This is a placeholder text
Group text
by GSDPACK on 24 December 2011 - 20:12
Carlin... go get a reality check to Slovakia.. and let me know how you like it!
by Jenni78 on 24 December 2011 - 20:12
I think someone didn't understand a word of Carlin's post.
by GSDPACK on 24 December 2011 - 20:12
Did I miss The irony... LOL.. I am known for that!
by Prager on 24 December 2011 - 21:12
Joanro said :
According to OFA the statistics for HD in the GSD from 1974 through Dec 2010 was ONLY 19%, no where does OFA say what Guru Hans blaa blaaaaaa blaaaaaa from Jinopo- Blazona claims is 50% !
Dear Joanro,
statistics are funky subject.
As anybody may properly guess,
people do not choose to send to OFA x-rays of dysplastic dogs . They send there mainly x-rays of good hips and hips with borderline HD. The obviously bad hips usually do not make it to OFA because it is a waste of money for a person to send such hips to OFA. That is why according to OFA it looks like the bad hips are only 19%. Which actually is not the truth. I have quoted here more scientific studies of let say Cornell university which are listed in a book Canine hip Dysplasia and other Orthopedic Disorders written by foremost authority on the topic Fred Lanting. Maybe you should read it . You can order it from my website for Christmas. It would do you good to read more on the topic before you go on insulting rant.
Peaceful Christmas to you.
Hans
by Prager on 24 December 2011 - 21:12
Another reason statistics on HD are variable is because of what is the definition of good and bad hips.
Some statistics consider only OFA excellent good hips . Some consider OFA excellent, good and fair as "good hips" and then we have different scales from different countries and different organizations, read by different people.
Prager Hans
Some statistics consider only OFA excellent good hips . Some consider OFA excellent, good and fair as "good hips" and then we have different scales from different countries and different organizations, read by different people.
Prager Hans
by Chaz Reinhold on 24 December 2011 - 21:12
Hans, don't you think that outside the sport and show world, that pet people don't do xrays or care unless they suspect a problem? I would think that there are over 100x more pets than sport/show dogs.
by Prager on 24 December 2011 - 21:12
Joanro. Nowhere have I called Americans stupid, those are other people's and your hateful words, but not mine.
I love America and American nation and American people. I have risked greatly and sacrificed much to come here to this great country and became it's citizen.
I am eternally grateful to USA for the new found freedom here.
Prager Hans
I love America and American nation and American people. I have risked greatly and sacrificed much to come here to this great country and became it's citizen.
I am eternally grateful to USA for the new found freedom here.
Prager Hans
by Prager on 24 December 2011 - 21:12
Chaz yes they do, but unusually they relay on the opinion of their veterinarian and do not send x- rays of obviously "bad hips" to the OFA. Usually these people will send in good and border line hips, if it is disputed by the breeder who needs to replace such dog. This destroys validity of such statistics. Where the statistics from Cornell and other scientific studies are based on random sampling where the animal's
x-rays were committed to their statistic study before the x ray's outcome was known.
OFA love to use their statistics as proof that since people started to x ray and certifie hips with them that the hips of dogs are improving. The truth however is that people send less and less often bad hips x rays for evaluation And the actual improvement of hips in the dogs is questionable. Would you send the obviously bad HD x-ray to OFA?
In above mentioned book by Fred Lanting this is discussed in great detail. Many organizations defended them selves against false statistic results, by applying certain strategies where for example people did not see the x rays until they were evaluated by such organizations and vets were not permitted to do x rays of hips without such evaluation. That type of "dictatorship" may be possible in some European countries but not in USA. The true statistics are hard to get here because it is such an emotional issue where it should be a pragmatic one.
Prager Hans
x-rays were committed to their statistic study before the x ray's outcome was known.
OFA love to use their statistics as proof that since people started to x ray and certifie hips with them that the hips of dogs are improving. The truth however is that people send less and less often bad hips x rays for evaluation And the actual improvement of hips in the dogs is questionable. Would you send the obviously bad HD x-ray to OFA?
In above mentioned book by Fred Lanting this is discussed in great detail. Many organizations defended them selves against false statistic results, by applying certain strategies where for example people did not see the x rays until they were evaluated by such organizations and vets were not permitted to do x rays of hips without such evaluation. That type of "dictatorship" may be possible in some European countries but not in USA. The true statistics are hard to get here because it is such an emotional issue where it should be a pragmatic one.
Prager Hans
by Chaz Reinhold on 24 December 2011 - 22:12
Hans, I agree with the statement that most just consider the vets opinion and don't proceed to ofa, but if 90% of the GSDs are pets and barely any care unless there is a reason to even care, that messes with the #s.
by aaykay on 24 December 2011 - 23:12
In the spirit of Jeff Foxworthy : if you don't get the rant you just might be a ..............?:(
Joanro, I did understand that there was a rant and it clearly was directed at someone. What I did not like or appreciate was the tone behind it....there was a flippance about it, with an insulting tone just immersed all through it. I am guessing you are still chafing at the Charik situation, and using every venue to vent your frustration (a situation which did not warrant any "frustration", IMHO) ? Just a wild guess.
Either way, people become more receptive to such topics, when they are expressed in a respectful manner, regardless of whether you have an axe to grind with some person or not. Ranting rarely gets the receptiveness you are looking for, and turns people away. If someone were to come to my forum (or my home for that matter) and talk in a tone/language that indicates poor breeding, they are unceremoniously shown the door....until they clean up their act. Just some thoughts on the matter from me.
Joanro, I did understand that there was a rant and it clearly was directed at someone. What I did not like or appreciate was the tone behind it....there was a flippance about it, with an insulting tone just immersed all through it. I am guessing you are still chafing at the Charik situation, and using every venue to vent your frustration (a situation which did not warrant any "frustration", IMHO) ? Just a wild guess.
Either way, people become more receptive to such topics, when they are expressed in a respectful manner, regardless of whether you have an axe to grind with some person or not. Ranting rarely gets the receptiveness you are looking for, and turns people away. If someone were to come to my forum (or my home for that matter) and talk in a tone/language that indicates poor breeding, they are unceremoniously shown the door....until they clean up their act. Just some thoughts on the matter from me.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
