I see the previous thread has been locked, but would like the right of reply to this statement by Polly:

> The film was misleading as Jemima has admitted here by saying the dogs in the film were pet bred, not bred by breeders who cared enough to do all available health testing, and that the sample from the ridgebacks was really too small.
>

I might be bowing out but I can't let that pass without correcting it. Polly, there were TWO pet-bred dogs in the film and they were used representatively, to show how hideous SM and epilepsy is. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that these two conditions are any less prevalent in showdogs. There is no test for idiopathic epilepsy so the breeder of the boxer, who you just assume did not health-test the parents, could not have tested for it. No one was MRI'ing their cavaliers when the cavalier was born. so you can't accuse that breeder of being uncaring either (and not least because of the hideous resistance most show breeders STILL have towards MRI'ing their dogs). Every single other dog in the film was show-bred - the crippled GSDs, the exaggerated basset, the scratching cavalier at the beginning, the the bulldog having a C-section; George the pug (whose showbred companion has just dropped down dead from a massive seizure at the age of four, not the first in the line apparently) and the cav with SM that won at Malvern.

As for the ridgeback sample - too small for what? Did you not read the researchers' statement?

A few days ago, Polly, I received a private email from you admitting that the gene pool in flatcoats was now so small that the breed may be gone in 20yrs.

If this isn't a crisis, I don't know what is. The film sang this issue from the rooftops. Because if you all woke up and really grasped this now, you could save flatcoats - and all the other breeds who are so genetically compromised they will go to the wall. And yet what do we get here? Someone whinging about some categorisation error in the Imperial study - utterly ignoring the compelling findings.

Really, the dogs deserve better.

Maybe next time you will go onto working dogs, BYB etc. who many don't health test and seem to think that only "show" dogs have any health issues?  Just look at the BVA hipscoring and you can see that even the crossbreeds including the Poodle/Lab crosses have terrible scores, more than double my breeds worst score.

I have been reading with great interest about all the arguments against health problems within certain breeds. Some breeds are in crisis due to health problems and talking as a lay person [so completely ignorant of breeding of dogs just a dog lover] if a certain breed has such a small gene pool and with that causing unnecessary health issues- why can't the breeder's get together and add in some new blood?  The flat coat or bulldog for example do not need to die out as a breed? There are plenty of other breeds closely resembling these types and then that would surely over 5 generations make these breeds less closely related?  

Another thing I'd like to mention is breeder's now are getting the stick for these 'mutant breeds' but it has been like this for 40/50 years?? yes looking at photos of 100 years ago the dachshund and basset did look different but not in 1960 ??

Seems a shame that we are all together in the health and well being of pedigree dogs are we not??  and it now seems lots of energy being spent in fighting between ourselves and having a go- rather than looking at a solution?

Hello Jemima,

This may have been asked previously but to be truthful, I find the whole BBC programme issue mind numbingly boring - it's easy to point fingers at dog breeders because lots of the general public watch TV and will view the programme thinking it was about dogs.  Had you made a programme about the problems associated with farm animals and all the foibles that were connected to that, I doubt you'd have got half the viewing figures.........however I digress.

What about those 100+ breeds out there that live a relatively easy, healthy lifestyle, where were they in your programme?    Its not hard to pick on 'easy targets' or the slightly 'cuckoo' owner/breeders however there are lots of breeds of dogs out there who aren't controversial and you ignored the lot of them.

Edited to add:   I have 2 books republished by Dog World several years ago dating from the turn of the 19thC.    There are a few breeds in there that are 'grotesque' looking and this was in the Victorian era - the length of back & terribly short legs in Field Spaniels makes me wonder if these dogs could ever work so maybe a bit more further research on your part to find those breeds which actually have improved by concientious breeders rather than the other way round.

Jemima,

I would just like to say that your programme did raise valid points about which action must be taken. However as far as the viewing/general public is concerned it seems you took the decision to tar all dog breeders, regardless of their actions, with the same brush.
Please feel free to use your right of reply, either publicly or privately.
Jeff.

I watched the programme and yes I was as horrified as the next person,but it was biased and unfairly reported.It needed to be balanced, it wasn't it lumped all Breeders of Pedigree Dogs in the same boat.I felt this was the intention.
There was little if any reference to the hard work been done by Breed clubs and Breeders with research into various breed specific conditions with the aim of trying to establish DNA tests.
Why did it take two years of filming and visiting various dog shows,to fit into a 1 hour slot, if all of us pedigree dog breeders are so bad,surely this could have been achieved in months ?

