This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Abby Normal on 03 March 2011 - 12:03
What is to stop an unscrupulous owner getting one clear result and then resubmitting samples from that animal over and over?
Shirley, Yes exactly right, there is nothing to prevent that happening as it currently stands. A test result without identification and independent submission cannot be considered 'true'.
This test had also (until very recently) not been peer reviewed, and has recently produced faulty results in FlatCoats. So I think there are still questions surrounding the verification of the test (although that may now have been achieved), also surrounding the protocols of the lab and submission and handling of the test. On that basis I doubt the KC would consider accepting the test as it currently stands.
The KC can and will register the results of a (verified) test if requested. As I said before, in collies the TNS test is carried out at the University of New South Wales in Australia. If the certificate issued is submitted to the KC, they will add the result to the health test page. I have just checked the health test page for a friends dog with a recent TNS result, and it is there. A covering letter from the owner asking for the test to be registered was all that it took. There was no 'special form' required.
Shirley, Yes exactly right, there is nothing to prevent that happening as it currently stands. A test result without identification and independent submission cannot be considered 'true'.
This test had also (until very recently) not been peer reviewed, and has recently produced faulty results in FlatCoats. So I think there are still questions surrounding the verification of the test (although that may now have been achieved), also surrounding the protocols of the lab and submission and handling of the test. On that basis I doubt the KC would consider accepting the test as it currently stands.
The KC can and will register the results of a (verified) test if requested. As I said before, in collies the TNS test is carried out at the University of New South Wales in Australia. If the certificate issued is submitted to the KC, they will add the result to the health test page. I have just checked the health test page for a friends dog with a recent TNS result, and it is there. A covering letter from the owner asking for the test to be registered was all that it took. There was no 'special form' required.
by Videx on 03 March 2011 - 14:03
It is very clear that there is a need for people to "carefully think things THROUGH" before making assertions. NOTHING NEW ABOUT THAT!
An important point of FACT, for decades people had their dogs x-rayed with NO identification of the dog except a form with its pedigree, NO tattoo - NO microchip. A dog with excellent hips and elbows could have been x-rayed under numerous other dogs names and details. It was not until January 2010 that the BVA (NOT the Kennel Club) required either every dog to have a tattoo or microchip, which was required to be checked by the Vet PRIOR to it have any BVA Health Screening Test, which includes the BVA/KC Hip & Elbow Scheme. What value Hip & Elbow Scores prior to January 1st 2010?
IF some unscrupulous owner does as some of you suggest, they would be foolish to contemplate breeding from any dog NOT genuinely tested. For IF such a dog is a JRD Carriers, 50% of its litter may be carriers, or worse a Homozygous (2 mutated Alleles) Carrier, their offspring will be ALL carriers.
IF any of their litter is subsequently JRD tested and found to be a JRD Carrier, then with the mode of inheritance of JRD, it can be quite straight forward to identify the Carrier parent. The legal consequences of such deceit should NOT be overlooked.
Additionally it may be possible now or eventually to find out if a dog has been JRD tested, without being given the result. It is very likely there will be some detrimental consequences for anyone who lies about a JRD test result for a dog and subsequently breeds from it.
I have already written on this thread about the FCR breed issue, it is apparent that some people cannot understand it or don't want to understand it. This is a problem with uninformed opinions on serious matters. A case of non scientists thinking they are capable of being negative on a scientific issue that has been independently checked and verified by other scientists. Some things will never cease to amaze me, particularly such audacious behavior.
An important point of FACT, for decades people had their dogs x-rayed with NO identification of the dog except a form with its pedigree, NO tattoo - NO microchip. A dog with excellent hips and elbows could have been x-rayed under numerous other dogs names and details. It was not until January 2010 that the BVA (NOT the Kennel Club) required either every dog to have a tattoo or microchip, which was required to be checked by the Vet PRIOR to it have any BVA Health Screening Test, which includes the BVA/KC Hip & Elbow Scheme. What value Hip & Elbow Scores prior to January 1st 2010?
IF some unscrupulous owner does as some of you suggest, they would be foolish to contemplate breeding from any dog NOT genuinely tested. For IF such a dog is a JRD Carriers, 50% of its litter may be carriers, or worse a Homozygous (2 mutated Alleles) Carrier, their offspring will be ALL carriers.
IF any of their litter is subsequently JRD tested and found to be a JRD Carrier, then with the mode of inheritance of JRD, it can be quite straight forward to identify the Carrier parent. The legal consequences of such deceit should NOT be overlooked.
Additionally it may be possible now or eventually to find out if a dog has been JRD tested, without being given the result. It is very likely there will be some detrimental consequences for anyone who lies about a JRD test result for a dog and subsequently breeds from it.
I have already written on this thread about the FCR breed issue, it is apparent that some people cannot understand it or don't want to understand it. This is a problem with uninformed opinions on serious matters. A case of non scientists thinking they are capable of being negative on a scientific issue that has been independently checked and verified by other scientists. Some things will never cease to amaze me, particularly such audacious behavior.
by hutch on 03 March 2011 - 14:03
Obviously the mode of inheritance means that falsified test results are possibly going to be found out if the animal is bred from but......
an unscrupulous owner of a stud dog may have made their buck by then and if they are that unscrupulous how much will they care?
an unsuspecting owner of a clear bitch might feel justified in not testing offspring mated to a clear stud dog. If that stud dog owner's test result is falsified then carriers might go untested.
the legal consequences of such deceit SHOULD not be overlooked - but someone has to have the courage and money to make an allegation and a challenge.
Would it not be a simple thing to have the test submitted through a vet like the PD test is?
