THe DPCA Members list Re: Heart clinic and futurity‏

[Elaine]

This thread is prompted by a series of posts on the DPCA members only list urging that the DPCA make it mandatory to include a Holter Test result in breeding data. One of the proponents of this sells the Holter monitor. We oppose using Holter test results in the context of breeding data for the reasons articulated below. Judy Doniere, John Getter, Elaine Hopper and a few of McNealy’s buddies think we're wrong. Getter does not breed dogs and appears to have zero understanding of what the Holter test results mean. He seems to think it predicts the future; it does not. Some people say basically, “ any test is better than no test.” We do not agree. In the context of breeding related data, the wrong test is not better than no test... it is the wrong test. Misleading people with test results that are irrelevant to whether the dog will develop DCM, or not transmit DCM is simply misleading, it is NOT a sign that a breeder cares, it's a sign that a breeder does not know what they are doing.
People have posted that their dog dropped dead of DCM right after the Holter testing. One said "Personally, I would NEVER again waste the money on a Holter monitor believing it to be a good diagnostic tool."

We all know of examples of high profile dogs, who had years of good Holter results, only to die suddenly of DCM. And we all know that not all relatives of DCM dogs acquired DCM... and that because a dog dies first of something else, it does not mean it would not have died of DCM had he/she lived longer… and not DCM deaths are properly diagnosed.

We feel that the relying on the wrong test is not a step in the right direction. Here are some of our posts on the issue, and paraphrasing of the rest of the discussion.



Let’s say you go to the doctor to get a bunion on your foot removed, and the doctor does a test for chronic migraines. You say, “ Hey doc, that’s a good test, but it isn’t relevant to the bunion.” And the doctor responds, “Well, it’s the only test I have, it’s better than no test at all, and it shows I care for you.”

That is what people are doing when they use the Holter Test result in the context of making breeding decisions… it is a wrong use of the Holter test. Righteously relying upon the wrong test shows a basic lack of understanding about how to avoid transmitting DCM. The wrong test is NOT better than no test at all in the context of whether the dog will transmit DCM.

Our goal should be to breed healthy dogs. Relevant testing would be a big help to us. As of September 2008 we do not have the tests we need to avoid transmitting DCM and we are not funding the testing we need. In the vacuum of “no relevant testing” people cling to testing that is not relevant to breeding decisions and then they compound their error by “throwing rocks” at people who don’t do as they do. If you think you’re ahead of the game by breeding to a dog who’s Holter test result you like, you are seriously on the wrong track, because the Holter test does not tell you that the dog will not develop or transmit DCM.

We need to fund research to understand how to avoid transmitting DCM, and that would involve understanding genetic and epigenetic influences.

To those who offer that there are other tests we do that are irrelevant to what the dog will transmit, I agree. That is not a reason to continue going down a wrong path, it’s a reason to start making wiser choices. -Elaine Greenwood.

[Elaine]

Getter posted that he thought the Holter test was valuable and a reliable and credible predictor of the future. The test is of value in the context of dignosis and whether to medicate... it does not predict that the dog will not develop DCM or transmit DCM. Mr. Getter is simply wrong, but he is not a breeder, I don't think he has a clue about what tests are valuable in the context of making breeding decisions. Why he wants to chime in on the topic (other than that I called him a pig from hell in the thread about the theft of Stella) is beyond me. This was Arthur's response to Getter.

Categorically, the Holter test will not tell you that the dog will not transmit DCM. It will not even tell you if the dog will succumb to DCM in the near future. It gives you data relevant to the day of the testing and whether the dog needs to be medicated. To put Holter Test data in the context of breeding data implies that the Holter test says something positive about what the dog will not transmit and this is false and misleading. Possibly if you were actually a breeder, and had to put yourself on the line to defend the implications of the testing being advocated, you would connect to why we do not want to mislead people. This is not about caring for our Dobermans… we all care deeply for our Dobermans. Some of us, especially those of us with a medical background, like to base our breeding decisions on reliable medical science. -Arthur Greenwood, M.D.

