Champdogs Blog: The Pros and Cons of Neutering

>If you do your research you will also find that estrogen is not just produced in by the ovaries(Many vets are unaware thst testosterone & estrogen have more than one source)& as in the case I mentioned the womb does not"shrivel"up as it still has blood vessels & nerves attached. Have you scientific evidence of this "shrivelling" ?

Well, if you do YOUR research, you will find:

- studies conducted over 15 years ago found no evidence of increased health risks with ovario-hysterectomy as compared to only ovariectomy (Okkens et al., 1997) - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9404289  - That means - NO INCREASED RISK OF PYO. 

- Removal of only the ovaries is a quicker, less involved surgery that has fewer post-surgical problems and is not associated with long-term health problems - https://www.parsemus.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2006-making-rational-choice-1.pdf

- This review found that there is no benefit to removing the uterus as well as the ovaries: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22087712

So, that's just a few research papers supporting what I am saying.  I am not really seeing any from you, supporting what you are claiming.

Please do give me YOUR research showing that leaving the uterus in, during a lap spay, results in an increased risk of pyo.  Thanks.

Can I just pop in on this one and say when I take my heavy hounds in for surgery, having seen how some vet nurses lift their sedated patients on and off the table, I always tell them to support the whole body when lifting.   Ditto for the cradle they lie unconscious dogs in, on their backs.  My Basset, with well documented (here) spine and hip problems, went in for a dental which had to be aborted as they wanted to put a line in to have more control over the anaesthetic and because he'd been licking his legs silly, the line wouldn't go in and stay in.   For quite 48 hours after this, he showed a lot of discomfort when trying to get comfortable lying down.  I put this down to what had happened to him during the dental that didn't happen, whether from lifting, or in the cradle. 

Maybe the lameness in this dog had more to do with what happened during the procedure, rather than the actuall procedure?

ps   Update on the aborted dental - when I took him in for another eye ulcer check, I mentioned the dental to the vet who'd not seen him (eyes) before.   She got her plier-type instrument out and nipped round his mouth, removing tartar as easily as anything!!   Job done WITHOUT the need to put him under a g/a.

Where is the data on the shrivelling of the womb ??

Unless you remove all the estrogen producing tissue there will always be the risk of pyometra infection in the womb if there is one - obviously you cannot do this as the adrenal gland, liver, bone, brain, adipose & breasts all produce estrogen & you cannot remove all of these. Therefore the ONLY way to totally remove the risk of pyometra is to remove the womb QED.

No further research on the internet for me, whilst there is a womb there is a risk of pyometra

Great, so in other words you have no research to support what you say.  It is entirely conjectural and it is disproven by all the papers I've quoted above.

As for the shrivelling of the womb - that is something I was told by the vet who did a lap spay on my dog.  I don't have a paper to prove that one, but whether that vet was right or not, the fact remains that there is substantial evidence that there is no increased risk of pyometra by leaving the uterus in, if the ovaries are removed - I've given you all the research above demonstrating that fact. 

This procedure has been carried out for decades by vets on the continent and so we have substantial evidence to prove this.

My research isn't based ONLINE so cannot direct you to ONLINE links sorry did it the old fashioned way from hard copy. Not going to start looking for information for you.

You cannot deny that the only 100% certain way to 100% prevent pyometra is to remove the womb, because if the womb remains there is a risk no matter how small that the horomone linked pyometra can still occur. Just removing the ovaries does not 100% prevent it, that is a medical fact

I asked a vet about this when deciding which op to have on one of mine. She said the risk is minimal but there is still a very very small risk of a stump pyo if anything is left behind. It can happen but very rare

Are we confusing the different types of spay that we are discussing about ? Pros and cons for each are slightly different .
The ovary sparing spay ( oss ) removes uterus but leaves ovaries. As I understood that could leave the dog open to stump pyo if the vet is not experienced and careful . It is however rare as Suejaw says. Also finding vets in this country who are doing this isnt easy .

The other type is when the ovaries are removed leaving uterus . Usually done by laparoscopic surgery and known as lap spay . This has been done for a long time and reduces the risks of pyo substantially as well as other cancers.

After much thought and reading , in the end I was happy to have Brooke spayed this way not least because the nearest vet to me at the time who could do oss was a couple of hundred miles away which was going to be impractical.

Obviously there is still the full spay and the pros and cons to that.

https://www.parsemus.org/projects/ovary-sparing-spay/ this link gives details on oss

https://www.villagevet.co.uk/laparoscopic-neutering/   on lap spay .

If its me that's confused I apologise in advance

If its me that's confused I apologise in advancel

Appologies if its me that sconfused now

Pyometra is a estrogen linked infection of the womb

Estrogen isn't just produced by the ovaries & if the ovaries only are removed the body continues to produce estrogen.

