Not logged inChampdogs Information Exchange
Forum Breeders Help Search Board Index Active Topics Login

Find your perfect puppy at Champdogs
The UK's leading pedigree dog breeder website for over 25 years

Topic Dog Boards / Health / Castration
1 2 Previous Next  
- By Charlie [gb] Date 05.05.04 23:57 UTC
Yeah good point, not much to worry about there!
- By Carrie [us] Date 06.05.04 15:36 UTC
"As for castrating - I would leave well alone, unless, and until, you find a good reason for doing it. Someone once writing in an Irish Setter mag said that "if you want a dog, you should want ALL of it - not just selected bits"! Personally I see castration as a mutilation that should not be done except for medical reasons."

Yes, by all means, wait until you have a medical reason like cancer which is common. By the time you find it, it's very often metastasized and it's too late. Mutilation! What drama!

- By Jeangenie [gb] Date 06.05.04 15:47 UTC
Carrie, this site  specifically says that testicular cancers are rare (0.9%). It also says that castrated dogs are 4 times more likely to develop prostate cancer than entire ones.
- By Daisy [gb] Date 06.05.04 16:40 UTC
But it's not exactly an unbiased view is it ? :)

Daisy
- By Jackie H [gb] Date 06.05.04 16:58 UTC
No it's not Daisy, but there are scientific studies to back the details given. I have the details and will let you have them if I can find them and someone does not beat me to it ;)

Well I have found this one to be getting on with.
- By tohme Date 06.05.04 17:20 UTC
The reasons put forward for castration are, like many others, which are excellently described on another thread:

"I think some people carry things to the extreme, not only with this topic, but others. They get a tiny bit of information and run with it like a horse takes a bit in it's teeth." :D

Like a lot of other cancers in all animals including humans you have to weigh up the %age increase in the likelihood of this happening against the %age of any animal developing cancer at all.  This increase is usually measured in miniscule "nths" so for example if I said "X" procedure would result in a .5% increase of a cancer developing and the risk of developing cancer WITHOUT that procedure was only 1% then you have to weigh up the risk of the procedure against the .5% increase!

Most of us know hundreds of dogs that are entire and have not developed any problems healthwise at all :)
- By Jeangenie [gb] Date 06.05.04 17:12 UTC
Maybe not, Daisy, but as long as the figures are true, that's all that matters.
:)
- By Daisy [gb] Date 06.05.04 17:20 UTC
Yes-  but you know the Disraeli's famous words - three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies and statistics :)

With very emotive subjects,  I find it very difficult to believe ANY statistics  - for OR against :)

Daisy
- By Jeangenie [gb] Date 06.05.04 17:30 UTC
I agree Daisy - so I tend to go by my own observations of my own (and other people's) dogs. In 40 years I have known one dog to develop testicular cancer; it was benign, he was operated on, and lived another 5 years till the age of 14 (and cancer wasn't his cause of death - he was PTS because of crippling arthritis). Exactly equal to the risk I've observed of dogs dying as a direct result of surgery - one.
:)
- By Jackie H [gb] Date 06.05.04 17:33 UTC
Daisy, like everyone else you will make your own decision for your own dog and then accept the consequences. You will like most of us do your research and come to your own conclusions. You may even as the years go by change your opinion, some of us do.
- By Daisy [gb] Date 06.05.04 17:48 UTC
Oh - I quite agree :) I still think that the decisions that I made for my dogs were the right ones for me and my dogs at the time :) Neither were neutered because of cancer fears - purely because of my domestic situation (four family members walk the dogs - none with expert training abilities) and the fact that we don't have an entirely secure garden - we can keep our dogs in, but can't guarantee that other dogs can't get in - and don't wish to block of a wonderful view with a high fence :)

If and when we get another dog, I'll review the situation :) But I still believe that for the 'amateur' owner, the risks of the dog getting pregnant or getting another dog pregnant, outweigh the medical risks :)

Daisy
- By Jackie H [gb] Date 06.05.04 17:54 UTC
That is because you have not as yet had any problems, as I said, some of us change our minds when faced with something like that.
- By Daisy [gb] Date 06.05.04 18:21 UTC
Yes - but both my sister and I were hit by cars as children and that didn't stop me letting my children cross roads by themselves :)

Daisy
- By Carrie [us] Date 06.05.04 18:24 UTC
There are two sides to almost everything. Tohme, you don't have to mock me and my quotes taken from other threads with other topics to make your argument stronger, or do you?  Health wise, cancer is not the only potential problem, although I have read conflicting statistics also, and I'm aware of the potential problems in neutered animals too. But when weighed, I find that the neutered have a better chance. You may find leaving intact is better for you and your dog. It's a personal choice. It's not that big of a deal, and it probably doesn't make a huge difference either way unless you are repsonsible for producing unwanted or ill bred puppies. (And there are a lot of so called "careful" people.) That's where I really get pissed off....when a dog is euthanized every 1.5 seconds due to overpoplulation. That's here in America. I don't know how it is everywhere, but with the relaxed attitude about this, I wouldn't be suprised if it's worse elsewhere, or if not, will be........per capita, or proportionate to size of country.

Here are some more stats and info:

http://www.nafacares.org/Spay%20Neuter/why_spay__neuter.htm#Spaying & Neutering is Healthier
- By digger [gb] Date 06.05.04 18:33 UTC
Another issue that's not been addressed in this debate is that of behavior problems - particularly dog aggression - how many dog aggressive dogs actually get WORSE when castrated?????
- By KateL [ch] Date 06.05.04 21:41 UTC
Neither of my two bitches are spayed, and I have never had a unplanned pregnancy.  Neither will I castrate Tamino unless he develops a medical problem. I believe that if a person doesn't want the hassle of a in season bitch.  Or they have more than one dog and they are of mixed sexes, and the owners don't want the problem of separating the dogs from the in season bitch or doesn't want to send the dog(s) to boarding kennels for 3 weeks, 2 times a year.  Or if an owner is so irresponsible he can't keep control of his/her dog or bitch (I am not referring to any Champdogger, just to the irresponsible owner that let their dogs roam), then by all accounts spay or neuter.

You cannot just say no one should neuter anymore than you can say all dogs must be neutered.  It all depends on how experienced the owner is and the condition and situation of the dog. There is no right or wrong in this debate, just what works for the owner and dog. :)

                                                                                                                                                                Kate
Topic Dog Boards / Health / Castration
1 2 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.29.6 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill

About Us - Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy