Epilepsy Do we have a problem - Page 10

Sue B, now that I have pointed out to you that you have been posting on the wrong dog, can you please tell me whether you are in a position to ask DH to make a comment on the right dog (Apollo v Dakota) regarding the alleged comment attributed to him that this dog is the source of the epilepsy.

It does not matter whether this dog has met his demise, or, not. There is still progeny on the ground carrying his breeding family. Any one of these could be epileptic and breed on should Apollo be the source for epilepsy. This alone makes it essential that DH clarifies exactly what he has said, or, should owners just wait and see what may come forth. Which would you prefer? It may be as you say that it is coincidental for him to be in the pedigree but there is at least one dog whose mother is inbred on Apollo on her mother’s side 0.3,3.

My mind will not be at rest until the matter has been clarified and, I suspect, nor will be Bill Owen’s and anyone else with Apollo or his breeding family in the bloodline.

Regards

Mackenzie

Mackenzie, I am not aware of DH making any such statement where he has attributed the source of the epilepsy from coming from the dog you have mentioned above. Since you now appear to be the only contributor to this thread who is constantly going on about this I can only presume that it is you who knows differently, have you read such a statement from DH, heard him say it yourself (if so why didnt you ask him to clarify it at the time), or  have you just heard it from a third party,  otherwise known as  Hear Say,  which in itself is less reliable than a British Rail Train arriving on time, hence the very good reason why Hear Say is not acceptable in court.  So you tell us then Mackenzie, what exactly did DH say about Apollo?

Regards
Sue B

Sue
Do you really think that DH will come on here or otherwise make a statement. I am a great believer in an old saying THERE IS NO SMOKE WITHOUT FIRE and as I stated on a prior post HOPE IT GOES away If DH has made a statement then surely it would be easier to answer the question YES or NO.

Patterson

Firstly,  Sue B, just because you are unaware of the alleged statement from DH does not mean he did not make it.  If you read the posts as I suggested to you then you will realise that it was not I that put the information into the public domain.  As it is in the public domain I am entitled to raise questions in the same way that you or anyone else can.  You are quite right that "hearsay" is not allowed in a Court of Law, however, this is not a Court of Law.  Further any good investigative journalist, policeman for example ask the questions based on hearsay all the time.   That is how they get their stories and solves crimes.   If the information that was put into the public domain is incorrect then a simple comment from DH would  have ended any further speculation.  As you know nothing has been forthcoming from DH and that in itself creates suspicion.

Another point I would make to you on the subject of hearsay is that back in the seventies, when a number of top dogs were epileptic, hearsay was the only thing breeders could  go by.   Once that hearsay became reality the breed suffered many distressing problems.  That situation can come again today.   Epilepsy is here in the breed in the UK now!!   As a breeder you should welcome any information that will reduce or eradicate  the possibility of the seventies era of epileptics and put you into a better position when considering your own breeding program.

regards

Mackenzie

Mackenzie, the only reason I keep answering you is because you keep directing questions to me of which I keep telling you I have no answeres but you dont seem to understand that. As for how news travelled in the seventies word of mouth was the fastest way of finding things out, the telephone was used and people were spoken to directly, so not necessarily HearSay , however I must also hasten to add that in the 70's no-one had to contend with a public World Wide Web Witch Hunt !!!

I will say again, if DH has made a statement or intends to make a statement where he would make such a statement is up to him, what gives you or anyone else the right to demand that he or anybody else makes it on this messageboard? 

Regards
Sue b

Once again Sue you have not read the posts regarding what I said to you only a few posts ago.  To help you here it is again.

If you read an earlier post from me you will see that what I did say is “I have not asked Davey Hall to come on here and declare all he knows. I have asked that he informs everyone of the basis of the alleged comments that he made. The vehicle that he uses to provide that information is up to him and, I think, that as the Vice Chairman of the Breed Council there is a duty upon him to do so”.


I hope that you will now get that clear in your mind!!!!!

Your first post here was to just have a go at me and posting about an animal that was not the subject of this thread.  Why do you not make a worthwhile contribution on the subject of epilepsy and stop trying to deflect attention from your Breed Council Panelmate.  You are clearly disinterested in identifying the source of the epilepsy that is in the UK whereas I have made my interest perfectly clear in saying that my dog carries some of the breeding families of Apollo.

With regard to your comment on a witch hunt I again refer you to an earlier post when I said "I am not trying to start a witch-hunt against Davey but the question does need an answer".   Does it cost anything to be honest?

