opinion. From what we see, the author of the new article posted in 2008 has gone back and read through the references of the 2005 article and decided to write the newer article based entirely upon those references. No new references were included.The second link posted appears to reference the same article as the first relies on. We were hoping to find more recent and authoritative supporting information.
While we believe there are pros and cons to both schools of thought, we feel it is still an individual choice on what is better for your dog. It would be nice to see newer and more conclusive scientific research on this subject that is more than just one vets opinion.
-
History has shown that benefits of spaying or neutering early helps control the pet population by reducing the opportunity for irresponsible owners as well as responsible owners who might be subject to an opp's pregnancy. This benefit is too great to be ignored. We already have an overpopulation problem. Spaying and Neutering before the age of sexual maturity is currently one solution. Maybe someone can suggest a better solution. As far as we know, to this date, this is the most effective approach.
-
Here you go:
http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html
These articles refer more to early neutering, but the studies cited are quite interesting. Neutering is not such a benign thing as we have been led to believe.
Here is a rebuttal to the links you have provided. Also below the first rebuttal is a link to an article written by Lisa M. Howe at Texas A/M. You see her credentials within her article. We suggest you grab a bag of popcorn and a nice comfortable chair. Dr. Howe has written a 5 page article in reference to Dr. Zink. In addition if you search the web, you will find more rebuttals Dr. Zink's article.
"Rebuttal to "Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete"
"Lisa M. Howe, DVM, PhD, Dipl. ACVS
[excerpt, as always read entire article]
I have written a rebuttal to Dr. Zink?s article entitled "Early Spay-Neuter Considerations for the Canine Athlete" in which Dr. Zink attempts to make an argument for revisiting the ?standard protocol in which all dogs that are not intended for breeding are spayed and neutered at or before 6 months of age.? In his discussion, Dr. Zink quotes manuscripts incorrectly in some instances, doesn?t present all of the data from given studies (ie, misrepresenting the findings of the studies) in other instances, and doesn?t include the interpretation of the data by the study?s authors (leading to erroneous interpretations of some data by Dr. Zink) in yet other instances. While I typically don?t write rebuttals to others? writings, or opinions (after all, we are all entitled to our opinions), the multiple errors and misrepresentations of the scientific literature quoted in this dissertation compelled me to ?set the record straight? with regard to the literature being incorrectly cited by Dr. Zink. While I respectfully disagree with Dr. Zink?s opinion on the appropriate age at which to spay and castrate dogs not intended for breeding, my primary purpose for this rebuttal is to present the literature that Dr. Zink cites in a more accurate, and more complete, fashion so that the veterinarian reader may reach their own conclusions regarding the most appropriate time to spay or castrate the nonbreeding animal, based upon accurate representation of the scientific literature."
downloadable doc: http://www.sheltermedicine.com/documents/Zink%20rebuttal.dochttp://www.columbusdogconnection.com/Documents/PedRebuttal%20.pdf
-
I think this article is a very good one. It looks at both the pros and cons of early spay/neuter. The author is not trying to build a case one way or another but just review the evidence.
http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf
-
This should really be a sticky for the forum
-
"One vet's opinion" based on studies that were done and statistics gleaned from those studies. It costs money to do research. I doubt new studies will be done every year just to revisit a subject that is of little interest to a lot of people who will neuter for convenience or because of laws and costs associated with intact animals, as it is a moot point for them…..
-
If you read or search the net for the rebuttals to the article you are referring to "One vet's opinion" by Dr. Zink, you will find, that others point out that the way the information and studies in that article were presented were skewed. Yes it costs money to do research. No, it does not cost money to properly cite and interpret the research.
We agree there is probably little interest to those who normally opt to spay or neuter there pets. However , there are those like the original poster of this thread that have questions and doubts. As is evident by the links you posted, there are even vets that exist that have doubts. In addition, there was another poster in this thread that admitted her information came from an individual she encountered and relied on his/her opinion.
Is it really a moot point and of little interest, if there are multiple posts and rebuttals to the article you referenced by veterinarians and others on the web?