I am not trying to be negative on a scientific and serious matter but I would feel much more confident about the test if this matter were addressed.
by Videx on 03 March 2011 - 14:03
I also believe this matter should be addressed in a similar way the BVA have addressed the health screening tests they (BVA) are involved with.
The small claims court can deal with claims of up to £5000 with minimal cost and inconvenience. I am also certain that a breeder that was "identified" as cheating on JRD test would be exposed and finished, notwithstanding potentially large liabilities.
Several breeders to my knowledge do make sure that when they are taking the swabs for their dogs JRD test, they do it whilst it is verified by a friend or have it done by their Vet with tattoo or microchip also checked. This not ideal and their should be an identification verification requirement for ALL health screening tests. Such things take time and in the meantime one has to ask, do we ignore health screening tests until it is place? We could be waiting many years.
Or would the lack of identification verification simply provide another excuse for some breeders NOT to have their dogs JRD tested? I am sure of it.
The small claims court can deal with claims of up to £5000 with minimal cost and inconvenience. I am also certain that a breeder that was "identified" as cheating on JRD test would be exposed and finished, notwithstanding potentially large liabilities.
Several breeders to my knowledge do make sure that when they are taking the swabs for their dogs JRD test, they do it whilst it is verified by a friend or have it done by their Vet with tattoo or microchip also checked. This not ideal and their should be an identification verification requirement for ALL health screening tests. Such things take time and in the meantime one has to ask, do we ignore health screening tests until it is place? We could be waiting many years.
Or would the lack of identification verification simply provide another excuse for some breeders NOT to have their dogs JRD tested? I am sure of it.
by hutch on 03 March 2011 - 14:03
Then we are agreed!!
It would be great if Dogenes added this requirement and then the test's credibility would be raised far faster than it took for hips and elbows.
It would be great if Dogenes added this requirement and then the test's credibility would be raised far faster than it took for hips and elbows.
by Videx on 03 March 2011 - 14:03
We are agreed on that point, however I disagree with anyone who implies or states that because a test can be cheated on by unscrupulous breeders, that it can be done without potentially serious consequences.
Missing outon the principle of the emboldened part of the above statement, is a very questionable omission.
Missing outon the principle of the emboldened part of the above statement, is a very questionable omission.
by hutch on 03 March 2011 - 14:03
We're agreed on that too - it's the potential for abuse which concerns me more than the likelihood of it but there are, of course, people who are prepared to take high level risk for adequate rewards!
by Shepherdguy on 03 March 2011 - 16:03
Videx you say
'Such things take time and in the meantime one has to ask, do we ignore health screening tests until it is place? We could be waiting many years.'
I know you are referring to identification verification with which I agree being put into place.
Elbow X-raying came into play in 1998 why then was this not taken up straight way by those that consider health tests important, indeed many still do not X-ray for elbows. The Elbows are as important as the Hips if not more.
'Such things take time and in the meantime one has to ask, do we ignore health screening tests until it is place? We could be waiting many years.'
I know you are referring to identification verification with which I agree being put into place.
Elbow X-raying came into play in 1998 why then was this not taken up straight way by those that consider health tests important, indeed many still do not X-ray for elbows. The Elbows are as important as the Hips if not more.
by Abby Normal on 03 March 2011 - 23:03
The solution is simple is it not? The lab concerned needs to review the protocol for submission of the test, and adopt the practice of submission through a vet with an identification requirement for microchip/tattoo number, in accordance with other labs/health trusts current protocols, and a consent box for the owners use.
It agree would take years to get a BVA type system set up which would be ideal, but if the protocols for this test are improved, and if the test has now been fully validated, the breed club (or whichever organisation is supposed to be leading breed health) can get liaise with the KC to accept the test, and subsequently register tests on their dog's health record.
It agree would take years to get a BVA type system set up which would be ideal, but if the protocols for this test are improved, and if the test has now been fully validated, the breed club (or whichever organisation is supposed to be leading breed health) can get liaise with the KC to accept the test, and subsequently register tests on their dog's health record.
by Videx on 04 March 2011 - 00:03
I have a straight forward, comprehensive and progressive opinion on the taking of health screening tests on pedigree dogs, as follows:
The Kennel Club and the FCI should require that ALL health screening tests REQUIRE "identification verification" though a microchip. This should also include a firm policy being adopted and published by these organisations REQUIRING ALL DOGS to be micro-chipped as a "condition of registration".
These practical policies would indeed serve our pedigree breed very well indeed.
There should also be a strong policy adopted by these and all other organisations involved in pedigree dogs, that ALL health screening test results MUST include on each of the "TESTS" documentation a REQUIREMENT by the owner of the dog being tested to sign to agree that the RESULT may be published and information about the result will be sent to The Kennel Club, for publication and inclusion in appropriate lists, which would be available to the public at least in the form of a pdf file accessible through The Kennel Clubs website.
These policies can then be progressed towards compulsory health screening tests, appropriate to each breed, as a requirement to the obtaining of a "breeding license" for each and every pedigree dog.
The Kennel Club and the FCI should require that ALL health screening tests REQUIRE "identification verification" though a microchip. This should also include a firm policy being adopted and published by these organisations REQUIRING ALL DOGS to be micro-chipped as a "condition of registration".
These practical policies would indeed serve our pedigree breed very well indeed.
There should also be a strong policy adopted by these and all other organisations involved in pedigree dogs, that ALL health screening test results MUST include on each of the "TESTS" documentation a REQUIREMENT by the owner of the dog being tested to sign to agree that the RESULT may be published and information about the result will be sent to The Kennel Club, for publication and inclusion in appropriate lists, which would be available to the public at least in the form of a pdf file accessible through The Kennel Clubs website.
These policies can then be progressed towards compulsory health screening tests, appropriate to each breed, as a requirement to the obtaining of a "breeding license" for each and every pedigree dog.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