It's about education,which was lacking in this programme,no reference was made to how the GP should go about buying a healthy well bred,health screened puppy.
And are the RSPCA really to be believed ? Until they get there own animal welfare policies in place I don't really think they have any room to criticize other canine organisations.

"there were TWO pet-bred dogs in the film and they were used representatively, to show how hideous SM and epilepsy is. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that these two conditions are any less prevalent in showdogs. There is no test for idiopathic epilepsy so the breeder of the boxer, who you just assume did not health-test the parents, could not have tested for it"

Jemima you failed to explain this in your program along, of course with the fact that Epilepsy can take upto 5 yrs to develop leaving ALL breeders working in the dark. Show breeders research pedigree's, health issues that have appeared in different lines, affected or non affected puppies, if the problem continued when different breeders who'd used the non symptomatic progeny in a bid to reduce the number of affected animals being born, the list of considerations is endless.  Unfortunately your scientists failed to mention the money and DNA we've supplied for many yrs in a bid to see reliable SAFE tests available for both canines and Human's.  MRI's on dogs can only be performed with a General which is a risk to what outwardly is a healthy animal, some do die whilst under, you can't really blame some breeders if they have no evidence to support taking that sort of risk - ie no symptoms shown in their bloodlines.

It sickens me to think you had this knowledge and more, yet failed to educate and inform the public about their choices making a difference to dogs in general.  I also have reptiles, since your program I have seen litter after litter of x breed puppies advertised on a couple of forums laying claims to x- y pedigree dogs with photo's to support said claim asking £550 to £700 per pup, no health tests, no idea what health problems are a potential with these puppies.  I'm getting pm's and emails from buyers telling me what sort of problems they've got asking what's wrong and can I help, 2 have already had to be pts due to inherited problems.  All those contacting me lament - we brought this puppy coz we thought it would live longer and be more healthy than a pedigree from a mutant breeder like you!  In reality we the Show breeders are paying a very heavy price for your campaign we're in a lose lose situation, do we tell these unfortunate people to go take a hike or help them and their dogs, of course we help their dogs it would be unthinkable to deliberately allow suffering to continue purely based on the greed of their breeder and the ignorance of their owner!

I have spoken with my own vet about your program and her experience with SM and epilpesy over the last 30 yrs - 'I see cavies year in year out from breeders and pet homes, not all breeders are show homes. I've only seen 3 SM affected cavies in that time and NON of them were from show breeders'  As for epilepsy she agreed she had learned more from me as a breeder who has lived with an epilpetic dog and the scientists, research teams, papers etc that I'd put her in touch with than she had during her training or even in practise, she truely believed my breed rarely suffered from Epilepsy.  She is not the only vet out there who believes the same, I had to send research papers to another vet before they would draw blood from my progeny, working on a smallholding, for submission to a research program. Indeed they rarely do suffer but that doesn't mean to say their DNA is not suitable for research purposes hence the whole breed club submitted samples, we need clear as well as affected animals to submit to give scientists a fighting chance -------- such a shame Jemima you took that fighting chance away from many good breeders!

The only Flatcoat breeder I know is a VET wonder why he's not kicking up a stink re the gene pool if its that bad, will have to ask him when I next visit home?

An interesting title for this thread, Jemima.  You had one hour of prime time television in which you made your points!  This is about as good as it gets for "us".

I am reposting my post that I put up on an earlier thread, because I think it is still valid:

"Jemima - you have done "us" - the responsible and caring breeders, who make use of the health tests available, who contribute our dogs' DNA to ongoing research, and only go ahead with matings after a great deal of research - a huge dis-service.  I really wish that you had made some effort to distinguish between ethical and non-ethical breeders, that you'd guided people towards doing some research on their chosen breed and using the breed clubs." 

And overall, I think you've done pedigree dogs a dis-service too.  OK, you raised some valid points but many of these were being addressed by the KC and the breed clubs - too slowly perhaps, but I think the negative fallout is going to overwhelm the positive. As several posters have already stated, you have negatively affected the public's perception of pedigree dogs.  You could have done so much better - such a missed opportunity.

And I do think that if you've quoted somebody's "private email" without their permission, that is rather unfair.