[Elaine]

This was the first post in the subject.

Why would you advocate including a Holter test result in the context of data on breeding animals? Are you asserting that the Holter test result tells the breeder something positive about what the dog will transmit… e.g. that the dog will not transmit DCM? Dogs can and have died of DCM shortly after being Holter tested.

As we stand on the verge of the total collapse of our economy … and struggle to fund a war in Iraq that we should never have engaged in, all of which will put us trillions of dollars further in debt, diverting funds from programs like universal health care, it is impossible not to notice the consequences of the bad judgment of our political leaders. We can not afford to sit idly by while leaders make bad decisions. Including the mandate of a Holter result in required data for breeding animals is a BAD decision.

A Holter test tells you whether you need to medicate your dog (on the day of the test). The Holter does not tell you what will happen tomorrow and the Holter result does not say one thing about what the dog will not transmit. This zeal to include a Holter result is not admirable; it is destructive, doing more damage to the breed than we can possibly comprehend. Forcing the inclusion of a Holter test result in the context of data on breeding animals is misleading to every one, including J. Q. Public, because the perception is that the test means something positive about what the dog will not transmit. The DPCA needs to act intelligently, based on medical science, not well-meaning frenzy. If we are going to mandate tests that we claim to be relevant to breeding, we need to fund research to develop tests to guide us. The Holter test is not one.

Why not mandate that breeders MRI their dogs? In one study, when they MRI’d the control group in the sturdy, 100% of the clinically normal dogs had some cervical abnormality, 25% even had a spinal cord compression (Wobblers). These were the clinically normal dogs. So, why not urge that we MRI all breeding animals. The answer would be, because there is no research to tell us that a compression is heritable rather than trauma induced.

These expensive tests amount to screening breeders for the financial ability to do expensive irrelevant tests. They are NOT screening dogs for what the breeding animal will or will not transmit, based upon relevant medical science. If we want to breed healthier animals, if we truly want to eliminate DCM, we need to understand genetic and epigenetic influences that relate to the transmission of DCM… based upon credible medical science. A Holter test result is not a step in that direction. A Holter test result does NOT belong in the context of data on breeding animals and what they will not transmit… it simply tells you if you need to medicate the dog on the day of the test. -Elaine Greenwood

[dobesign]

To the Doberman community: My FIRST gripe is the sweeping application of the DCM moniker. People do NOT understand that DCM is NOT SA node issues, not aortic stenosis, nor aotic aneurism, nor pericardial tampanade! The name MEANS that the cardiac tissue has stretched. Okay, tell me I don;t know anything about it. Those of you that know me know that I HAVE DCM, and my life has been turned upside down because of it. Doberman people need to FIRST find out WHICH form of cardiac disease they are dealing with (sudden death is NOT DCM in most cases, and ventricular fibrillation has MANY etiologolies). Testing while the dog is alive is VALUABLE (putting your hands over your eyes does NOT make the world disappear) in that if the dog DISPLAYS the disease and it can be diagnosed. If it can be diagnosed then you MIGHT be able to prolong your dog's life, or at the very least, your dog might be made more comfortable. Testing as a breeding tool? Bovine feces. But testing so that I can share time with my best friend? Priceless. I myself was diagnosed with DCM 10 YEARS before I became symptomatic. Did it help? I have now lived 16 years LONGER than friends I met that were diagnosed much latre. Value? Hmmmm.
My SECOND gripe is that no one does necropsies. No one does post mortem examinations unless there's a fault issue. We NEED to find out which forms of DCM are affecting which lines! Years ago, CANCER was the buzz word. It's mention meant death. These days, our educated public says, "Oh had a melanoma removed then I went shopping." or when people say prostatic cancer the room goes silent. DCM has become that catch phrase. It's not the right term. For all of the different variations we are seeing (sa node, a-fib leading to v-fib, a-fib only, sudden v-fib, left ventricle enlargement, right atrial enlargement, aortic stenosis, aortic aneurism, pulmonary artery/vein issues, pericardial tampanade....ad nauseum) we say DCM. How do I know all these are affecting our dogs? I've personally seen it in the pathology lab. We complain that people breed without educating themselves. I think that we need to take the next step: let's become as knowledgeable as the human families become when a silent killer strikes THEIR family. We need to step out of the medical Dark Ages and KNOW what we are talking about.
I have the utmost respect for people who bring these issues up in a public forum, because it reminds us just how much we haven't yet learned about such things. I know as a fact that E1 HAS read up, and knows her stuff, so CLEARLY we should all do our homework now so that we might have a constructive discussion that will actually help the breed!:rolleyes:

[Elaine]

Brenna,
I welcome your insight… please understand I am no expert … my point of reference is that as breeders, Arthur and I try to produce healthy dogs. Coming from a medical background, we rely upon medical science to guide us in making breeding decisions. More and more I find I am becoming very intolerant of these sanctimonious mis-informed people who advocate irrelevant tests be included in the context of breeding decisions. I think they do a great deal of damage to our breed. The idea of making a Holter Test result mandatory in the context of breeding is not only misleading… it is a huge disservice to the breed and it will get people sued.

In the context of making breeding decisions, the wrong testing is not bettter than no testing.

We would like to see funding for research to guide us in a postive dierction. Decades ago I had a friend in Great Danes who sold several dogs to Wendy and Craig McCaw (who owned McCaw Cellular / Cellular One .. I think that was the company name). Anyway, though it never came up, the McCaw’s had the resources to fund many worth while causes. Maybe we need to get Bill and Melissa Gates involved in Dobermans, so that the Gates Foundation could fund the basic research we need.

[dobesign]

I'm in 100% agreement with you. Mandatory Holter IS insane. Research IS fundamental!!!!

[Sheila]

Ladies, although I start at two years of age having my dobes tested and do so yearly thereafter with Mike O'Grady at Guelph, my reason is to get at two years of age a basis of what their hearts are like so there is evidence by which to compare subsequent testings. Why do I do this? So that if there is a problem found I can hopefully prolong the dobes' lives with medication.

As I said to Elaine #1, the testing which was normal Sept 8th for Raker and Player is only good on the day it was done and I do NOT then say my guys are clear of cardio in whatever form.

I completely agree mandatory testing is ridiculous as a breeding protocol and that research if anything holds the key.

Sheila

[Niko]

This is how I see this. Please feel free to correct me if I see this wrong because I like to be educated.

I feel mandatory Holter Monitor testing for DCM is foolish----who makes these rules anyway? Recently I am so confused by SOME rules set forth.

Should we not put our time and effort into finding a way to improve DCM in breeding. We have been able to do so with other issues, why not this? If they are so set on this then why not set forth rules about preventative/selective breeding, meaning try to breed out - (of course not 100%, but greatly improve it) DCM. And yes I know it takes time, but would it not be worth it?????

I would not prefer one breeder over another if they did this test, waste of money.

I do agree with Brenna that necropsies would be great research, but she is right in that it is not done in most cases.

Am I making sense?

Cathy

[Elaine]

So now another medical doctor has joined the dialogue on the DPCA list… in part to complain that Arthur signed a post to Getter as an M.D. and to express her opinion that we should be breeding to DCM free pedigrees. I have no clue where she thinks she is going to find a Doberman with a DCM free pedigree. What she is really advocating is that we not breed Dobermans. I have never met this woman, but by her admission, she is much older than Arthur… Arthur is in his early forties.. so this woman M.D. must be what? 60? Why she thought that was important to include her age in a conversation on DCM is well beyond me. I can’t help but feel she is very immature in her response to Arthur. If Arthur was a plumber and we were discussing plumbing, he would anchor his opinion on a public forum with his professional credentials. Why would doing so prompt any response at all from a medical professional? This woman comes across as petty and childish. As for merit of what she says, Arthur addressed it. And btw, there are several members of DSNN who spoke with Arthur last evening… he may be up to his eyeballs at work, but he does make time for issues that are important to us… and believe me, this is important to us. In black font below is Arthur's post