The result being the womb is still at risk of developing pyrometra.

The only way to 100% prevent pyometra is to remove the womb totally

I  am not arguing that point  but done properly an oss spay removes all possibility including risk from any material left.  . Lap spay only removing ovaries may leave a small risk but that is the individual  owners choice if they wish to take that risk
There are also different types of oestrogen and altho I have no clue as to if they are all.secreted by the ovaries or are implicated in pyo that could make the difference  to the risks .
Maybe ?

Blah blah blah.  No research to back up claims.  Blah blah.

What you say is just meaningless and misleading words unless you can produce research to support what you're saying.  There not only is NO research to support what you say, there exists research to DISPROVE what you say. 

You can hypothesise all you like that there is still a risk due to estrogen from elsewhere and whatever, but the research does not support your hypothesis.  There is NO INCREASED INCIDENCE OF PYO amongst dogs spayed using a lap spay compared to dogs spayed conventionally.  I've posted the links above to prove it. 

End of.

Oh, and all peer-reviewed research which has been published in journals is online these days.  If you can't find it online, it doesn't exist.

Whatever you say it must be true because it's on the WWW because nothing is true thst isn't on the WWW.

Have a good day

Ann, I'm totally open to hearing about research you have which isn't on the internet as well.  You would, though, need to scan it in and provide a link to it somehow so that it is accessible of course.  You surely don't expect people to believe that research exists just because you say it does - without being able to say where it has been published and who wrote it?  I can easily say that the earth is flat and that aliens exist, without any research to support my claims.

Science doesn't work like that.  That's called hearsay or myth.

Im talking about the difference between a regular and lap spay. Not OSS, i looked into that and not something i would do if spaying

>Not OSS, i looked into that and not something i would do if spaying

Nor me. All the risks of surgery and few of the health benefits, and none of the behavioural benefits, of a full spay. I'd rather leave a bitch entire.

Hi I notice nobody has mentioned Mammary tumours as a result of the hormone cycles an intact bitch will go through - every heat cycle an intact bitch has increases the risk of Mammary tumours. This is the same effect as HRT in women - the hormone Oestrogen acts on the breast tissue. I understand you want to interfere as little as possible with your bitch but I would not risk the tumours - we are just about to have a second tumour removed from our 11 year old girl - she was spayed at 5, I wanted her to be free of the mood swings and hormones as soon as she had finished her breeding career. She had her first tumour at 7, the operation is a big one and expensive as is an emergency spay due to pyo- far more expensive than the spay operation , if that is a consideration.

There are pro's and con's for keeping a bitch intact but I think the con's very definitely out way the pro's.

I understand this is not everyone's point of view but we all approach it from our view point of looking after our girls the best way we can.

Actually, the study which found that there was an increased risk of mammary tumours has been largely discredited and debunked.  It was one study done in 1969 which had poor design and is not reliable as the basis for recommending neutering.

Furthermore, even that study found that there is only a benefit if you neuter before the first heat cycle or perhaps the second.  To neuter after the third or onwards brought no benefit whatsoever in terms of preventing mammary tumours.

https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article-abstract/43/6/1249/910225?fbclid=IwAR1Mmzu57MxBXwQ9C7otZOOuGa_TPL5_Oep8dMRWqxGcvKamS-waLKIbX6w This is THE paper - from 1969 - which is referred to as the reason for neutering to avoid mammary tumours.

However, here is a systematic review of the subject in 2012 which dismisses that 1969 study:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225080364_The_effect_of_neutering_on_the_risk_of_mammary_tumours_in_dogs_-_a_systematic_review?fbclid=IwAR25ZpPfydeBSAvkTQIumhNwkj8NiKXT9IDbdx1ptHrT5WWRnLXN9w1UNj4 

This review concludes that, "due to the limited evidence available and the risk of bias in the 1969 study, any evidence that neutering reduces the risk of mammary cancer and that age at neutering has an effect on it, is judged to be weak and not a sound basis for firm recommendations on neutering."

There is so much misinformation out there and garbled 2nd/3rd/4th hand accounts of things, passed on in some bizarre chain of Chinese whispers that gets distorted with each retelling.  The only answer is to go to the research itself and to think independently.

Thanks  my friend's dog did not have pyonetra. The dog is fully insured so the cost of the proposed surgery and initial treatment was covered by the insurance, but not the spay. The initial surgery was going to be small, the proposal from the vet was for a small sum (small relatively to the cost of the surgery being covered by the insurance), she would be spayed.
Now the dog is in a very bad shape. My friend cannot afford subsequent major treatments not covered by the insurance any longer.
My friend choose what she thought was best.

