http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsq5m5ZJ0qM thought some people would find this interesting

it almost looked painful! made me come over all faint!!

You can find anything on youtube these days.

Emma

painful ??? the dog is not even knocked out its fully awake andf clearly not in any pain??

> painful ???

Clearly you've never had a hysteroscopy, Kelly :-)

they are only going to the cervix not any farther   if you have proof this is a painful procedeure I would l.ike to see the info .I was there the dog was never even uncomfortable she was barely being held

It's referred to as transcervical which means passing through the os of the cervix. 

yes just barely though and the cervix is dialated I;m not sure how many dogs have you have had done with this method but I have had several and no dog has ever shown any discomfort

> just barely though and the cervix is dialated

It's either through the cervix or it is not and that's the bit that would hurt.  Bitches can be very stoical about mating as their urge is strong.  I'm not saying this cannot be justified when it is of value ie bringing in fresh blood from abroad where a natural mating cannot be arranged but I would hate to see this ever being routine.  Thankfully the KC in the UK appears to have similar views although primarily to prevent the loss of natural fertility.
Does it mention the sire being in the vicinity in the video or have I got that wrong?  Was this done for research or training purposes then?

Our KC has certainly got the right idea by not allowing it to be a routine procedure, and only when the sire is either dead or overseas. At least with the advent of Pet Passports even that's not such a valid reason any more.

Having watched the video again it is not that clear, as we have no clear view of the monitor, but it seems the scope is not passed through the cervix.  They appear to be just injecting the semen through.  The procedure title is perhaps a misnomer then except in the sense that all fertilisation is transcervical :-D

its too late its already done routinely and if it were painful they would use anethesia but its not.an no it was done to impregnate the dog not for research?? and yes both parents have all genetic clearences

yes I think they are depositing it at the opening

> its too late its already done routinely

Not in the UK it isn't.    Why were you doing it if you had the sire just right there?

is the KC known for producing dogs that are globally supeior? is it a governiong body?? for some reason I thought they did not even demand genetic clearences I;m glad that has changed I wish AKC would follow suit!

The KC demands screening of it Accredited Breeders which they recommend people to buy puppies from but even if they demanded it from all their breeders I don't see why that should be at the expense of risking natural furtility. 

wow thats great they do all that over there here genetic screening is optional I'm glad they require it there its much better that way,though I doubt natural fertility is at risk if anything there is an extreme overpopulation of dogs over here!

What's the point of doing it when the sire is there? It's not going to improve his genes, is it?

> if anything there is an extreme overpopulation of dogs over here!

Then best not to breed, surely? To breed from dogs whose libido is so low or who are otherwise incapable of mating naturally isn't a sensible course of action.

> I doubt natural fertility is at risk if anything there is an extreme overpopulation of dogs over here

But it is not the well bred pedigree that wants to see fertility compromised.  Why was the male not being allowed to sire this litter naturally?