http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/1100/abshealthreqs.pdf

Would be very interested in people looking at this then letting us know about whether they agree with this , detailing where there are gaps with the KC document then where the list doesn't cover the tests that are not on the list BUT would recommend should be done and give links to the breed clubs that are actively working towards bringing the tests into a mandatory test.

I am just interested to get a view about how the breed clubs are pro active or reactive :/6r

I think that TNS DNA test for border collies should be essential with CL DNA recommended (there are a few in this quarters breed supplement so there will be more carriers in future!)

So not on the KC recommended list then.

Sorry should have asked as well what are the symptoms / condition a dog will get if they are not tested ?

Carriers suffer no ill affects however the chance of putting two carriers together increases without testing and  the  resulting affected puppies would be unhealthy until they were given sleep or passed away both conditions are ultimately fatal.

Looked this and really all large breeds in the working group at the very least should be hip and elbow scored
I did a lot of research and after contacting Prof Bedford he confirmed in Rotts MRD is a one off test, either the dog is affected or unaffected, nothing changes over time so to say annual eye test doesn't make sense..I'd still be happy to do it if there was a reason to.. All dogs IMO should be tested and litters can be tested too... Heart testing is recommended by the main breed club too...

yes TNS is fine for carriers, no symptoms, but affected pups die by around 4 months of age, CL also fine for carriers, affected dogs die by around 4 or 5 years of age.

TNS is where blood cells get 'trapped' and can't fight infections which the pups then die of, CL is a storage disease where toxins aren't removed from the body and are 'stored' until capacity is reached and the dogs die.  There are no cures for these diseases.

I also think that the one off gonioscopy (eye test) should be at least recommended - test for propensity for narrow angled glaucoma which if affected dogs will lose both their sight and their eyes and is a very painful condition.  It's as yet not fully understood, but testing is the only tool we currently have.

> It's as yet not fully understood, but testing is the only tool we currently have.

Your lucky in my breed the incidences of Glaucoma are the open angle type, so no way to test for predisposition, ti just hits, seems almost randomly, thankfully not often.

Yes one can find this or that link in pedigrees, but they may be purely coincidental, as most dogs have common ancestors somewhere, and most breed lines worldwide have had dogs affected or produce it at some point, fortunately the incidence is low, but it's the one disease that scares me, as it's painful, and expensive to treat, with usually the outcome of loss of sight/eyes.

I think the KC should publish all the results no matter which company did it!

Your lucky in my breed the incidences of Glaucoma are the open angle type, so no way to test for predisposition, ti just hits, seems almost randomly, thankfully not often.

they don't currently know of the accuracy of this test, but it may indicate a predisposition and there may be some genetic link.... at the moment it's all mays :-( which is why I wouldn't want it to be an essential test, but it should be encouraged simply so we may know more....

>

I agree, KC should publish all health test results, they are bonafide results whoever did the tests, and should be available for all to see on their Health Test Result finder page.

It's up to breed clubs to ask them to make them official breed tests.  We had to do that with Optigen's prcd-PRA test in our breed, first found to be this form in Autumn 2008, but not made 'official' and recorded by KC until July 2009.  Owners were able to send in earlier results to be added to KC records.

With international co-operation I can't see why they can't record foreign test results for oversees dogs used, example hips A, B etc for FCI, Exc, Good etc for USA.

I have now bred two litters where no health test results show for the sire, yet the KC demanded to have them as they are requirements under the ABS.

>they are bonafide results whoever did the tests

Clearly, that does not necessarily have to be true.  Tests and laboratories are not always as they should be, particularly in countries where regulations are not as strict as they might be in the UK. 
Until a test is established as reliable the results could be misleading and therefore damaging to a breed.

These are UK based companies that I'm talking about Stooge!  For PRA DNA the KC will only accept Optigen's results and will only post their results......

>It's up to breed clubs to ask them to make them official breed tests.

I agree.  It is hard to imagine in this day and age that many clubs do not have active health committees constantly reviewing information and they are clearly in the best position to consider the impact on their breed.  It will be interesting to see if anyone has a breed that does not have a health committee doing this.

> For PRA DNA the KC will only accept Optigen's results and will only post their results......

If the KC have passed Optigens test as suitable why not use that then?  It does not seem reasonable to expect the KC to check out the reliability of lots of different establishments.

Actually I questioned one company with the KC and they said that they were a recognised company but that they can only accept Optigen's results.  And I don't mind admitting Optigen are expensive compared to other companies.  There is now thankfully a company who do the test and the paperwork goes through Optigen but it is three times cheaper!!

> There is now thankfully a company who do the test and the paperwork goes through Optigen but it is three times cheaper!!

That seems like the solution then :)

The test I was thinking of is carried out by a recognised UK company but the KC will only accept Optigen.

It is now Stooge but sadly some people have used the other company in my eyes to hide results.  Thankfully many people are open with their results.  Only pain with this other company is that it takes ages to get results back so it's no good if you've got pups and you are wanting to keep a clear one.

The eye exam does pinpoint the dogs with narrow angles and these could be helpful in establishing a DNA test as bloods and swabs are currently being asked for from the worst failures as well as the ones that have lost eyes. .So I believe we should have this as a requirement and should have gone on schedule A rather than B. We don't what it becoming more of a problem than it is now.

We aren't even on the under investigation one for Glaucoma any more as I suppose too few in the UK have been affected to prove an inherited issue.

Interestingly I chatted with Peter Bedford today and he was totally dismissive of narrow angled glaucoma being an issue in border collies - I asked what the current state of play was and he said 'there was a problem with a few' when pressed, he said that there didn't seem to be a problem in border collies other than a few cases.  Good news, but perhaps we don't need to go onto schedule A, nor press for a DNA test just yet.  I'd probably rather they get one sorted for epilepsy which is a major problem in the breed :-(

Talk to different eye panellists you get different answers which is unfortunate. Bet he didnt tell you to stop testing though
If we can be proactive now then it should never become the problem that epilepsy is and isnt the fact that no one talks about epilepsy in lines one of the biggest hinderences to taking any steps forward. Do we really want glaucoma or a predisposition to it to become the same. Personally having experience of BOTH then no I don't.
I am sure you know research into epilepsy is also taking place.

it is unfortunate as they attend the same meetings, although I haven't had a gonioscopy done for a couple of years, I haven't heard there's a big issue over it.  Of course they wont turn down the money for the test ;-) but fortunately I don't think it's a particularly widespread problem now that quite a few dogs have been tested.

Research into epilepsy has been taking place for a long time (far too long, although I understand there are major issues to overcome) and some breeds are starting to have tests, but we have to wait a while for collies ;-(

> Research into epilepsy has been taking place for a long time (far too long, although I understand there are major issues to overcome) and some breeds are starting to have tests, but we have to wait a while for collies ;-(

The trouble is, any condition which proves to be polygenic is very difficult to develop a test for. Many breeds are affected by epilepsy and finding solutions will not be easy. The affected genes may not even be the same for each breed. :-(

Yes they attend the same meetings and the stance they now take in only giving affected or unaffected rather than some grading while others weren't was discussed and worked out with the Breed council and the panellists themselves to try and gain some uniformity.
Looking at the database shows that there are still affecteds being diagnosed but no one is forced to add to this so how many are diagnosed and not being open about it ? As I said the same situation that we have with people keeping quiet about epilepsy. Neither issue is pleasent and I do wish neither was in the breed but we have to work towards finding solutions to all issues don't we ? After all we only have the ISDS strong stance on CEA to thank for not having the same incidence of CEA that breeds such as Rough Collies, Smooth Collies and Shelties have.