It needed to be balanced,

It needed to be balanced BUT Balanced would not have caused the stir, balanced would not have gotten the viewings and balanced would not put the reporters and producers in the good books with their bosses if the show only brought humble viewers ;-)

Nobody can talk their way out of that sadly nor the mess they have created. I think the mess truely outweighs the benefits sadly.

Maybe the KC should fund it's own show and televise it perhaps from the monies normally hadnt to the RSPCA.

Of course you have the right of reply .....now please tell us - did you not expect this backlash from those of us who, when we breed, do so, taking every care, putting in lengthy research into breeding what we hope to be a much-loved healthy litter of puppies?   In one hour of a television programme, the care that we have taken, over many meany years has been disregarded.   AT NO TIME DURING YOUR PROGRAMME did you acknowledge that there are good, caring breeders out there.

That is why we are so disappointed with you.

Sorry - meant to add this point, but failed to do so.

Jemima, you say "Because if you all woke up and really grasped this now, you could save flatcoats ".    Basically no, this is no longer true.   Because of the propoganda stirred up by your programme, caring breeders are thinking long and hard about even having another litter.

> Really, the dogs deserve better

And the Cavaliers in your programme deserved better than being put on leads just to add shock value and cause them more suffering.

The Boxer with epilepsy deserved better than having bright lights shone on him while having a fit.

Also the general public deserve to know the whole truth not just half the story which is all you bothered to portray.

>The Boxer with epilepsy deserved better than having bright lights shone on him while having a fit.

To be fair, I gather the footage of the boxer was amateur film taken by his owners, not crews from the BBC or Passionate Productions.

To be even more fair, the programme should have pointed out that epilepsy is far from uncommon in any type of dog of any breeding. The programme was unfair in leaving viewers thinking this was a problem limited to pedigrees.

> No one was MRI'ing their cavaliers when the cavalier was born. so you can't accuse that breeder of being uncaring either (and not least because of the hideous resistance most show breeders STILL have towards MRI'ing their dogs). Every single other dog in the film was show-bred - the crippled GSDs,

So how old was the Cavalier ? over 6 ? because MRI scanning started way back in 2002 & my dog was done in 2003

As for the crippled GSD(inferred by the program to be the BOB & Res Best dog @ Crufts 2008)both these dogs have working qualifications & have done the endurance test as well as passing breed surveys, hip & elbow testing & DNA testing-so please do tell me how are they crippled ???

You should have made it prefectly clear that the two dogs you showed were bred by pet breeders & not breeders who heart, eye, hip tested their dogs for starters. You should have shown the other side of those who deny that SM is a problem-I'm sure a certain top breeder would have explained what she has done & is doing since she found out that her dogs had SM.

I did not see the film I rarely watch tv but I have had a prospective puppy buyer tell me that they intended to pay nearly £1000 for a dog that was a cross between the breed I have and another, totally bad mix, because of hybrid vigour.  I don't charge anything like that for my registered dogs who have health tested parents.  This will be my last litter for a long time not because they don't sell, they were sold before they were born, but because I have no intention of defending myself from verbal abuse.

I am guessing there will be lots of hybrid vigor on the streets until the novelty wears off. 

> As for the ridgeback sample - too small for what?

to be considered statistically significant at the 5% level?

> who you just assume did not health-test the parents

i assumed no such thing, in fact i asked you in a previous thread. another question you ignored. i also requested your references in the thread thats been locked.

i also answered your question on the deliberate use of emotive language- do you have a reply on that?

> A few days ago, Polly, I received a private email from you admitting that the gene pool in flatcoats was now so small that the breed may be gone in 20yrs.
>
> If this isn't a crisis, I don't know what is

soooo..... import studs? like most small gene pooled breeds do?

of course you have a right to reply, we would all actually prefer you to reply more. i again ask you a few questions you've been given- are you proud of what this film has accheived? (you might fancy a shifty at the thread about cross breeds being euthanised before you answer), do you believe that this film was unbiased and did not provide a tainted perception of pedigree dogs? why did you not better represent those breeders who do health test?

and there are so many others right now i've forgotten them all...

Here, here, Moonmaiden.

I notice that Jemima has not replied to anyone who has raised concerns that the programme has led the general public to believe that crossbreeds are healthier (despite having no health checks), thus encouraging more breeding of crosses.