I am not going to argue expertise or experience with you, doing so is unprofessional. I strongly disagree with the simplistic view that “… [it] is a hereditary disease and so it does make sound medical sense NOT to breed animals who have the disease.” Your assertion is wrong on many levels. At a minimum it completely ignores epigenetic influences, which alter the expression of genes and the transmission of genes. Not all offspring or siblings of dogs with DCM develop DCM. We need to fund credible research to understand why. I know of no medical professional who would advocate anything less. More on point, presently we have no way to tell which dogs will develop or transmit DCM. So this rock of a positive Holter test result, that you advocate breeders stand on… the rock of, “my dog should be bred because the Holter test result says he doesn’t yet have DCM” is a rock of jello. The dog may develop DCM tomorrow.

Let’s look specifically at what is being advocated, i.e. that for puppies to be entered in the DPCA Futurity, their parents need a Holter Test. Let's ponder the implication of this. The DPCA would be saying that a Holter Test result says something positive about what the dog will not transmit… and that is totally false. Consider that a two year-old stud dog might easily have a good Holter result, case in point is Dagger, he had positive Holter test result till he died of DCM. The positive Holter result does not say the the dog is not transmitting DCM and it doesn’t say that he will not develop DCM.

Doing a Holter test on a two year-old male is like doing a colonoscopy on a 10 year-old child.

For those who urge that we only breed to older males… it is worth taking a look at, and we have factored age of the male into breeding decisions, but this may not be quite as great an idea as you would think. A recent published test from Sweden noted that advanced paternal age is connected with higher incidences of bi-polar disorder. The sperm cells of an older male are older. We see in cloning from older males that their new babies can have diseases related to old age, because the cells they were developed from are older. Like other breeding decisions, we need credible science to guide us -Arthur Greenwood, M.D.

[dobesign]

I, too, test my dogs. I don;t use it as a tool to demonstrate "my dogs are better than yours" though. I use tests as baselines, and God forbid as a diagnostic. You cannot say that a dog does not have DCM because it was not reflected in the test. It's like saying one doesn't have epilepsy because no seizure occured during testing. It's absurd. As for Arthur signing as M.D., what the Hell is wrong with that? He IS one! So, just to follow suit, I'll sign off today as Brenna BS, MS, MD, ME, PhD. :eek: Although I do NOT understand what that has to do with anything. Oh, and I'm 45. And equally as important, I am a brunette!:p Although these days, it isn't natural colour!:eek:

[Elaine]

It has been suggested that we require autopsies on heavily used stud dogs... which has merit. It may be of value to require an autopsy on dogs that make major numerical contributions to the breed, my concern would be how we interpret the results. Let's say that a heavily used dog dies because he is hit by a car. The autopsy would likely not be even remotely relevant to his eventual DCM status or to any heritable condition he may transmit. Let’s say the dog dies of a complications related to a storage disease, my understanding is that you would need a neuropathologist to do a proper autopsy and there are few neuropathologists around. (in our area there is one, at North Carolina State University, and if the dog was not previously a patient at NCSU, they will not do the autopsy, regardless of what the DPCA says). The quality of the autopsy and what it reveals vary widely around this country. And, as always, there is the question of what conclusions we should draw from the results.

I believe in using credible science to guide us in making wise breeding choices, but are we going too far in our expectations of perfection? I am wondering if we are simply accomplishing from within what animal rights activists are trying to do from without; we are making it almost impossible to breed dogs.

[Ann Lanier]

DPCA can pass all the requirements that can be thought up, but you can't FORCE anyone to do a necropsy, or even a Holter. The most the DPCA can do is hope someone is late with their dues, or file a grievance or petition for a vote from the Membership to toss the person out. O well.