We dispute whether it is a moot point and will ever become one. In our opinion, as long as there is doubt there will be interest. If you think there is no interest, why do you think questions in regard to this topic constantly resurfaces?
-
Didn't say it wasn't of interest to some, just that it is a moot point for many who for whatever reason feel compelled to neuter…..usually earlier rather than later.
As far as research goes, the article linked by lvoss seems to indicate the same things. Statistics, of course, can be manipulated depending on what you want to prove. Short of doing a clinical trial where you can control for all the variables, any results will always be open to interpretation, i.e. was neutering the causal factor or was it simply a statistical relation because of some other common factor. I just grabbed what I could find quickly on Google to reference something that was out there, as I am far too busy right now with farm work to spend much time on research. However, I personally know of lots of supporting anecdotal evidence, from breeder friends and a couple of vets who have seen things in their practices. Yes, the plural of anecdote is not data, but anecdotal evidence can certainly provide some "smoke" to show where to look for the fire.
But as far as the science is concerned, most of us just want to find something to support our own point of view......a natural human response. I'm reading an interesting book at the moment, "Thinking, Fast & Slow" , written by Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman, that amply demonstrates that the brain tells us to make quick, intuitive judgments with identifiable biases. Our more reflective processes, more often than not, line up to support these judgments. Scientists are not immune to this effect, either.
If people used scientific data to make nutritional choices, for example, most people would refrain from eating dairy products. But since we as a society are so influenced by advertising, we are programmed to make potentially unhealthy choices without questioning the wisdom of them. But that is a subject for another board.
-
We are kind of busy ourselves finishing up an addition on our home, getting ready for one of our sons to graduate from a big 10 school next week, making arrangements and communicating with those coming that graduation, raising and training our new puppy, as well as a lot of other responsibilities and events that accompany life.
Sounds like you are reading a great book. You are correct, Scientists are not immune to the effect you describe, however, a good Scientist will work at seting aside personal bias and attempt to follow the scientific method. If that is achieved, then no quick judgements will be made and no bias will be involved. Conclusions that are drawn will be based on the evidence that presents itself. Just for the record, a veterinarian is not a scientist, unless they choose to do research and follow the scientific method. So while many of them have opinions, those opinions tend to be in regard to scientific research others have done.
In the interest of saving you research time, we spent a couple of minutes and did a quick search on the internet and grabbed what we could. Here are links to a couple of pages of multiple sites with posts related to the topic at hand:
-
Gee, thanks so much for the links!
Here is one that supplies links to a lot of articles on the subject:
Don't think there are any by Cesar Milan, but I haven't checked yet.
Whether or not one has a PHD, one can "adjust" the interpretations of data to suit one's argument. We are quite aware of that fact. Short of pulling up the original studies and analyzing the content, the easiest way to determine the validity is to have a look at all sides of the argument from varying points of view, and use what you find to guide you. From strictly the health perspective, not neutering at all would seem to be the best course of action for males, but that isn't a route most can take these days. (most of the literature out there seems to rely on the same study data, and as far as I can determine there are no large clinical studies in this area…...which is the only way to control for extraneous contributing factors).
We'll be having a busy day here. Cheers!
-
Gee, thanks so much for the links!
Here is one that supplies links to a lot of articles on the subject:
Don't think there are any by Cesar Milan, but I haven't checked yet.
Whether or not one has a PHD, one can "adjust" the interpretations of data to suit one's argument. We are quite aware of that fact. Short of pulling up the original studies and analyzing the content, the easiest way to determine the validity is to have a look at all sides of the argument from varying points of view, and use what you find to guide you. From strictly the health perspective, not neutering at all would seem to be the best course of action for males, but that isn't a route most can take these days. (most of the literature out there seems to rely on the same study data, and as far as I can determine there are no large clinical studies in this area…...which is the only way to control for extraneous contributing factors).
We'll be having a busy day here. Cheers!
We think this is excellent.
-
Gee, thanks so much for the links!
Here is one that supplies links to a lot of articles on the subject:
Don't think there are any by Cesar Milan, but I haven't checked yet.
