Dysplasia ???????? - Page 1

I understand hip dysplasia is genetic, but how prevalent is it. Will a dog w/ bad hips os bred will all the puppies have bad hips? Has there ever been two severally displactic dogs bred, and want % of the pups had bad hips. What percentage of dogs that come from parents w/ good hips have bad hips. I think its widely held that dogs w/ bad hips will produce bad hips, but has there been any studies done?

Wscott00, the S.V. did publish some statisical data some time ago. It was related to the production of a1 x a1, a1 x a2, a1 x a3 as well as a few more possible combinations. An excellent person to contact for this is D.H.. Their findings were that the the mating of a1 x a3 dog did not produce dysplastic puppies at a much higher rate than a1 x a1 or a1 x a2. There was of course a small increase, but one might consider it insignificant. It is not my intention to start a contest with anyone, but the S.V.'s classification of a3 allows some dogs to pass who might not pass another hip registry. But of course that is not your question, and those dogs are issued ZW numbers that indicate their propensity to produce hip dysplasie. In the states we are always urged to breed normal x normal to achieve normal results. Of course normal covers everything from Excellent to Fair. The dispersion of O.F.A. statistics gives us an idea of the components of the pass/fail ratio, but of course most stateside GSD's are never tested, and many who are tested never have their x-rays leave the veterinarian's office if the results look poor. What would be the ratio of Excellent x Good, Good x Fair, Fair x Fair? We may never know since there are not enough x-rayed dogs to make sufficent data for a good analysis. As far as breeding dysplastic dog x displastic dog, I am sure that some backyard breeders have done this unintentionally, but we know the progeny were probably never x-rayed so there is no data there. I seriously doubt that the S.V. would ever do such a test, as the animal rights laws in Germany (and probably the EU) clearly state that it is a crime to produce animals with known genetic defects. But, you would think that someone, somewhere has performed these tests. I know there have been many tests of the progeny from passing parents where the type and quantity of nutrition was compared between controlled groups to show a marked increase in hip dysplasie among the litters who were free-fed, or denied certain additives such as glucosomine or chondroitin. But, that's all that I know. Good subject. Bob-O

Puppy buyers want guarantees on one hand but unfortunately are often not willing to do their part. The University of Giessen in Germany has been trying to get data on a HD study in which pups of whole litters are followed throughout their lifetime. The study can only be conclusive if the puppy buyers, who at the time of purchase all agreed that they would screen their pups actually do it. There lies the problem, few do. There is an interesting evaluation on the siriusdog website, in which the offspring of 200 females each with a1, a2 and a3 was checked and what they produced. There was very little variance in the HDa-stamp results of the offspring. There was about 10% variance between the a1 and a2 bitches for producing a1s, but virtually none between the a2 and a3 bitches. There was virtually no difference in what all produced in terms of dysplastic dogs (a4 & a5), which was 5% overall out of a1 bitches, 6% out of a2 bitches, and 6.2% out of a3 bitches. It is pretty commonly accepted these days that HD is partially genetic, partially acquired. The numbers range from 30-40% genetic. I came across a study a few years ago done in the UK which followed Golden Retrievers. After breeding 10 generations with only dogs that have excellent hips pups with HD were still produced in the 10th generation of HD free breeding. A German book that since its first publication has been banned (Germany has no free speech) claims that according to their research raw diet influences the incidence of HD. The book heavily promoted raw feeding and vaccinating as little as possible and the authors got bested by the industry giants who supposedly were responsible for the book being taken off the shelves. If raw diet influences HD it stands to reason that all diets influence HD. In Germany you cannot officially breed with a dysplastic dog, and no HDa3 does not equal dysplastic. Public pressure makes breeding with an a3 dog nearly impossible these days because the common misconception is that good hips = good hips and not ideal hips = bad hips in the offspring. The odd dogs that are still used for breeding with a3 are very few. The problem with any HD scheme is that not all offspring is screened and therefore the data is incomplete, but not totally inconclusive. With the SV a-stamp the data that is available is available for the breedig population and therefore gives at least a trend for that breeding population. We are not concerned about dogs that never get bred. But to a certain extent we do need to pay attention to relatives that produce less than ideal results. If relatives that have been raised under different circumstances are more frequently dysplastic than others then these dogs are probably more genetically prone to develop hip problems. If the odd one out ends up dysplastic it is probably acquired rather than genetic. Many dogs with bad hip x-rays are not severely or even at all physically compromised and lead a normal and full and long life. For very few dogs a bad HD result is actually fatal. Keep that in mind... Currently about 1/3 of the anual puppy crop is certified within the SV HD a-stamp system and the majority of the dogs that are submitted for a-stamps pass. About 10-15% of the dogs x-rayed will not be submitted to the a-stamp system because an a3 or worse is expected at the time of x-ray. Of the 3rd that gets a-stamped nearly 80% pass with HDa1 and a2. These are the dogs that will contribute to the following generations.