The net result could well be that Dobermans are even more considered an unhealthy, expensive, short lived breed, that other breeds would be a better pet choice. (Judy Bingham's point.)

People within the breed who may not have the extra $2,000 for testing baby puppies, or who do not see the value of Holtering a litter of 6 month old pups will not enter the Futurity, and therefore may not attend the National, further reducing attendance.

This concentration on the poor health of Dobermans ignores that most live their usual lives of ten or so years and pass away. Dogs are going to die from one cause or another before we do because we are longer lived creatures than dogs. That is the way it always has been and likely always will be. Yes, we all want to help our beloved dogs live as long and comfortably as possible. But the central focus here seems to be shifted from their lives to their deaths. People seem to be worrying about their deaths before they even get the pup.

Our dogs are going to die first. It is going to hurt us like hell. Get over it. If you can't stand it, don't have the courage, don't have a dog, but don't ruin the enjoyment for everyone else with all this doom and gloom hanging over every pup like the Sword of Damocles.

And in the process scare away prospective Doberman lovers and breeders of the future, tainting the breed for all.

JMHO

a

[Elaine]

Also of concern is that if we are forced to put Holter test results in the context of breeding data (and essentially the DPCA Futurity is about recognizing breeders), puppy buyers are going to think that the Holter result means the dog is less likely to develop or transmit DCM. That is the implication, otherwise, why insist on using the Holter test result for Futurity entrants and why put the result in the ad?

So, if a puppy (with the Holter test data) later develops DCM… or if a dog in the pedigree develops DCM… the breeder can be sued, just like Kathy Babbitt was sued in Skaer v Babbitt. The judge in Skaer v. Babbitt awarded almost $15,000.00 in court costs, attorney fees and damages, on roughly a $1,500.00 sale… for a dog that was actually healthy, though two relatives died of DCM when the puppy was over a year old.

How many of us could afford to pay a judgment of $15,000.00 on a puppy sale of $1,500?

In my opinion the DPCA should have filed a amicus brief on behalf of Ms. Babbitt in Skaer v. Babbitt. Instead, we saw McNealy and Hopper on CyberDobes trumpeting the decision as a victory. McNealy isn’t a breeder, so naturally she has no clue what the decision means to breeders. Her ignorance is in part understandable. I haven’t a clue what was going through Hopper's mind. She apparently was a witness for Skaer, maybe friendship clouded her judgment on the underlying issues.

[doberdogsfd]

I believe Ms. Lanier has hit is right on the head!
If one doesn't have the courage to have this breed, get out of it or do not get into it.
It requires someone that is willing to breed smart, not be afraid of understanding that yes, DCM is pretty much in every line and we need to make those smart choices when breeding.
Forcing breeders to test a litter of puppies is a tad over the top here. This is a Breed Club...not a Federal Regulatory Agency.
Put the money into R+D and let's move forward that way.

Like I said in an earleir post and Ms.Lanier has said in her's, focus on the life we share with them, not the inevitable end animals face in the cylce of life.

JMO.....Cheryl

[Elaine]

The discussion on the DPCA members list has petered out to just about nothing... toward the end McNealy came along to express her opinion… must admit, I did not read more than the first few paragraphs.. it went on a bit. In my opinion McNealy has been a very destructive force in our breed. She does not own or breed Dobermans. Whatever her opinions may be, they are completely irrelevant… she is not putting anything on the line as a breeder… she does not have to stand behind any health claims (misleading or otherwise), she does not have to be responsible for misleading people that a Holter test means a dog will not transmit or develop DCM. The nuances of this issue have no impact what-so-ever on McNealy, she is not a breeder or owner. At best it is all theory. Fueled by what appears to me to be a pubescent child mentality that you argue against the person, in large part because you do not understand the topic, she had a few hundred words to say to me… I read the first paragraph and thought she was taking the conversation to the sewer. In the context of breeding and how to avoid transmitting health problems, McNealy not only does not understand the topic, she has no stake in the topic.