Whether or not one has a PHD, one can "adjust" the interpretations of data to suit one's argument. We are quite aware of that fact. Short of pulling up the original studies and analyzing the content, the easiest way to determine the validity is to have a look at all sides of the argument from varying points of view, and use what you find to guide you. From strictly the health perspective, not neutering at all would seem to be the best course of action for males, but that isn't a route most can take these days. (most of the literature out there seems to rely on the same study data, and as far as I can determine there are no large clinical studies in this area…...which is the only way to control for extraneous contributing factors).
We'll be having a busy day here. Cheers!
You are so welcome!
Oh, is Cesar Milan the ultimate authority in your view?
If the paragraph above is to be accepted, then why bother with any study of any test.? As I believe you have said in past post, you might as well throw the baby out with the bathwater. If the scientific method of research is to be ignored, man has certainly wasted a lot of time and money attempting understand and find cures for diseases. We might as well go back to the days when people were bled and leeches were used in an attempt to cure what ails us. Maybe that is the solution, just throw out all the scientific research, history books, flip a coin, go with our gut feeling, and pray we made the right decision.
Don't get us wrong, there is nothing wrong with a good debate, but as in any good debate, its only as good as the facts presented. If debates come down to who can yell the loudest whether the facts hold true or not, then we are bigger trouble than we think.
We will be having a busy day here ourselves, but like you, we will be checking in periodically. In fact sometimes we are signed on and we are not even here. LOL
-
You are so welcome!
Oh, is Cesar Milan the ultimate authority in your view?
He came up at the top of the list in your first link, so I assumed he was important to you.
If the paragraph above is to be accepted, then why bother with any study of any test.? As I believe you have said in past post, you might as well throw the baby out with the bathwater. If the scientific method of research is to be ignored, man has certainly wasted a lot of time and money attempting understand and find cures for diseases. We might as well go back to the days when people were bled and leeches were used in an attempt to cure what ails us. Maybe that is the solution, just throw out all the scientific research, history books, flip a coin, go with our gut feeling, and pray we made the right decision.
Wow, don't remember saying any of that. I have simply been playing "devil's advocate" in this, since there is some controversy over a) neutering, and b) the best time to neuter if you choose to do so. The studies that have been done are not recent, granted. The interpretation of the results by different parties is interesting, and I note even the neutering proponents are admitting there are some downsides to the practice. And the differences would be more significant for some breeds than for others. (oh, BTW, leeches are making a comeback. They are great for cleaning up necrotic tissue and are used in mainstream medicine for that purpose these days)
I have no dog in this hunt, I just find the subject interesting. All of my Basenjis have been neutered, none of them early…....some quite late. (no choice if you are going to show). But we learn more from the studies that have been done. Here is another of interest. Not concerned so much with health as with temperament. Some extremely interesting results, although the study is admittedly flawed since it relies on reporting from dog owners. As is oft quoted on "House", everybody lies!
http://www.cdoca.org/downloads/files/Early%20SN%20and%20Behavior.pdf
Don't get us wrong, there is nothing wrong with a good debate, but as in any good debate, its only as good as the facts presented. If debates come down to who can yell the loudest whether the facts hold true or not, then we are bigger trouble than we think.
Words to live by. We think so, anyhow…..
-
Oh wow, I didn't think my question would open up such a debate.
In my family, we have always had our dogs spayed or neutered between the ages of 6 month to a year. I never noticed an actual change in character. Since it has always been suggested by vets or breeders, I always thought it was safe for them.
I still think, in my case, I will have him spayed. But now I am more worried!! haha
I have been reading most of the articles posted here and am wondering why no vets are aware of this…
Have any of you observed any negative effects on your Bs once they were neutered? Or any other noticeable changes? -
@Ana:
Have any of you observed any negative effects on your Bs once they were neutered? Or any other noticeable changes?
No, I haven't. And I am most definitely not anti neutering. I think it makes sense for most people. A cost/benefit analysis of the study data would be interesting, and I suspect there would not be a huge benefit to leaving a dog intact, although obviously if you are one of the unlucky ones that the statistics are reporting on, it would make all the difference to you personally.
Sorry our debate has become a thread hijack. Some of us just enjoy discussions. I think it is always useful to listen to multiple points of view.
