Curious and be nice.. My bitch hips came back Fair....Would you still breed her?

I personally believe we are never going to rid this lovely breed of issues if we breed fairs and grade I. jmo I would not breed to a fair stud nor would I breed a bitch that is fair. there are enough labs being bred with good and excellent rating. Why breed a fair? I understand fair is passing as far as ofa but it is not a pass for me in my program.

Fair is passing. Why not?

Based on fair hips only, I see no problem in breeding her. There may be a million other reasons not to breed her, though.

Fair hips are PASSING.

to a good or excellent stud dog if everything else passes.

"dont breed a fair" crazy! It's passing

Breed a fair hip girl? Yes.
Breed to a fair stud dog? No.

I'd breed fair to excellent only. And probably only if I really loved the girl. As someone said, fair is passing - no disease.

I have used a Fair stud dog, and what I considered not only an OFA Good bitch, but no history of anything but that in her background and siblings. The offspring that I kept was OFA Excellent, and I was not at all surprised.
Breeding an OFA Fair bitch, I would find a stud dog that was Good or Ex, WITH background and siblings of same. And be prepared for the chips to fall where they will. The question is, does she have all of the other Breed qualities that you are looking for , and that a Labrador should have!

1. "yes"

2. maybe do Penn-hip AND/OR use a male with a high Penn-hip score.

3. A lovely Bitch with a passing rating of Fair is a non-issue IMHO

If someone had asked me this question 15 years ago, I would have said that I would never breed a Fair. To date, I still have not used either a Fair bitch or stud. However, I have a 4 year old bitch that is OFA Fair, Elb. Good and Opt. A., out of (2) OFA Good parents. She has no points, but is something that I would consider breeding if the right stud came along, or some of my other girls don't work out. At this point, I am thinking that I may never breed her, but am keeping her as back-up just in case. I would say that it all depends on the situation and what good qualities she has that you would like to keep in your line. You might try breeding her now and see what she produces orthepedically. (I know - sp?) If you get good hips out of that litter, then maybe she passes good genes. I would breed her to Exc. that has proven himself. One thing to think about - when a dog gets a Fair - there could have been one Dr. that gave a Borderline and one a Fair and one a Good. Did you call OFA and ask what the 3 doctors gave her?

I'd find a dog I liked with really good pennhip scores or one who has produced cleanly with good clean lines.

There are much worse things being bred than fair hips.

One and one don't make two in this orthopedic rating game. I have a friend that has a bitch whose BOTH parents did not pass and she just got a rating of excellent, and my "fair" bitch produced more excellents then any of my "good" bitches have, so those of you who think that all of this is black and white think again.

I think that may be inaccurate info , about the 3 doc opinion, isn't it true that the dog receives the grading of the LOWEST opinion of all 3 ?? Please correct me if I am wrong.

Fair is passing. If she is all that in all the other areas, find her an Excellent stud, and go for it.

Hips are such a grey area. I've known excellent to excellent breedings that have dysplastic get.

I would look at the siblings and parents of the dog and bitch and look for a line of strong hip scores in the siblings as well as the dogs bred.

HD is polygenic and the hip rating is subjective measure of phenotype. The water couldn't be muddier!

I would never throw out a fair dog or bitch that has everything else I want. But I would throw out an excellent bitch who had a lousy temperament or incorrect structure. It's not all about the clearances.

Grey - thank you, you said exactly what I wanted to say... and you said it better!

Breeder/Ohio writes: "I think that may be inaccurate info , about the 3 doc opinion, isn't it true that the dog receives the grading of the LOWEST opinion of all 3 ?? Please correct me if I am wrong. "

Can tell you for sure you are wrong. I had one come back Fair. Since that was totally NOT what I was expecting, I called and asked for the 3 individual ratings. The dog got one good, one fair, and one moderate dysplastic.

this is interesting. why wouldnt you breed to a stud with fair hips, but would breed your girl with them?
adam

Grade I elbows are failing. Fair hips are passing.