Many thanks, I will join the FB group. It is good to find people that can question what seems to be apparent popular beliefs.
Going through the chat here has been useful. Yes, there is a lot of hearsay.
I believe that we are trying our best with our dogs. Yet, what others say around us is powerful, some people speak/write with certainty and can persuade others (including me) as they create an apparent view that everyone thinks the same way they do. I.e. everyone is having their dogs spayed, so people hearing this (including me) will think that it must be OK  and so we also spay our dogs.
Not sure if I described the above ok.
On spay (and castration) my humble thoughts are that we need to do better than trying our best. The little research that is out there needs to be better distributed.
Dogs have been (and are still) used for medical research of human biological health.
Socially they share our way of life. At the same time they have their own personality, are very adaptable, loyal and overall want to please us humans. If you cut a dog's tail or leg it will still love you, they may not fully realise what is going on but they have feelings.
There is research on people that have had their ovaries, wombs testicles removed and it points to a type of conclusion they we all generally agree with. Only when necessary, I.e. risks are extremely high as consequences can not be taken for granted.
Most of us would not choose to have our children's (or grandchildren) reproductive organs removed, but that is exactly what many of us are doing to our dogs.
NHS on hysterectomy
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/hysterectomy/considerations/

Luckily not many girls have their ovaries removed when young, so most of us cannot speak from personal experience, here is a report of likely complications of ovary removal https://www.prevention.com/health/a20499410/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-having-your-ovaries-removed/

Hope this helps.

You cannot compare humans with pets.

With humans the patient is able to chose what is done to them in 99.999999% of cases.

With our pets we make those decisions for them hopefully to make their lives better.

To prevent pyrometra is a reason to spay a bitch or a queen & ensure no negligent litters are produced which is a secondary effect. There are bitches that have medical reasons for spaying apart of pyometra as well. Had I as a human been offered a full hystorectomy when much younger I would have jumped at the chance, as it would have prevented a health problem that dogged much of my"fertile"life.

Some people anthropomorphize their pets way too much. Apart from the physical operation the pyshological effects of neutering are totally different in humans & animals. Many years ago a very experienced vet said to me about castrating male dogs to change some behaviours" they(owners) don't seem to understand that yourcastrate the body, not the mind, hence castrated dogs can still mate & tie with bitches"

> Most of us would not choose to have our children's (or grandchildren) reproductive organs removed, .<br /

Because its against human right/the law!! Sorry you just cant use that as a comparison!!

I dont think it's useful to compare humans and dogs in this way regardless of the law.
Human reproduction and health problems are different as   are our psychological and social pressures . Dogs don't have social.implications surrounding having  puppies or not
Dogs dont go through a menopause for one.thing . Cancer risks are totally different  and for most we are able to make our own choices as to what we should do and how we control our own reproduction .
After all we are able to euthanase our dogs if we feel it's in their best Interests  . For humans as yet in this country we cannot make.that choice and it would be for.the individual not a relative to do that in any case . So imo human dog comparisons are not helpful. For me we must do research and decide what we believe gives the likelihood of a long healthy life for our pet

You absolutely can compare humans and pets and the points made by the OP are completely valid.

>With our pets we make those decisions for them hopefully to make their lives better.

No, the vast majority of people make those decisions because they don't want blood on the floor/don't want the inconvenience of avoiding other dogs on walks/worry about matings we don't want (the bitch very much does)/think we can fix all behavioural problems by chopping out body parts/dislike humping/don't want to think of their dog as as sexual being - and insert any other reason, and then - to top it off - they kid themselves that they are doing this for the dog. 

They are not (in 99% of cases) doing it for the dog. The dog didn't ask to be neutered, the science and research is against neutering (especially at young or even middle age) and the repercussions are considerable.

Here's a great article in the NYT which sums up exactly that perspective:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/opinion/dogs-spaying-neutering.html 

Especially summed up in the last line:  "As a society, we are endorsing the idea that dogs come without complicated needs and messy bodily functions — because after all, that was “fixed.”

But we are the ones who need fixing."

I tend to agree with onetwothreefour.
We can contemplate a comparison between humans and dogs, specially on something we do not truly understand ourselves (physiological aspects and things like health, hormones, happiness  and how we feel....).
Just because is legal or illegal it does not make it right.
In the past it was legal to castrate boys and some would become famous singers.
For the parents that did it, it must have been like an achievement, if I was around at that place and time perhaps everyone here and I would have followed the trend and said that it was a good thing to do to a child, who knows.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thevintagenews.com/2018/10/11/the-last-castrato-singers/amp/

You are still anthropomorphizing animals.

I have 2 young castrated rescues & an entire elderly dog. Both the castrated dogs will hump other dogs given the chance, but both stop when told. If I were ever to have a female she would be fully spayed at an appropriate age because she would never be bred from & to prevent Pyometra.

