Good post, Kim. However, there is a reason for testing. The one reason to consider testing for this problem is that in population genetics, nothing ever stands still. The population is either moving toward one extreme or going backward toward the other extreme. Some call this the "drag of race"--- that tendency for a species, if allowed to breed freely, to return to the "wild type".
When considering the blood platelet problem, it is better to know the platelet counts of dogs so that you can have the option of deciding whether you want to take a chance or not. Ignorance of the platelet counts could lead you to inadvertantly develop a line of all low platelet dogs. Continued breeding within these low platelet dogs could possibly produce a form of low platelets where the cavalier does have symptoms. It is like breeding continuously for plush faces--- you eventually get a "smushed in" face. Things either move forward or backward on the bell curve of the population. With about 30% of Cavaliers testing with low platelets, the breed needs to move away from that end of the bell curve. I would not put low platelets ahead of more serious defects, but would consider it the same way--- perhaps a little more seriously-- that I consider umbilical hernias, something to consider with low to medium selection pressure. I reserve high selection pressure for conditions that are debilitating. All the best, Susan Cochran ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 4:05 AM Subject: [CKCS-L] Thrombocytopenia > > > > Hi List- > I would like to respond to Cynthia's post and her request that breeders address the issue. This post is not ment to be argumentative or sarcastic, but a view from another side... > > Cynthia wrote: > One thing I think we all need to keep in mind is that yes this occurs in over 30% of Cavaliers. But it has been proven to be > a congenital and hereditary problem. I hope owners and breeders alike are taking this seriously. > > First off, my personal experience with thrombocytopenia is nonexistent (in dogs, that is!). I was "alerted" to this issue by my local "generalist" vet who, when I was in doing going-home-healthy-puppy checks mentioned that she was treating a 3 1/2 year old Cavalier bitch (no relation to mine) for this problem, and was having no luck with the normal modes of treatment. She asked if I knew anything breed specific about it. I recalled that there was discussion about it on the list and told her I would look it up. I faxed the information and papers I collected to her (alas, now in a file in Hawaii and I'm in chilly 'ole Los Angeles this evening), but my > recollection of the studies etc. was that Cavaliers tend to display thrombocytopenia more often, but further investigation showed that they don't actually have the syndrome-just that machines used to test their blood cannot read the larger than normal cells. A manual count often results in normal numbers, though the cells are not a common size for most canines...now I may have skimmed too shallow on this issue and missed that Cavaliers really DO have a greater incidence of true thrombocytopenia, but I came away from my research believing that the problem was with the machines, not the dogs. > > Cynthia went on to say: > The only way we can combat it is to not breed the Cavaliers if they or their offspring is to come up with this. I think if we don't start taking this seriously in ten years it's going to be almost as bad a problem as the mitral valve in instances. I have had responses that basically said (and I'm not repeating or quoting but you will get the gist) well it's common in Cavaliers, nothing is wrong and basically why stop breeding the animals that it shows up in. > > Hummm...one of my favorite sayings is, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". In this case, if my belief is correct and the issue is of different sized cells, not missing cells, then why do we need to address this as breeders? Unless the larger cells are causing a physiological problem, who cares? > The slippery slope of over-testing is easy to build momentum on-it seems like such an easy way out of decision making. We test for heart murmurs, patella's, hips, eyes. thyroid, elbows, blood discrepancies. Got the clearances? Breed it! Missed on one? De-sex it and cry me a river! Often it is the novice breeders or ones with a lack of confidence that bang the clearance drum the loudest. The truly difficult decision; does this animal have unique qualities that we want reproduced, takes a back seat to the health clearance scramble. > Now don't misread me. There are severe health issues in every breed that can and are avoided/decreased by judicious testing and removing affected animal from the breeding stock. But, just because they've come up with a new test doesn't mean we all have to rush off to the specialist to clear FiFi. Case in point; in the early 70's, the newly formed CERF was deciding what conditions were passable or not. One of the conditions in question was juvenile cataracts, seen most often in Golden Retrievers. Juvenile cataracts-sounds scary enough...visions of stumbling pups, blind adolescents. But a juvenile cataract, seen ages 4-6 months and up, is a triangular > shaped opacity on the retina of the eye, very small, stable in size. Dogs with this condition rarely have vision impairment. The CERF asked the National Club which side of the list they wanted it on-pass or fail (this is how controversial the impairment was-they asked the club!) In the end, it got put down as a CERF fail. To be reviewed several years down the line...never was, and the breed has seen untold numbers of quality specimens tanked simply because of that non intrusive little " mercedes benz sign" on a retina. Please, don't fix what ain't broke. > > She goes on to suggest: > To me that is the wrong mentality. I am very into the health & welfare of my animals and I care about the breed. We have enough health problems, why would people want to add to them?... This is still a small enough problem that if we work hard we can combat it > before it gets out of hand. > > Were it easy to combat health problems by selective breeding! If it was that simple, we breeders would no longer be plagued with early onset murmurs, PRA, hip dysplasia (now in it's 40th year of selective breeding practices), thyroid deficiencies, and that pesky uneven black mark trickling down one hock. Genetics are tricky, and most dog breeders are school teachers, nurses, AT&T operators, real estate agents, shop keepers...not geneticists. But it is expected of these breeders, by the purebred dog buying public and their vets, that they have the knowledge, wisdom and skill to produce happy, healthy and condition free dogs. With guarantees. At a reasonable > cost. With 150% of your money back (to the vet) if the dog has a glitch.( Puppy lemon laws ). And we breeders are to obtain these skills, this knowledge, that wisdom by breeding no more than two litters a year, 'cause everyone knows that you are a puppy mill if you do more than that! No one on this list wants to "add to" the health issues in our breed. We dread that phone call from a distraught owner (or worst, clue less vet) claiming that the woes of their world is our fault. We cherish and strive for those yearly holiday cards that say "Thanks for our wonderful, healthy family member, pict. enclosed" . In the breeding of mammals, simple Mendelian pea nor > fruit fly genetics apply, and we can neither wish nor "breed away" a polygenetic trait anymore than we can wish away the actions of the pond scum who indiscriminately bred, then discarded Mandy, the Black and Tan rescue in North Carolina. > > In our stressful and too short lives we need to "pick our battles", and I'm not yet convinced that this is one worth fighting. If I find that this is truly a condition that affects a number of our breed, is detrimental and can be "bred for" (or against, as the case may be) then I will as a breeder apply that knowledge to my breeding practices. But please don't ask me to fix what ain't broke. > Kim Johnson > Allegria Cavaliers and Gold-Rush Golden Retrievers > > P.S.- I STILL want to know why a blood test was run on a healthy young dog visit. Geez-we don't run blood panels with human healthy baby, children or adolescent visits (though if the insurance would pay for it, we probably would). I believe that the first time most US citizens get their blood drawn is during their Military Service exam...the males, that is! > > ========================================================= > "Magic Commands": > to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email: > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL > to start it up gain click here: > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL > > E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. > Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html > > All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author. ========================================================= "Magic Commands": to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL to start it up gain click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.
