# Life expectancy of certain dog breeds plummeting?



## Lazhar Ichir (Feb 18, 2015)

Back in the 1970s, Golden Retrievers routinely lived until 16 and 17 years old, they are now living until 9 or 10 years old. Golden Retrievers die mostly of bone cancer, lymphoma and a cancer of the blood vessels more than any other breed

The Morris Animal Foundation has started a new $25-million study with thousands of Golden Retrievers enrolled! Owners and breeders are all awaiting important results so they can start focusing on specific characteristics when breeding the dogs.

They have said, because dogs of different breeds share more than 95% of their DNA, their researches will help improve all dog breeds, including German Shepherds and pretty much every purebred working dog.

What's your take on this?


----------



## eric squires (Oct 16, 2008)

This is the effect of a closed system of breeding bound by standards that do not allow the addition of new genetic material from outside the breeds. Also the genetic bottle neck created by the show ring.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

25 million just to find out that dogs are being bred daily with nothing more then to feed the show/pet market. ](*,)](*,)

Often there is little to no thought about health issues in the breed, any breed.

Little thought about keeping breeds functional. Even in "functional" lines, how many knowingly produce dogs with genetic health issues or refuse to cull those that show up in their lines?! 

How can I get involved in that money making bs?


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

i read the study format

that mega buck study appears to simply be a daily diary kept by thousands of golden owners. documentation only. what they will do with all that data to try and connect the dots will be a challenge.
- plus; do the math....it's over 8000 dollars per owner ](*,)

total waste

what the researchers might be forgetting is that in this "new age of social media", this data could be collected at NO cost on a free web site ](*,)

but you would also have to figure in the dumb factor since who would know how accurate all that data would be since it is provided by thousands of different owners who might have a personal agenda in what they submit
- which would make it even more difficult to collate and validate

might have good intentions but i see nothing definitive coming out of this study. plus it's already been going on for three years and hasn't even gotten off the ground yet ](*,)

did anyone look at the list of the studies by this group ?
- some are pretty bizarre in my opinion

i have NO expectations that ANY domestic dog breeds will ever get healthier and live longer. as soon as we make them a "breed" they go downhill.
- too many dogs are controlled manipulated and bred by too many stupid people
- the only animals we seem to breed efficiently are the ones we want on the dinner table.....but we have shown we can screw that up too ](*,)


----------



## Kirsten Fitzgerald (May 23, 2014)

eric squires said:


> This is the effect of a closed system of breeding bound by standards that do not allow the addition of new genetic material from outside the breeds. Also the genetic bottle neck created by the show ring.


 
Yep. Can't improve it by adding anything :-k !!Lets get rid of anything thats not perfect, then we will be left with perfection!!..... When we can stop eliminating stuff.

All with the show ring in mind. The purpose seems to be a perfect illusion.


----------



## Kristian Taves (Jul 2, 2013)

Thank Bob Barker and the spay and neuter crowd.


----------



## Lazhar Ichir (Feb 18, 2015)

Very true, the base used for this study is weak. We pretty much rely on randoms instead of relying on scientists.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

Bob Barker and the S/N crowd ??
- thank them for what ? decreasing the life expectancy of certain breeds ?

as far as i know, spaying and neutering doesn't weaken the genetic vitality of any breed. it prevents dogs from breeding

- what was your point ?? sorry, but i don't get it


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

The most inbred dog I ever owned lived to be 15, a GSD; he was born in 1985 My more recent working line dogs - total outcrosses - both died at 9 of hemangio. Honestly I think it is environmental.


----------



## Chip Blasiole (Jun 7, 2006)

Are these statistics based on dogs in the U.S.? There is an epidemic of obesity in the U.S., which I believe translates to people's dogs very often. I have a friend who owns a pet crematory and he says he is seeing a majority of dogs brought in for cremation that are very overweight or obese. Related to obesity is a lack of exercise for many dogs.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

is there any agreement why cancer kills so many humans ?
diet ? environment ?
- it often runs in the (human) family ](*,)

but if there isn't, why would we expect to find out the answer why so many dogs die too early from cancer ?
- have wild dogs been compared to domestic dogs in terms of the frequency of death by cancer ? is it just because domestic dogs live longer ?


----------



## shane beanhard (Aug 1, 2014)

entropy?
pollution?
diet?

all of the above?

my girlfriends old employer had an inbred collie that lived a very hard working life,ate low grade food and still lived to 17.

so i'll go with it mainly being genetic weakness.


----------



## Chip Blasiole (Jun 7, 2006)

Life expectancy for humans in U.S. recently decreased. I think poor diet and lack of exercise is a major factor for people and dogs.


----------



## Kristian Taves (Jul 2, 2013)

UC Davis study from (I think) 2013 found a correlation between early spay/neuter and greatly increased cancer rates in Golden Retrievers. The study, titled "Evaluation of the risk and age of onset of cancer and behavioral disorders in gonadectomized Vizslas,"1 was conducted by a team of researchers with support from the Vizsla Club of America Welfare Foundation. It was published in the February 1, 2014 issue of the _Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association_. Similar findings came from the Vizsla study. 

Google "spay neuter cancer". There is lots of information and studies.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Another study with the pros and cons.