Dogs do not have the same behaviour as humans- smiling in humans is akin to dogs showing the teeth. In humans it is a sign usually of happiness in dogs usually fear !!

The last castrato wasn't castrated when an adult, but as a prepubescent child as all the Catholic castratos were. It was done to prevent puberty & keep the voice high pitched. Castratos were excessively usually extra tall &  because of the early removal of testosterone preventing the growth plates closing timeously.

Not just castratos of course in countries were slavary existed many male house servants were brutally castrated to make them "safe".

In both cases it didn't stop the castrated man from having sexual relations because it wasn't done when they were babies before any measurable amount of testosterone had been produced. As I have previously stated testosterone & estrogen are not solely produced in the gonads.

I agree with you, in that castrating will not stop sexual urges, this is similar both both dogs and humans. Castrated when young will have detrimental physical effects both for humans and dogs.
Dogs are versatile and can adapt to different living conditions. Humans are perhaps even more adaptable, when pushed.
In fact I think that we are more similar to dogs than what we believe.
Some people will have their dogs castrated as they have been told that the dog's behaviour will be more obedient or reduce the sexual urges or temper. So there are a lot of myths.
Same with spaying, myths and hearsay.
A lot of people will say, "cut it or have all that stuff removed because it's easier".
No mess, no unwanted/phantom pregnancies to worry about etc.
So it would be good if there myths and people were more responsible.
In the UK at the moment, dogs are loved but treated as commodities, like a thing to have and show off to other people.
We know that in some countries there are big problems of stray dogs, but in other places they do not spay/castrate and do not have a problem with overbreading,  I.e. Sweden.

Our brains are great, adaptable, resilient and able to think in an abstract way. All in all we should all agree that such operations just to make our lifes a bit easier are quite barbaric.

>Both the castrated dogs will hump other dogs given the chance, but both stop when told

Actually, research shows that neutering dogs increases the amount of humping:  ""Increased Age At Castration was associated with significantly less mounting of objects, furniture, or people (7.64%; OR = 0.996(0.995–0.997)) "

And "Surprisingly, increased Percentage Lifetime exposure to Gonadal Hormones was also associated with less mounting".

Taken from:  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0196284&fbclid=IwAR21SiMC8xTwbbBPPSxpmV64U6WXi7SFJ2WELS9KezM6XfBhw6wQKpACutA

How sad that you would remove the healthy uterus and ovaries of a female dog, without doing any research at all into the overwhelming numbers of studies which suggest his will increase her risk of cancer, joint disease, auto-immune conditions, incontinence, behavioural problems - and far more. 

There is no excuse for just regurgitating the same outdated points of view to impressionable people seeking advice - when there is a phenomenal amount of research to suggest neutering is a bad idea.  It might have been acceptable 20 years ago or even 10 years ago to regurgitate the 'neuter your dog' mantra, but it simply isn't acceptable now - it is spreading misinformation which abundant research disproves.  We wouldn't accept this in any other area or subject and we should not accept it on the subject of neutering. 

Yes, there are occasions where a dog will benefit from being neutered and yes, it is probably best for a female to be neutered at some point to avoid pyometra - but we know from Scandinavian countries where dogs are not neutered, that the risk of pyo isn't that high until the dog enters early old age (8yo +) and the benefits from retaining the ovaries till then, outweigh that risk.  Certainly unreasonable fears of pyo are not a reason to be neutering 2 or 3yo dogs...

Having a very close friend nearly lose a very young bitch to a closed pyometra BEFORE she had had a season & only the prompt action of their super vet prevented her dying. The vet removed the infected womb, but left the ovaries to allow the bitch to develop normally( bitch is a very large breed) & doing a laperotomy removal of her ovaries when she was fully mature. The ovaries showed the start of developing cysts which could have been dangerous for the bitch should they rupture l

What would you have done as you are an expert in canine gynecology ? Treat the pyometra with antibiotics in the hope they would work ?  The bitch was spayed to save her life, not to keep her entire for most of her life. The vet(who is a veterinary gynecologist BTW)would be interested in your expert view.

I prefer to keep male dogs & would not be spayng any bitch I might own for my convenience re seasons etc but to keep my bitch as healthy as possible for as long as possible.

One might argue that it is unnatural to not allow bitches to have puppies every season because that is"natural". Do you prevent this from happening ?

Nothing about breeding pedigree dogs is natural, they have been selectively bred for 100s of years to produce what humans want, over 60,000 years of domestication separate wolves from dogs, but you want to leave bitches au naturale & entire & condemn anyone who dares to think otherwise. I never castrate my male dogs except on medical grounds, my 2 castrated dogs are rescues & have been castrated for that reason

>What would you have done as you are an expert in canine gynecology ? Treat the pyometra with antibiotics in the hope they would work ? 