Well, Jemima?  What is your opinion on this matter?  I, and I'm sure others, would love to know how you feel on this matter?

Hi Jemmia,
I am not saying the programme was to blame but i really think you should have a look at the thed started by Peanuts called a Sad State of Affaires and then tell us that your programme has been good for Dogs.

> thed started by Peanuts called a Sad State of Affaires and then tell us that your programme has been good for Dogs.

I had tears in my eyes reading that post, it was so upsetting & I for one completely hold you responsible for that.  Is that really what you set out to achieve in your programme?

> had tears in my eyes reading that post, it was so upsetting & I for one completely hold you responsible for that.&nbsp; Is that really what you set out to achieve in your programme? <IMG class=qButton title="Quote selected text" height=10 alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" width=20>

I'm sorry but I don't see how Jemima can be held responsible for a BYB wanting to have a litter of cross-breeds PTS due to being unable to sell them (Labradoodles are not a pedigree breed the last time I checked). We've had post after post all saying how PDE encouraged people to buy cross-breeds over pedigrees so it makes no sense at all to now say Jemima is to blame for the situation in the Sad State of Affairs thread. The fact is puppy sales are slow everywhere and the situation is not confined to pedigree breeders (a little something called the global recession might have something to do with this don't you think?)

> We've had post after post all saying how PDE encouraged people to buy cross-breeds over pedigrees so it makes no sense at all to now say Jemima is to blame for the situation in the Sad State of Affairs thread

To be fair JaneS, from personal observation local advertisements never mind internet ones have increased dramatically with every other type of 'doodle' 'chon' and 'poo' imagineable, almost all citing the 'hybrid vigour' or lack of KC registration as being a bonus to prospective buyers. 

Whether or not the blame for these mass produced creatures now being unable to find homes is down to the current financial climate alone is impossible to tell and I for one do believe it is having a significant impact.  However, I believe the renewed vigour with which these 'designer crosses' are being created and pushed to the general public is because the irresponsible money grabbers who breed dogs for no reason other than a quick buck have been motivated to do so by the PDE documentary portraying ALL pedigree dogs as 'mutants'.

I doubt very much this situation is one affecting only my region of the UK, i.e. Central Scotland :(

> To be fair JaneS, from personal observation local advertisements never mind internet ones have increased dramatically with every other type of 'doodle' 'chon' and 'poo' imagineable, almost all citing the 'hybrid vigour' or lack of KC registration as being a bonus to prospective buyers.&nbsp;
>
>

They may be using this as a sales tactic but I see no evidence that it's actually working with the general public - someone has posted elsewhere that prices for these designer crosses are currently being slashed, presumably because they are not selling as they once were say a year ago. I still cannot see that anyone can or should lay the blame on one person alone for the fact that an apparently irresponsible breeder cannot sell their litter of designer crosses.

> To be fair, I gather the footage of the boxer was amateur film taken by his owners, not crews from the BBC or Passionate Productions.

True but they still chose to use the footage in the programme, footage that in my opinion shows an act of unnecessary animal cruelty.

If Passionate Productions / Jemima are really so concerned about the wellbeing of dogs then you would have thought this sort of footage would have been omitted from the programme on the grounds that it caused unnecessary suffering, after all wasn't that the whole point of the programme?

> To be even more fair, the programme should have pointed out that epilepsy is far from uncommon in any type of dog of any breeding. The programme was unfair in leaving viewers thinking this was a problem limited to pedigrees.

Totally agree, that was my reaction when watching the programme; that is was completely irrelevant, making the 'amateur' footage even more unnecessary.

>True but they still chose to use the footage in the programme, footage that in my opinion shows an act of unnecessary animal cruelty.

During an epileptic fit the 'sufferer' is unconscious, so the boxer would have been totally unaware of the kitchen lights (if I remember it was filmed in the kitchen under normal lighting conditions).

But you're right - it was completely irrelevant to the programme.

>Jemima, you say "Because if you all woke up and really grasped this now, you could save flatcoats ".    Basically no, this is no longer true.   Because of the propoganda stirred up by your programme, caring breeders are thinking long and hard about even having another litter<.