I have no more to  say on this subject to you Sue, or, anyone else in the UK on this serious problem that you have.  I am well advanced on another route in getting the information that I need.

Mackenzie
 

Hi All,

I thought I would just add a bit of technical data on here about Epilepsy.  In the mid-sixties I trained as an EEG Technician in the NHS for 2 years.  The long name for this is Electo-Encephalographer and we dealt on a daily basis with human epilepsy by attaching leads with sensors to the human head (on the outside - non-invasive) and recording the electrical waves of the brain. 

Whilst medicated  (on say Phenobarbitone or such like) a patient may not be physically fitting but when an EEG is taken it clearly shows the fits on paper recordings.  However, off medication the fits are physical occurences on a regular or irregular basis dependent on the area of the brain and the severity of the epilepsy inherited.  There are also various types of epilepsy in humans - like temporal lobe epilepsy which sometimes manifests itself as "unusual or abnormal behaviour" and not necessarily fitting.

Very occasionally fits are related to brain tumours or other brain disease.

We never had GSDs or any dogs in the 70s and we are glad we did not, because to see a human or dog fitting especially when it is a Grand Mal Seizure is horrific (Grand Mal being a full blown epileptic fit - foaming at the mouth and uncontrollable movements, tongue biting and incontinence of both orifaces).

I was amazed to read the part on here that breeders/owners etc did not believe the recordings taken by Dr. Phyllis Croft who did EEGs on GSDs/dogs - how IGNORANT is that - as I said I am not an expert in the brain activity of dogs or any animals come to that, but if a fit is recorded on paper with an EEG Test then A FIT IS A FIT - and it is easily recognisable.  

Medication will control or mask the fitting, but the fits still go on in the brain of the dog or human, it never goes away - there is no cure for it.

At least for animals we can STOP BREEDING FROM THEM, however I am fully aware that once a dog has seizures it is ultimately too late by that time for he or she and his siblings.  But from there on it is not rocket science to stop the spread of this disease by doing the right thing -  withdrawing Sire and Dam from stud or breeding programmes, spaying the animals who have it and making sure that any siblings are never bred from and that is the duty of every Breeder/Owner involved in this dreadful disease. 

This is only my 2 pence worth for what it is worth of course. 

Personally, we are going to offer our 2 old dogs DNA for control subjects for the above Research and I would advise anyone with an common sense to do so also.  The Researchers need lots of control subjects just as much as they need DNA from dogs with epilepsy or their relatives.  It only cost a small bit of your time to at least contribute to this Research.

Aileen Mathieson

I had a bitch (Chleo) PTS in 2004 because of Epilepsy, the fits became more frequent and prolonged. I dont honestly know if it was genetic or aquired, she had her first fit in the summer of 2002 (just short of her 3rd birthday) whilst playing with the other dogs and a running hosepipe. We still have her brother, now 10 1/2 yrs, who has never had any fits or convulsions, and has rarely been to the vets, (there were rumours that Iolanda Farah was an epileptic but it was never proved despite numerous tests at the Animal Health Trust Newmarket, to which I was involved and shown the results).
At the time not knowing if Chleo's epilepsy was or wasnt hereditary, we took the decision never to allow Chico to be used at stud.
I pride myself in being honest and open and will openly admit if and when I have a problem with my dogs.

you can find his pedigree here

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/pedigree/551338.html

Iolanda Tomahawk, I would be interested to know if there are any lines that are affected???

Sarah Smith

www.sarocalgsds.co.uk

As I said in an earlier post, let's wait until we have concrete proof through DNA research where the problem, (If there is one) lies, So let's all chill out, and let the scientists work it out. Some of the early post on this thread, talked about, sympathy, and being brave, that Karen and Alan explained their experience of what they went through, and the moving letter about Nevada, and that there must not be any witch hunt against the people who are prepared to openly and honestly discuss there experiences with this terrible situation. I received an e.mail from Karen tonight, which she received on face book from Edward Armstrong, It reads, "If you go down to the woods today" " You're sure of a big surprise", If you go down to the woods today, You'd better go in disguise!. "I hear  there all coming out of the woods now Karen" Bet you're well pissed off having mated you're bitch. It's a shame Bill didn't tell you about them 2 out of that dog before all the finger pointing!!! Karen sent me that face book post, If that is what represents sympathy and concern about people opening their tragedy on this site, then shame on the Edward Armstrongs of this breed. Needless to say his facts and figs are incorrect. Bill Owen.

Thanks for the info Mackenzie
the first link I cant access but the second one  I can
www.vin.com/proceedings/Proceedings.plx

Pam