Of course not, if there is a clear and obvious medical reason that a bitch needs her uterus removed to save her life, of course that is obviously in her interests.  Just as with women, if a woman has a medical need for a hysterectomy, she has one - but we don't remove her uterus age 15, preventatively.  We wait until there is a clear medical reason and then we act.  And yes, I believe making comparisons with people is useful because what is done to dogs is shocking and outrageous and the world is far too used to it and needs to see it for what it is. 

>Having a very close friend nearly lose a very young bitch to a closed pyometra BEFORE she had had a season & only the prompt action of their super vet prevented her dying.

Sorry, but this story is just anecdote.  Science exists to counter anecdote.  You can tell me one anecdote, I can tell you another which counters it.  You can tell me a further one, and we can go backwards and forwards forever without any further conclusions about medical and scientific statistics and truth. 

Science exists to give us statistics and through those statistics we can make educated choices and whether and when to neuter.

The thing you are hugely overlooking, is that there are clear medical disadvantages and harm done, through early neutering.  Cancer risk.  Urinary incontinence.  Behavioural chances.  Joint disease.  Auto-immune conditions.  Even increased risk of vaccine reactions.  All of these are caused through early neutering.  It is very very very unlikely for a bitch to get pyo before a season, let alone cysts on her ovaries (not even sure I believe this story - such is the problem of engaging with anecdotes, people can just make stuff up to prove their points - but let's run with it) - to have saved that one bitch, you would neuter millions - and expose them to even greater risks as listed above. 

What's the point of preventing pyo if the bitch has cancer by the age of 5yo?  Or joint disease by the age of 2yo?? 

>I prefer to keep male dogs & would not be spayng any bitch I might own for my convenience re seasons etc but to keep my bitch as healthy as possible for as long as possible.

There are many people who successfully keep both male and female dogs entire (many of them on this forum, actually) - so just because you have males, doesn't mean you therefore somehow automatically have to spay a female.

Furthermore - of course it would be for your convenience, because it would have been your decision to add a bitch to a house of male dogs.  If you don't want to keep an intact bitch beyond a young age due to existing male dogs, then for her sake, don't own her.

>One might argue that it is unnatural to not allow bitches to have puppies every season because that is"natural". Do you prevent this from happening ?

I've no idea what you're talking about here, I'm afraid.  If you think any of the argument behind this is about what's 'natural', then you've very much misunderstood everything.  This is not about what's 'natural', it's about what science shows us is best for the health of a bitch. 

>Nothing about breeding pedigree dogs is natural,

Er, see above.

> I never castrate my male dogs except on medical grounds, my 2 castrated dogs are rescues & have been castrated for that reason

I'm not sure what the point of this statement is.  It's a shame you don't extend the same consideration to female dogs (which it seems you don't own anyway, so I'm not sure what this hypothetical conversation about your non-existent female dogs is about).  I don't know why only male dogs should be extended the privilege of the best chance at a full and healthy life, in your eyes, but female dogs have to be condemned to all the risks of early neutering.  Is leaving your male dogs intact supposed to make it not so bad that you recommend to others that their female dogs should be neutered?  The mind boggles.

Onetwothreefour, I'm wondering what your thoughts are about an ovary sparing spay,as a way to prevent unwanted pregnancy yet retaining hormones?
  I don't see many vets in this country who offer this but it is something that might be a middle ground for some people.

Ovary-sparing 'spays' don't prevent a bitch coming into season and being attractive to males as normal, so needing to be kept away from dogs during this time for safety reasons (fights can occur when dogs try to mount a bitch, and she can become injured either during fights or during a mating). The hormones can contribute to stump pyometra. And of course there'll be the usual phantom pregnancies after every season (normal for bitches) when they can become extremely miserable and sometimes need medical treatment to get them out of it. Not a procedure I would consider for any of my bitches.

So I’m now wondering : does everyone consider phantom pregnancies as “ normal “?
It’s not something we’ve experienced despite having owned many bitches both entire and neutered .

>Onetwothreefour, I'm wondering what your thoughts are about an ovary sparing spay,as a way to prevent unwanted pregnancy yet retaining hormones?

I think I share Jeangenie's thoughts on OSS for the most part.  The issue is that the dog continues to cycle - they continue to be attractive to male dogs and, as the dog ages, the ovaries themselves can get cysts as well.  I think I'd probably be inclined to leave a bitch intact rather than do an OSS. 

If you remove the ovaries and leave the uterus, the uterus becomes inactive (unlike the ovaries) and there isn't a risk to it remaining there.  It's not quite true the other way around. 