Well said Lokis Mum. Flatcoat breeders have been breeding responsibly for generations! When I got my first flatcoat via Brenda Phillips the first thing I was advised was to not breed closer than a common grandparent or great grandparent. Something I have stuck to. I like most flatcoat breeders rarely breed a litter. I do all the health tests available, and have been for the last thirty years. My flatcoats have been eye tested for PRA/HC every year whether bred from or not, they have all been eye tested for glaucoma, (the only eye disease that British bred flatcoats are known to suffer from) and have all had their hips scored regardless of whether or not they have been bred from. In the last five years I have been getting the elbows scored. I do not DNA test for colour as it does not affect health. I often think about getting a new bitch and I look at the aftermath of PDE and think it is not worth the aggro! I care far too much about the pups I produce, to simply let them go, even pups produced by my stud dogs I keep in touch with.

I am not unusual among breeders and especially the breeders on this web site, from what I read in earlier posts I have formed the opinion that by ommitting saying some relevant things in the programme it was therefore misleading. I did not say you had not made some points, but you did not let the breeders like the ones here who do care have a say in your programme. They are the ones who have suffered the results, and is plainly unfair.

And speaking of unfair actions, it was a private email which I had not given permission to be posted. If we are going to go down this line of posting private emails there are a few Jemima would not like posted which I still have on my computer, but I hope that I am not so low as to quote private emails. What I said in that email and quoted here was an opinion given to me by several people, who I will not name as it is of no consequence.

> someone has posted elsewhere that prices for these designer crosses are currently being slashed,

Yes Jane, that was me also :)

>presumably because they are not selling as they once were say a year ago

Or perhaps because there are now significantly more being churned out for a saturated market

> I still cannot see that anyone can or should lay the blame on one person alone for the fact that an apparently irresponsible breeder cannot sell their litter of designer crosses

Nor do I - however I believe blame can be laid on THAT documentary for an enormous amount of the general public losing confidence in the likeliehood of purchasing a healthy pedigree dog from *genuine, responsible, pedigree show dog breeders*

Just because you cannot see the connection Jane doesn't negate it's presence - I have spoken to a great many people with little knowledge of the pedigree dog world and the vast majority of them have fallen hook line and sinker for the notion that buying a pedigree dog bred from show lines is guaranteed to ensure ill health, huge vet bills and a greedy breeder who doesn't want to know :(

That's a fact Distasteful? Yes  Accurate? IME, Yes

i am so intrigued reading this thread,as i didn't watch the programme but heard/read mainly on this site about it,BUT all the anger/outrage seems to be taken out on just one person!  Obviously i can't comment on the actual programme but surely it wasn't just Jemima Harrison ALONE that produced/presented/researched/directed/aired etc unless she is some 'wonderwoman'.  I just feel that it seems unfair to direct all this at just one person!  (and no i don't know her and have never heard of her until reading CD).  Can we all not direct such strong/heated views to a wider audience?  PLEASE don't lambast me as so much of what i have read i totally agree with but just feel that something more positive could be done.  e.g does anyone have contacts in broadcasting? just a thought.

> Obviously i can't comment on the actual programme but surely it wasn't just Jemima Harrison ALONE that produced/presented/researched/directed/aired etc unless she is some 'wonderwoman'

I'd have to dispute that she aired the documentary - that was after all the BBC which I think you'll find has lost favour with quite a few licence payers :) 

I'd also have to dispute the highlighted text re 'wonderwoman' too BUT, that aside, Jemmima Harrison IS Pedigree Productions who produced, presented, researched the documentaty that you didn't see  - simple :)

>> but just feel that something more positive could be done

Goodness, where have you been

 

this is so typical!

What is

Wendy, don't take offence but I would strongly recommend doing some research and watching the programme if it is still avaliable to watch on iplayer. I think that would help you understand why we are all getting upset. The attack if you want to call it that is directed at Jemima as she produced the programme, she should answer ALL the questions she has been asked most of them are so relevant and if you are going to produce a programme with the content this one had you have to expect the back lash. If it was a balanced both side's of the story programme the thread would not been happening.......

Jemima Harrison put her name to the programme after trawling on here, some 21/2 years ago, for people to take part in the production.   She knew what she was doing.  

Teri,  i was trying to say IMO that it would be a much more positive/productive reaction to be able to have a t.v programme that shows all the positive sides of good dog breeding instead of venting everyone's opinion/anger on this thread which seems such a waste of energy.  This is why i asked if anyone has contacts in broadcasting.  Just feel that there must be other ways of getting honest, reputable, good breeders to have their 'right to reply' to the general public.

