> You know, genetics and reproduction are a highly complex field and *I* > need to ask many questions. How is it that there aren't more questions > about the effect of the protocol in terms of the downside risk? I know > I'm echoing your question, but I too keep wondering why this doesn't > scare anyone.
I think this is human nature. We truly want to believe we have *control*. We want to believe we can control everything--that we can fix all faults without any negative results. It is only after breeding litter after litter and experiencing the results that we start to understand that we truly do not have this much control. Everytime we improve something, we negatively impact on something else. All of nature is based on genetic diversity and balance. Just by merit of being purebred, our dogs have some loss of immune function over the mixed breeds. It is not because purebreds were *poorly* bred, it is because they have less genetic diversity. There is no gene or combination of genes that determines good immune function. It is not a simple recessive or even a typical polygenic trait. Good immune function is based on the entire genetic makeup of the dog. The more genetic diversity in a breed, the better the overall immune function. If you manage to greatly cut down on several genetic defects there will be even more loss of genetic diversity and more loss of immune function. Balance is the only way. Testing is a very important tool to create this balance. That tool should be used to breed towards balance, not to reduce genetic diversity. Laura Lang ========================================================= "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.