And, to throw another spanner in the works, there is even research to suggest that the uterus plays a role in memory and isn't just some non-functioning organ besides pregnancy:  https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/rat-study-points-to-role-of-uterus-in-memory-65188?fbclid=IwAR1LMjYPXLz5rqzWwujXG_MCmVudPd4FZ8s3JSDEkKdoBQSkpxajBHEjGfQ

Which makes OSS (where the uterus is removed) something to reconsider as the perfect solution, too. 

>does everyone consider phantom pregnancies as “ normal “?

Every female dog after a heat cycle is hormonally the same as a dog which has been bred and is pregnant.  It's only towards the end of what would be the time of pregnancy that there starts to be a clear difference between pregnant and not-pregnant bitches in terms of hormones.  This means that yes, false pregnancies are very normal and common (although not all dogs show any false pregnancy signs) and for the most part they need to be weathered until the bitch passes out of that period of time.  Sometimes if they are very severe, people may want to spay, but I think there is a tendency to view false pregnancies as somehow a sign of Something Wrong which needs to be fixed by neutering - when, in the vast majority of not-severe cases, they are just a normal part of the cycle.  Normalising them and helping people understand why they happen and that they are not a sign of anything wrong, helps people not rush out to neuter.  (Unless they really are severe of course.)

Many thanks for your comprehensive reply. I too am trying to decide what to do for the best for my bitch.

Garbo, I would say leave her intact for medical reasons. If you are considering not getting her spayed then you are probably responsible and caring. If you don't want puppies then be careful when she is on heat (around 3 weeks) and watch out for symptoms related to pyo. Spaying (and castration) can cause severe physical and mental complications.

Thanks for the input index random.
However I also have an intact male dog- so now what would you do?

@Indexrandom
I rescued a 9yr old small breed bitch 6 yrs ago , was told she was spayed. 10 months later she started vaginal bleeding, the vet said she had a UTI and she HAD been spayed, based on a scar on her tummy. Treated for a uti, bleeding stopped after 3 weeks and 10 months later started again with other signs of season. It turned out the scar was from a C-Section.
By this time she was 11 yrs old and we thought too old for surgery so decided not to intervene , and she was only having one season a year.
At 13 she developed mammary cancers and had extensive surgery to remove them , a long and painful recovery. I promised her no more operations.
At 14 she started bleeding heavily as her season was due to finish, with blood clots and other signs of pyo. The vet put it to me that she either had surgery to remove her uterus and ovaries or she would die - she was spayed a few days after and her uterus was bulky and unhealthy though she hadn't got full-blown pyo but had metritis


She bounced back within a couple of days, it seemed to be absolutely the right decision and my only regret was not having her spayed as soon as it became clear she wasn't already.
Based on that experience I would advocate having any bitch spayed as soon as feasible, To my mind keeping a bitch entire is not worth the risk.
My other bitch was spayed 4 months after I got her at 5yrs old, 8 months after her last litter. Her breeder requested that she be spayed and I was happy to comply.
I now have an entire male dog, retired stud, and am undecided about castration .

>Based on that experience I would advocate having any bitch spayed as soon as feasible, To my mind keeping a bitch entire is not worth the risk.

But why conclude that??  You adopted a NINE year old bitch.  The risk of pyometra alone, from the age of NINE up into old age is really quite considerable - that alone would have been a reason to spay at 9yo when you got her. And it is well-known that as bitches age (just as women age) they are at risk of ovarian cysts and uterine issues if left intact.  

But all this does not translate to 'it is therefore best to neuter every bitch, no matter how young she is, whenever I get her'. 

Sheesh:  The science and research is there about the risk factors, it is waiting for people to read it and made an educated decision for their bitch.  Instead people experience one situation, with one single bitch, and have a knee-jerk reaction to it and then over-generalise.  Science exists to enable people to look at thousands and thousands of bitches, what has happened to them when spayed or not spayed at various ages, and thereby to enable us to consider the risk factors - on ALL SIDES - about what it's best to do. 

The OP's bitch is just 4yo.  That is a very different proposition to a 9yo.  At 4yo, she will greatly benefit from retaining her ovaries much longer.  With some breed exceptions, there is no reason to spay before age 8yo, considering all the risk factors.  That way the bitch benefits from her ovaries and hormones most of her life and you avoid the risk of these things which tend to happen in old age.

May I point out that this was NOT a knee-jerk reaction based one ONE experience, I did read all the information I could find for and against spaying, discussed these findings at length with my vet.
In addition I also said that we were told that our girl HAD been spayed when we got her , obviously by then she should have been but hadn't.
Unless we are breeders we don't have access , or the knowledge to know where or when to find all the facts and figures so of course personal experience is going to impact our decisions.
Edit to add, I find your reply to be very condescending.