Just feel that there must be other ways of getting honest, reputable, good breeders to have their 'right to reply' to the general public.

I totally agree, I wish there was a way a more balanced programme could produced that would be great, but getting the funding etc for it would be very difficult.

Just need someone on CD with a family/friend in 'high places' with an alternative broadcaster i.e not bbc. to get the ball rolling.. i always live in hope!!

Hi Wendy

had you seen the documentary and if were up to speed with all the developments since then you'd be aware that any 'contacts in broadcasting' would be required to be taken up by our governing body, i.e. the Kennel Club.  Individuals are unlikely to have the finances to produce and have aired a suitable programme on prime time terrestrial television refuting the sensationalised claims of the original documentary and, in light of subsequent events post PDE, would be even less likely to be given credence by a now brainwashed public.

Perhaps if you are able to see the original program and also follow up on the various press releases from the RSPCA, PDSA, Dogs Trust, Kennel Club etc you will be in a better position to decide whether this or any other thread is in your opinion likely to be 'a waste of energy'

For my own part, IMO everything positive which has been done to date by our breed clubs, individual breeders, the BVA and of course the KC has been negated in one fell swoop - which is a disgrace, especially for the dogs themselves.

> however I believe blame can be laid on THAT documentary for an enormous amount of the general public losing confidence in the likelihood of purchasing a healthy pedigree dog from *genuine, responsible, pedigree show dog breeders*
>

Teri,
I have to agree with you on this comment. I for one have for years loved the British bulldog but would not own one due to there problems not being able to give birth naturally and their breathing problems.

I have since meeting one- really wanted a pug in my mind similar type- squashed up face & loads of character- but after seeing this programme I would be worried to go to a breeder with top lines as the one pug shown had lots wrong with him??

So yes it has affected peoples thoughts on buying a pedigree show dog.  Saying that I wouldn't go and buy one at all now not from anyone unless it's parents a clean bill of health  but how can some document you are shown really guarantee anything?? It really is depressing for all concerned.

The trouble is Wendy, that healthy, tested stock, producing healthy offspring is just not newsworthy at all!

>I still cannot see that anyone can or should lay the blame on one person alone for the fact that an apparently irresponsible breeder cannot sell their litter of designer crosses

> Nor do I - however I believe blame can be laid on THAT documentary for an enormous amount of the general public losing confidence in the likeliehood of purchasing a healthy pedigree dog from *genuine, responsible, pedigree show dog breeders*
>
> Just because you cannot see the connection Jane doesn't negate it's presence - I have spoken to a great many people with little knowledge of the pedigree dog world and the vast majority of them have fallen hook line and sinker for the notion that buying a pedigree dog bred from show lines is guaranteed to ensure ill health, huge vet bills and a greedy breeder who doesn't want to know :-(
>
> That's a fact Distasteful? Yes&nbsp; Accurate? IME, Yes

Excuse me Teri, I was not saying that PDE has not had an affect on the public's views about pedigree dogs, especially dogs bred by show breeders - I just disputed several people's allegation that one person (Jemima Harrison) was completely to blame for this particular breeder being unable to sell her cross-breed pups when there are obviously other factors at play (like the recession). I'm not sure why you have interpreted what I said as meaning that I am somehow blissfully unaware PDE has adversely affected the pedigree dog world. That is clearly NOT what I said or what I meant! If you want to continue this, then PM me as I do not want this thread getting side-tracked by pointless arguments.

Sadly your feelings are reiterated time and again magica by many - I make no excuses for breeders, whatever their backgrounds, producing dogs which have poor health or porr quality of life due to physical exaggerrations but while every single one of them is of great importance so too are all the beautifully and thoughtfully bred healthy, happy, agile dogs which owe their glowing health, great breeding and optimum socialisation to countless breeders across all breeds throughout the country.

I can't blame the public for being scared of whether to buy any dog at all now as a family member but feel so very aggrieved for them as much as for responsible breeders that those overcoming their fears may now believe that their safest option is to go for a BYB or PFs 'stock' on the basis that if it's free of 'show lines' then it's more likely to be free of 'inherited inbred defects' :(  Add to that the countless 'hybrids' (itself a misnomer if ever there was one!) being produced as 'healthy outcrosses' and sadly there will be little point in those of us who passionately defend the wellbeing of our much loved dogs continuing to breed on despite enjoying good health, temperament and - importantly - looking like the same breed they're supposed to be :(

Teri, I absolutely agree with you...I'm still waiting for the responses to all these questions...