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf


----------



## Catherine Gervin (Mar 12, 2012)

two points of opinion, one containing facts: spaying and neutering dogs who shouldn't be bred/aren't going to be bred cannot contribute to rising cancer statistics in all members of their given breed--only to those within their breed who are spayed/neutered. it's even a lesser evil than contributing to the staggering number of homeless dogs who are destroyed annually--speaking against spaying and neutering is like preaching against using cowpox to prevent measles.
second point; the scary stuff in our food is often in our dogs' food now,too, and what that does to a mammal, long term, is so hotly contested that the data is actively suppressed by the USDA. genetically modified this and that being fed antibiotics like candy as well as liquiffied remnants of its' own species so it can survive long enough to get fat enough to be slaughtered is poisoning all of us.


----------



## Kristian Taves (Jul 2, 2013)

I am against early spay and neutering. I am for responsible dog ownership.
I am against using cowpox for a measles vaccine. Cowpox does not build immunity against measles.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

entropy ?
had to look that up 
but it didn't help.....
can you explain how it relates to life expectancy of dog breeds ?


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Our Landseer died at sge 12,5, the Briard 13,5, the Fila Brasileiro 14,5 years.


----------



## eric squires (Oct 16, 2008)

I suspect that diet, lifestyle, stress, and chemical exposure all play a part in the declining life expectancy of humans and animals today. In fact there is a branch of science dedicated to studying this called epigenetics. Basically it looks at how these factors turn on and off genes.


----------



## Karin Sable (Aug 31, 2014)

I did question a bit how it was determine that goldens regularly lived to 16 and 17 years old 35 years ago. Just wondering.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

It's a proven fact that a neutered male will never get testicular cancer. 

I wonder how some genius figured out those results? ](*,)](*,)


----------



## shane beanhard (Aug 1, 2014)

rick smith said:


> entropy ?
> had to look that up
> but it didn't help.....
> can you explain how it relates to life expectancy of dog breeds ?


we generally dont test our dogs as ruthlessly anymore imo and due to changes in attitude and modern medicine dogs live that in their natural state wouldn't (shouldn't) and some of those inevitably reproduce.

gradually weakening the breed in question,or pretty much all dogs here in the UK at least.

a bit of pretentious word to use maybe


----------



## Catherine Gervin (Mar 12, 2012)

Kristian Taves said:


> I am against early spay and neutering. I am for responsible dog ownership.
> I am against using cowpox for a measles vaccine. Cowpox does not build immunity against measles.


TERRIBLY SORRY--smallpox, not measels.


----------



## Catherine Gervin (Mar 12, 2012)

furthermore--since we are splitting hairs--if responsible dog ownership were prevalent, there wouldn't be puppy mills or a litany of animal cruelty cases which get excused because of ignorance (i didn't know i had to feed the horse, etc) or a need for Nuisance Laws in every town/city/state in the US or billions of unwanted, unintended animals being produced and left to an indifferent fate in animal shelters.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

I personally think DCM in dobes is epigenetic. 
related note but not for evidence of such, my last dobe died at 11ish if you look up the expected life span of dobes for the year she was born it was about 7.5years. You also have dogs among litters full of DCM deaths who go on strong until very old age and seemingly pass on DCM to loads of their litters. This IMO is why DCM is so hard to research.
Genetics is very interesting an all but I feel the 'science' community seem to look at it as the be all and end all of all answers, I do not believe this to be the case. Scientists like everyone else can get 'locked in' to an almost dogmatic way of thinking despite the methodology and creed(?) of the field where they will say "well if this doesn't answer it there is no answer" type situation. Science can be too objective IMO, it can get blinkered to things that are plain an obvious to the layman because 'science says this'


----------



## Kerry Kubla (Nov 20, 2014)

As much as I hate to admit it humans are part of the reason. There are very few pet owners that go out of their way to ensure that their dogs are fed and exercised properly. Most everyone on here probably do not fit into this category however we only make up a very small % of dog owners. 

Nowadays Vets actually prescribe medicine the same way Doctors do for humans.They do not cure the root of the problem but instead simply prescribe a drug to try and mask the issue. Example; if a pet owner brings in a dog to the vet that has a super high drive and is releasing the energy into destructive behaviour or what can be considered aggression.Most of these people do not put in the proper training or time needed for exercise. The Vets today are very quick to prescribe a medicine to tranquilize or calm the dog because they think the dog is a threat or liability. Most working dog owners would consider this to be the perfect dog for working. 

This is the same with children today. There are more juveniles that are taking prescriptions for ADHD than you could ever imagine. The reason is they have no boundaries, chores, or even go out and actually expend energy exercising. They consume excessive amounts of sugar and sit behind computers, cellphones, or video games all day. Ask any kid what is the most important thing they possess that they could not live without and most would answer their smartphone.

All processed food along with our aggricuture is becoming garbage and loaded with either high fructose corn syrup, starches, grains, or GMO's because it is cheaper to mass produce and is addicting. This all translates into sugar! which is estimated to be as addictive as cocaine. Great for huge companies looking to make money and keep people consuming and buying more of their products. It is estimated that today the average human consumes 150lbs of sugar each year. This has continued to escalate tremendously over the past few decades along with obesity, cancer,alzheimers, cardiovascular disease. Great news for huge drug companies, working with the FDA, that produce prescriptions to combat these diseases.


----------