SusieRainbow, in what way is it "NOT a knee-jerk reaction based one ONE experience"?  You experienced a medical situation with an elderly bitch and concluded from that, that you should therefore spay any bitch you get right away?  And advised the OP (who has a 4yo bitch) to do likewise...

That, to me anyway, is the definition of a 'knee-jerk reaction based on ONE experience'...

>Unless we are breeders we don't have access , or the knowledge to know where or when to find all the facts and figures so of course personal experience is going to impact our decisions.

I'm sorry, I don't accept this.  Having access to the information has nothing to do with being a breeder - it is readily available in online articles, many of them very readable, and the majority of research papers are summarised with the conclusions accessible without having to pay for access.  There are FB groups providing more information and the popular press is even writing about it.  Nothing to do with information only being available to breeders at all.

I don't really mind whether you accept it or not, it's my point of view to which I'm entitled , just as you are to yours.
I wasn't necessarily advising the OP to get her 4 yr old bitch spayed either, just relating my experience and saying what I would do, and did do, with my second girl - i.e spay her as soon as was practical.

I would be very doubtful that the OP would be swayed by my comments anyway as she seems to be pretty confident with her decision.

You said:

>I would advocate having any bitch spayed as soon as feasible, To my mind keeping a bitch entire is not worth the risk.

That is a recommendation to others, there's no other way it can be read.  It's not just an account of what you did - 'I would advocate...'. 

It's not just about the OP and whether she herself would be swayed so much as anyone else coming across this thread in the future and wanting to research the subject - and reading horror stories of elderly dogs left intact and therefore we all should spay ASAP - just isn't going to convey a message in keeping with any current scientific research.

This is what forums are for surely ? An exchange of opinions , the OP reads them and takes away what he/she agrees with or sees as the most helpful.

As far as I can see this has been quite a well balanced discussion with the pros and cons of spaying explored , Plenty of explanation on both sides.

Wouldn't life be dull if we all agreed about everything?

>This is what forums are for surely ? An exchange of opinions

Opinions are only as valuable as the research they are based on and the knowledge and experience of the person offering them.

>Opinions are only as valuable as the research they are based on and the knowledge and experience of the person offering them.

Exactly; and unless people give their real names and verifiable qualifications there's no way of knowing if they're genuine or bluffing.

Fortunately when we have peer-reviewed papers in published journals, written by distinguished academics with many letters after their names, we don't really need to worry about who passes on that information...

When we have people giving anecdotes about their own individual dogs, then absolutely - we have no way of knowing if they are just making stuff up, I completely agree.

That's the difference between the scientific method - and hearsay.

So are you saying that personal experiences have no place in these discussions, even if they are clearly as stated ,personal experiences?

And why would we want to make them up ?

I'm not the person talking about making things up, if you read above properly:

>unless people give their real names and verifiable qualifications there's no way of knowing if they're genuine or bluffing.

>are you saying that personal experiences have no place in these discussions, even if they are clearly as stated ,personal experiences?

Susie, you gave your anecdotal personal experience with one dog.  I responded by referring to articles and research and statistics which sadly don't support your experience. 

I'm sorry if you don't like that, but that's not really my concern.  I'm more concerned about getting the right factual information across to people who might read this thread in the future. 

Your own personal experience is not going to stand unquestioned if you post about it on public forums.  If you don't want people to question you or to take issue with advice you give, you might want to rethink entering into discussions in the first place. 

You have changed this conversation from being about neutering as a subject, and whether and when that should occur, to being about who can say what.    You are welcome to say whatever you want, whether it's your own opinion or something you've made up - but don't expect to stand unchallenged or unquestioned, when you do.

>Fortunately when we have peer-reviewed papers in published journals, written by distinguished academics with many letters after their names, we don't really need to worry about who passes on that information...

And of course you have links to these peer-reviewed articles so that we can read them for ourselves?

Sure, here are just a few - let me know if you'd like more:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/29067194/?fbclid=IwAR0LnODrPJ7VAgPtlfQjuUUdFz3-vkeekzzsXM7WBulsoxmNGaIr1u20-Ck

https://www.parsemus.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Zwida-and-Kutzler-2016.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2TVxIhVeFa4I7200ozOakVE_D0Iu-jSJ4u1zkKADwBb9T6WwJdAFSB4TA

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0102241&fbclid=IwAR19GbXK4XXgie992gjbzwKQGE4F7waqFwMWW_bwO4yFnNp6EDZ9xHfoQxQ

https://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/11/11/1434.full?fbclid=IwAR0pNYAquJiE0-DicT6kGyl9tfJXnuG0-_ybVJD4ZahEKcaqqNtO_FUAlRU