> The trouble is Wendy, that healthy, tested stock, producing healthy offspring is just not newsworthy at all!

yes sadly in retrospect i would have to agree with you on that.  It would obviously not be 'sensational' enough for the viewing public.  It is a sad fact that the programmes with high viewing figures always have some kind of either 'reality' theme or detrimental to someone/something etc...or soaps!  but i do think that true dog lovers would watch a positive, interesting programme relating to this subject.  one of the reasons i never watched the bbc doc. was because i had heard that is was going to be detrimental to dog breeding, KC & Crufts. 

Excuse me Jane,

I didn't say or imply that you were 'blissfully unaware' of anything - I clarified the point your raised about 'someone' mentioning something on another thread - i.e. that the 'someone' was myself and elaborated on the reasoning behind it. 

I did agree with you that the recession was a more likely cause of any breeders, regardless of their ethics, being left with surplus pups from litters and what I believe the connection to be.

I haven't argued with you nor do I intend to so it needn't go to pm as far as I'm concerned.  We've both exchanged views - that's what the forum is still for is it not? - that they may be similar in some respects and different in others is par for the course IMO

I also think that the option of a 'Buy it NOW' dog being available is very attractive to certain people in this 'I want it and I'm gonna get it' day and age! I know people that have phoned up for a pup from one of the ermm 'larger' puppy selling places in Manchester...got it delivered, then asked me to go round and see it...the Dog puppy they bought was actually a Bitch! Very overshot mouth and an eye infection, it stank! They kept it, cost them a small fortune in Vet fees, but hey ho, they got it when they wanted it! I've had someone waiting 4 months for a pup, saying how long it seemed, they thought the day would never come! What hope is there when people can just phone up and get the pup of their choice, when they want, from the 'not so pleasant' establishments??

I rather think a public service would be being performed if these establishments were investigated by a programming company.

Newfiedreams,

Did you go to the anti puppy farm and anti retail sales for puppies at Leeds or Manchester in November?

This type of purchase of dogs is exactly what we should be exposing, it is disgusting that in this day and age we can still say that this has not come to an end.

Did you know that is the 30th anniversary year of the slogan "A dog is for life not just for Christmas"? It was thought up to try to stop people making impulse purchses of puppies from stores.

No I didn't I'm sorry....without boring you all I am well, in need of a body transplant! I'm nearly bionic now and was having surgery on my shoulder at the end of October...my second major lot this year so I've only been to ONE show too! That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it! ;)

Seriously I despair, every week in our local Newspaper in Liverpool there are adverts for these and the other notorious 'puppy abusers' in Manchester...free delivery and credit cards accepted!

Jemima
You failed to explain how these problems got into the lines in the first place.
We never had these autoimmune problems 20 years ago so where did they come from ?
Vaccinations, Vaccinations, Vaccinations, dear Jemima, Dr Jeff Samson (and other eminent scientists) have stated that vaccinations can cause genetic damage and if that damage is to a gene that controls a particular function, introduce into a line a problem where one did not exist before.
Why did you not take on the Veterinary profession or the drug companies ?
Too scared huh ?
Did Auntie Beeb not want to get involved in a possible law suit ?
But decent dilligent breeders and the KC were easy meat in your eyes.
Food additives and the environment play a big part too but no thats too easy for dear sweet Jemima to investigate.
There are increased instances of Cancer in human beings, shall we stop breeding then ?
It would mean the end of the human race just like your programs content could spell the end of the pedigree dog.
The fact is Jemima or Ms Harrison you and those like you would want to ban the showing of dogs even if they were all in that Utopian postion of being genetically clean.
Would you please explain to everyone your position on the Animal Rights Movement and the illegal acts that they perpetrate.
Do you think that their actions are justified ?
Please don't duck this question as I will take it to mean that you condone them.  

I'm closing this as Jemima has had her Right of Reply and Polly has also been able to reply to Jemima's comments. I see no point in continuing this as people are now just repeating things that have already been raised in other recent threads  so we are going round in ever decreasing circles. Also posts like the last one are hardly likely to be answered due to the tone in which they are being asked.