Very interesting. Thank You DH

Excellent reply D.H.. I am glad that you were about. I have read the studies that you mentioned, and think that we all agree that there is no guarantee for 100% dysplasie-free hip production with any breeding pair regardless of the excellent quality of their hips and the repeated concentration of breeding good x good, generation through generation The problem of course being that the genetic cause is polygenic (many genes in combination) and therefore impossible at this time in our history to isolate. The GSD genetic soup was made just over one-hundred (100) years ago from a handful of dogs with all of their good and bad traits combined and the bad ones virtually unknown at that time. But of course many purebred dogs are this way. A very interesting dog is the North American Husky. This is a "natural" dog that has existed for many centuries with little influence by humans until first harnessed for sled work. Dogs for this purpose were subject to selective elimination by observed lack of working ability. This was later followed to some degree by entry into the beauty pagents known as conformation shows. But, even after all of this, the Husky still has a very low incidence of hip dysplasie. Perhaps nature made the selection long before humans interfered and the dog has remained virtually unchanged. We cannot say the same thing our our GSD as it has been "refined" at least two (2) different ways during its short history, and long before acceptable methods were developed to determine hip quality, as well as a few other things. Bob-O

I have a daugter of a noch zugelassen female who was bred to "a" normal male, got "a" normal female (the daughter I own), with low ZW. All pups that have been x-rayed from "a" normal bitch (the daughter) (bred to "a" normal male and "a" fast normal male) have good hips. Just my own experience.

Hi WSCOTT! I have done quite some studies on HD frequencies recently. As DH is refering to one of my studies Dr. Fred Lanting was friendly enough to translate and put on his website, I can offer you this study on my website also: http://www.bloggen.be/hd/archief.php?ID=39 Feel free to visit and discuss. Kind regards, Jantie P.S.: Now don't you let people minimize the disease. Some of them will tell you it's not all that bad. But you haven't seen the end of it. Less than 50% of all x-rayed GSDs have perfect hips - look at the overall graphics and simulations on my website. If you start talking and investigating, you will soon find out, what happens in extreme cases. Story told to me recently: Vet has a stiff GSD in the freezer with perfect hips. Should the x-ray of the living dog be bad, the stiffy one is placed on the table for a new 'evaluation'. Don't kill the pianist. Let me correct the false image/quote DH presents (repeatedly). The SV publishes a heritibility rate of 60-70%. Can't believe why DH would stick to the wrong numbers.

Here we go again Jantie, actually it is you who sticks to the wrong numbers. You deliberately changed and then omitted the numbers that disprove your own theory. You are thereby misleading and tweaking the numbers you decide to put out so that they match what you would like them to. You have been lobbying for this for a while now, all because of a dog that did not even live in your home, but in the yard/kennel of your fathers property and you went to visit 3 times a day. A dog you refused treatment for and also refused to adjust exercise levels to match his MILD HD (a4) condition. Claiming the dogs level of discomfort, which you could not have known about exactly because the dog was not with you all the time. Nature does not need perfect hips because nature does not see perfection as you see perfection. Perfect in nature as it is, with all its imperfections. Perfect is what works for nature, not for humans. Nature just needs things to continue, that means once reproduction has been achieved and the species continues, nature is satisfied. Nature does not care if a dog lives to 6 months, 6 years, or 16 years. Only humans do. Your perception of perfection is like that of lifeless industrial machining with zero tolerances. What does not make the cut in mass production gets scrapped, recycled or destroyed. In lifeless mass production you can control many factors up to the end product, which you never will be able to control with a living being. In industrial lifeless production the amount of scrap that is produced just to get a few good ones is also something that would not be acceptable in any production lines dealing with living beings that humans happen to care about. You are lobbying for HD utopia whereas your energies could be used much more productively elsewhere. The original tables that you published can still be seen here: http://siriusdog.com/articles/hd-german-shepherd-statistical-study.htm You no longer show these tables at your 'bloggen'. For a very good reason. They show that when you reduce the numbers of HDa1 results that you originally had been lobbying for so strongly - it also reduces the numbers of a5 results to a quarter of a single percent! That would mean that severe HD is virtually non-existent in the GSD population. You had not paid attention to that and of course those numbers really do not serve your purpose. So now you leave that bit out. Your claim that 50% of all screended GSD do not have perfect hips is also irrelevant as already described by me above, because only 1/3 of all dogs are factually certified and only those that have actually passed will continue to influence the future. There is only very limited influence from the dogs that were not screened or screened and not submitted. Especially when you take into account the research done with other breeds which show that perfect over many generations is still no guarantee for perfect.