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19732047?fbclid=IwAR2q3jbt16ihQo4ljfScpCLAvl-AL_XWH-zXj4pbtwOqVG13D1V4I_Laji0

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/29067194/?fbclid=IwAR2hEaw2yXOcbntfPlAORY77XRn9sNZdV4N5K0JL6ne8sm8q3GwcPDlskAo

http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/11787155?fbclid=IwAR01XrycAMdPYPBLOvfhfk74-OYDCZPyVs_hcGH1paEDprUeY3nKlwQvCxs

http://veterinaryteam.dvm360.com/research-update-earlier-age-spayneuter-risk-factor-obesity-and-orthopedic-injuries?fbclid=IwAR3qCwb_KtaFCzPiX6G62sHgnmXr6sramEY8YqtuumtpZc8wpqjNk8rbq2I

https://cgejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40575-018-0067-7?fbclid=IwAR257yIOv69efktUexCXnrwRLHII3s_inZbPNwA8E63_EtpQC0MNw1ktGHw

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/29718954/?fbclid=IwAR3QQvTeWA-1NK-d5jVclo5lVanS2khSFbbMEos0GxY8o22GYHbdEZE9tas

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2018.00018/full?&utm_source=Email_to_authors_&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=T1_11.5e1_author&utm_campaign=Email_publication&field&journalName=Frontiers_in_Veterinary_Science&id=284353&fbclid=IwAR276GmqmC_lOvGl2IWfqxI162yCYLa61Kccv0FmwIjUeFoEikmbw-NUU4A

http://www.naiaonline.org/uploads/WhitePapers/SNBehaviorFarhoodyZink.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1kFSRwS61T6bp5qXgDRu8nBFnPoAoFzY2hddet83WLVHuFdQXFUPtLx98

https://www.avma.org/News/Journals/Collections/Documents/javma_219_4_460.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0oAPklMgzONzK3vfHGYzIUqJgDoE13GB3W9QBG1l3aFrnMMsF31lO6RX0

https://www.avma.org/News/Journals/Collections/Documents/javma_219_1_51.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0A3khDowRRnkO4YDp6_Vum1ET8JcNFcdGat6oQxUZOmf_JOXVpGy_dw30

http://www.naiaonline.org/uploads/WhitePapers/EarlySNAndBehaviorDuffySerpell.pdf?fbclid=IwAR30vDRGQH9egGmVZ3XtdcyzPgJMUGrtUhO9sNCQ4mqIDIkxHW9w2ZgxNDo

https://openventio.org/Volume2-Issue1/The-Social-Behaviour-of-Neutered-Male-Dogs-Compared-to-Intact-Dogs-Canis-Lupus-Familiaris-Video-Analyses-Questionnaires-and-Case-Studies-VMOJ-2-113.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2W40OSDE49Vbo7NV5rHhfTm6k_OPPqal70Rh8fVJyIn3dfsj0CFS-_ll4

http://www.jarvm.com/articles/Vol4Iss2/Lund.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0ca5MqTWl8oql5g-zAEsbL52vxaKqySgtWiXMtqdj-FuxzAC9cbMJBbN0

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090023319300930?fbclid=IwAR0nt0aIvOf5UW8cPVhGwywIAINJ5-utdJFTZYS_cVBOGlM6S9ztPxj1xRI

https://cgejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40575-017-0044-6?fbclid=IwAR0MMTpsJCchoUBVX0xpEBoJatvNpPmNuXVjq9u8fcl8TKBwZK_-N3bBFLU

https://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12917-016-0911-5?fbclid=IwAR3911R61WtysHjh3oWBCgkwvI4TuZpxDO7FXqky1MVYi-cP4Vw7InCVqNk

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0055937&fbclid=IwAR0PbjB-Dl_DQ5d-E4fGpwJoxKVfHJGET4WrKOx0BI8zkOzrEvkmosbupwI

https://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/11/11/1434.full?fbclid=IwAR29oHLl0iDWAQwVnTaMpgr0ALlJuVxa7EfegFr-7vtOJGUfIHk-LaViOCI

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3892096/?fbclid=IwAR2TsR14Nr2fXGuCmsJWhvZQ0Et5_8ySHh7UeNMcHtbJLXuG91PQuOegvjg  [""In bitches with the disease that were surgically treated, a mortality rate as low as 1% was recorded (Jitpean, Ström‐Holst et al., 2014). The prognosis is thus surprisingly favourable considering the severity of the disease and that it affects middle‐aged to older individuals with increased probability of suffering from concurrent diseases (Fransson et al., 2004)."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11817057?fbclid=IwAR2fiITCzG1pKJwfy183KIygtpS3H4PK7vMN_KVEhCMOobSxLS6a6Zc3TJQ