My response to Chri McNealy’s diatribe to me was something very simple... one line, something like, “Is McNealy now moderating this list as well?” Dana at first refused to post my response, I objected, Dana then posted it with her lengthy editorial comment, which I think shows a strong editorial bias towards McNealy. Coincidently, McNealy had a response too, almost as though Dana had sent McNealy my post that she was holding, even though Dana had not sent my one-line response to the list. Might have been a coincidence... the timing was perfect if it was. As I recall, Dana actually uses CybeDObes to cross post DPCA list information. IF my recollection is correct, that is editorial bias… and is unacceptable. If Dana uses CyberDobes for disseminating DPCA business, she must also post on other lists, including DSNN.

McNealy responded in the members list with something to me and a bit about how time consuming it is for her to moderate CyberDobes. My response (which does not belong on the DPCA list any more than Cheri’s response) is, “Why does McNealy need to spend anytime at all fighting with her posters on CyberDobes?” As I recall, Cyberdobes is simply one long McNealy diatribe after another. If you disagree with McNealy she goes after you… at 100 words per minute. On DSNN we never have to edit for content (except in one instance where a post was simply profane). I do not spend even one moment scanning what members have to say, with the intent of controlling the expression of their opinions. By McNealy's admission, she spends hours and hours haranguing people who post on CyberDObes. Seems to me, based on what I saw of CyberDobes over the years, she was trying to force her skewed version of reality down people's throats and would attack anyone with a dissenting opinion. I’d imagine that sort of dictatorial control is exhaustively time consuming.

Another thought, DSNN does not intrude on readers. They come to us, when and if they like. In contrast, CyberDobes comes to your inbox. We used to scan topics and then hit "delete." We always ignored the Hippity Hoppity posts, the Florida woman, the Man- Child posts and any of the rah rah “we haven’t a clue what this discussion is about but ‘Cheri is right’ Seal Flippers Clapping posts.

[Elaine]

Here is one of our last posts

It’s interesting that the medical professionals we know and respect (including the veterinary medical professionals we know and respect), have no trouble grasping this. Not sure why some here are so “hard pressed to understand.” Possibly people who spend their lives focused on the precise meaning in the written word have an advantage here.

I did not say the Holter test was, in an of itself, misleading. Rather, including a Holter Test result in the context of breeding data is misleading. Sometimes an example is beneficial: AS an example, we can advertise that our champion linebred Kakfa son - Ch. Logres’ Tungsten - passed a 72 hour Holter and other comprehensive heart testing (that surpasses the heart testing done on many Dobermans)... we could throw that around. Doing so would not be an indication that we "care for the breed." Rather, it would be an indication that we did not understand the limited usefulness of the Holter test and the need for some well funded research. We don’t put Tungsten’s Holter test in a breeding ad or in breeding data because it does not say he will not possibly develop DCM and it does not say he will not transmit DCM. Again, Tungsten's great Holter test results do not say that he will not transmit DCM.

So far the reasons advanced for misusing the Holter test in the context of breeding data and/or Futurity eligibility are that it supposedly “shows the breeder cares” and it’s “A” test and some advance a theory that “A test, even the wrong test, is better than no test.” Or, that we have other test that are also possibly misleading. I do not find these good reasons for relying upon the wrong test.

If the goal was simply to see how many tests a breeder could do, why stop at testing for DCM? We should also require a $3,000 MRI, and tests for Storage diseases, the list could go on and on forever. We could all become sales reps for a portable MRI machine, and, under the theory that we "believe in the MRI", because "a test is better than no test" and "it shows we care"... we could push that the DPCA make the MRI test mandatory.

Before we go further down the wrong road, we should all agree that for the sake of our breed, we need the right tests to guide us to make good breeding decisions… and to find the right test we will need to fund research. -Elaine Greenwood

[Elaine]

and this post:

Thoughts about research.