The suggestion that a vet has a frozen dog as a stand-in for a dog with bad hips only discredits you even more. Such a dog either would have to have been been held in proper x-ray position by two people for quite a considerable amount of time after death as rigor mortis sets in. Anyone who has ever done a HD x-ray and positioned a dog for it knows how laborous that is. Or the other alternative was that this dog was held by two people in proper postition inside a bloody freezer til the dog was frozen stiff in that position. How many times would they have to thaw and reset that dog to get the perfect positioning on that dog? Much easier to just take in another live dog with good hips, buddy! What a ludicrous statement. If a vet would ever be found out to substitute a dog they would no longer be able to a-stamp for the SV, which is a big income source for vets in Germany. And they would probably loose their license and livelyhood anyways because no medical practitioner can be allowed to keep operating while practising known fraudulent procedures. Their livelyhood is hardly something a vet will knowingly risk to loose over a 150 Euro x-ray!!! How would a vet keep something like that from his staff? Both the frozen and the live dog exchange? Vet techs and assistants are usually always present or at the very least come and og. That is THE MOST STUPID comment that I have heard on this board in a long time! 60-70% rate of heredity? Where does the SV publish that? The SV states that HD is 20-30% genetic on their site: http://www.schaeferhunde.de/site/index.php?id=604 (Sicher ist, dass erbliche Veranlagung für das Entstehen dieser Krankheit eine maßgebliche Rolle spielt. Von Bedeutung sind aber auch Einflüsse durch Fütterung und Haltung. Der Erblichkeitsgrad bei HD liegt wissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen zufolge bei 20 bis 30 %.) The SV also states that numbers of HDa4 and a5 have been reduced from 27% to 3% http://www.schaeferhunde.de/site/fileadmin/download/informationen/info_zba-907_hd-verfahren.pdf (Der Anteil von Deutschen Schäferhunden mit mittlerer und schwerer Hüftgelenksdysplasie konnte dadurch von anfangs 27% auf heute nur noch 3% drastisch verringert werden!) If you really would like to do a service to the GSD community, check all the data from dogs that are in the genetics database and see how a1, a2 and a3 dogs, all of them have been producing and how the trend is over time. Have dogs born in 1980 produced more awhatevers than dogs born in 1990 or 2000? Easy to graph out. You have the time. How many a1 and a2 and a3 have actually been actively re-producing and is there a notable trend towards using more a1s then a3, which I would assume there is now. Is there a continued drop in HD cases that are produced? Especially by the dogs that have been around in the last 10 years because they are expressed the strongest in a pedigree. Especially the heavily used lines like Ursus, Jeck and Fero, Mink. That is stuff that is of interest.That is where you could invest your energies and actually do something productive and useable for all GSD folk instead.

Hi D.H. You seem to have this well in hand so I won't jump in. However, I will say that the stats cited by D.H. are consistent with various stats that I have noted. Also the trend shown indicates to me that anyones best genetic stand against HD is breeding ONLY a-normal stock (as fast-normal and nz have a difference in result that is not statistically significant). I do believe that nutrition plays a greater role than most are willing to accept. D.H., can you tell any more about the banned book you mentioned? ( whether it has any credible info, the name, and whether it might be available outside of Germany)