I think Doberman owners and breeders need to reconnect to what unites us and ignore the rest of this irrelevant personal stuff. Breeders need credible medical science to guide them, not just with DCM, but with Storage Diseases, cord compressions, kidney disease… vaccination protocols… and on and on and on. There is so much we do not know. Funding the research we need is well beyond the resources of the DPCA or even the AKC. Unless we can convince deep pocketed people like Warren Buffet or Bill Gates that canine related health issues are worth millions and millions of their charity dollars, we are simply under-funded for what we need. I do not think we can look to the AVMA to pursue our interests. I do not believe the AVMA is all too concerned with supporting breeders and breeder’s issues, but even if they were passionate about our concerns, they too are scrambling for what little funding there is. Our DPCA funds might be better utilized by monitoring current research in human medicine, world wide… research that is either being done with dogs or that has applications for dogs… so that we could benefit from the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent in human medicine. We might even have some input in making slight modifications to ongoing human research programs, so that a given study more directly benefits us. We need credible research, we need it available to us ASAP. Finding the funding for the research we need is a huge challenge… but we have to find a way to meet the challenge, because it is the right thing to do for our breed. -Elaine Greenwood

[Elaine]

Though I did not post this on the DPCA members list, here are a few thoughts ...

Many people do not weigh in on health issues. They do not what themselves or their dogs to be the target of the sheer stupidity and pettiness of people on these lists. Privately they will say they simply will not show in the Futurity if some morons make it mandatory that we list Holter test results to be eligible for the DPCA Futurity. Privately they object to one bad policy decision after another with the DPCA BoD. Privately they object to the toxic influence of McNealy in the DPCA Board of Directors. I respect that people feel uncomfortable about coming forward because they do not wish to be a target. The mentality of some of the vocal members of the DPCA and the mentality of people like McNealy turns people off. They walk away from the club rather than deal with the garbage. I completely understand the impulse to walk away from stupidity and pettiness… but here is something to consider: The DPCA is for Dobermans… it is for the breed, not for individuals, not for a current Board of Directors… not for Cheri McNealy… it is the Doberman Pinscher Club of America, it is for the dogs, and with any luck it will survive longer than this period of stupidity.

[pretty dobe]

Elaine, I agree whole heartedly with you on the testing and what vets are saying. I've done the doppler with Caye, and was deemed he has a very healthy working heart, but local dobie vets say not to waste the money on the holter... They personally feel that though it gives a base but it does nothing to prove he wouldn't drop dead later in the day. They are hoping on better testing coming in down the road that will truly make a difference. There are those that feel the need to test and that is great for them. In this day in age with the increased cost of most everything we have to pick and choose what is the most important and necessary for our dogs. Now I am lucky in that there has been no heart issues in Caye's background. Not that it couldn't show up, nothing is written in stone. Out here on the desert we have other issues to test for that are dangerous for our dogs. Valley Fever and desert diseases that can silently kill your dogs before you know it. I personally test twice a year for these and these types of testing are very expensive.

When I saw the post of Cheri McNealy on the DPCA, it brought me back to the all the attacking posts that are so familar on her site. I deleated it quickly and found it offensive to even be allowed on the site. I understood the point you were making and thought it was a valid one, but the the attack group from her site were called out quickly. That type of writing should not be allowed on the DPCA posts. It serves no purpose. I've had my issues with Cheri and she knows how I feel about her attacks. This type of thing happens way to often and stifles most good people from asking questions and giving an opinion. Some people that have been in the breed a long time feel that they know it all and want you in lock step. I certainly want to learn what the old timers and younger have to offer but let me make the decsions of which ones are right and needed for my dogs...

You put in mandatory testing for dobes in the futurity you will lose people showing in that venue. These pups are their own entities and who knows how their genes are put together....It is just one more outlandish expense that proves nothing to go along with the rest of the cost of Nationals.

OK, I'm braced for the fall out.....

JMHO:)

Judie