Don't forget, as hips have improved, hips rated fair now are better than hips rated fair year ago.

But, I would be hesitant to breed an OFA Fair from borderline parents, or with siblings (plural) who failed. A fair from good or excellent parents with good or excellent siblings is fine in my book. But as other posters mentioned, take her to a good or excellent who have a strong orthopedic pedigree.

Having said all that, if she is ugly, I would not breed her if she has excellent hips. Look at the whole bitch. Lots of straight shoulders and incorrect coated OFA Good bitches out there who are being bred to heck.

I think you can ask yourself one simple question: Is the bitch dysplastic? NO!
So, within that framework, figure out YOUR priorities and make a decision that fits your plans.

Breeding with Fair is just fine. It is passing. I just bred my good to a fair boy and the hips done on the 2 year old pup came back an excellant. Its all in the family history. The fair boys sister was excellant ? Most family history was very good. I had alot rather breed to Fair than the thought that so many are playing around with bad elbows. This should not even be compared or said in the same sentence. Fair and bad elbows, not the same animal at all. Just do your homework and if all else passes and she looks great fine her a good boy thats grade is better than hers.

My girl came back a fair, I called OFA, and asked what her individual ratings were. She had one good and two fairs, and I was told they average the scores. For exapmple if there was one good, one fair, and one borderline, they would come back as a fair, one excellent and two goods, would come back a good.

OFA's description of "Fair":
Fair
Fair (Figure 3): Assigned where minor irregularities in the hip joint exist. The hip joint is wider than a good hip phenotype. This is due to the ball slightly slipping out of the socket causing a minor degree of joint incongruency. There may also be slight inward deviation of the weight-bearing surface of the socket (dorsal acetabular rim) causing the socket to appear slightly shallow (Figure 4).

OFA also says on another page:
Do not ignore the dog with a fair hip evaluation. The dog is still within normal limits. For example; a dog with fair hips but with a strong hip background and over 75% of its brothers and sisters being normal is a good breeding prospect. A dog with excellent hips, but with a weak family background and less than 75% of its brothers and sisters being normal is a poor breeding prospect.

All i have to say here is that i have a friend who took her 2 year old boy for OFA finals. X-rays were done by a well respected vet on the east coast. Vet was thrilled with the x-rays, the breeder and the owner were thrilled to peices, the x-rays were beautiful. Weeks later the rating came back as Fair. OFA was called and Dr. Keller's respose was "It is what it is". The 3 ratings were Excellent, Good and Fair. Vet that took the x-rays was told that OFA takes the LOWEST reading. Six months later x-rays were re done on the dog and they came back Excellent, Good and Good. This was just last year.
Personally i see NO consistancy (sp) in OFA. How can a dog be rated excellent, good and fair?????? Its just a picture that depends on who reads it and what they think they see. JMO
I now do Penn HIp and OFA because i have loss of faith.

Of course! Sometimes it's the positioning that can turn a good into a fair. If she is a solid fair, so what. That is a passing grade which means that there is no arthritis and the hips are fine. If there were only good and excellent grades would you throw out the goods because they weren't the best? Fair is passing!

Fair is average, what is wrong with that??? GEEEEEZ The whole idea was to bred up!!! If the pedigree is clear and the dogs behind the female are fine, why not.

The most important phrase in that story was "I have a friend" - in other words, it didn't happen to you and you do not have full, direct knowledge of the incident. Basically, what you know is what your "friend" told you. Here is what I can tell you as a first-hand fact because I always ask what the three separate readings are.

The opinion is a consensus opinion. That means it is an "average" of the three readings. If your friend's dog really received three readings of Excellent, Good and Fair, the final consensus would have been Good. That is just the way it is and has always been. It is rare to have that much deviation in opinions, but it generally happens when the x-ray quality or positioning is not great. Some readers are just not willing to assume everything is fine when they can not clearly see it on the film.

The dog later received a Good, I assume, since you said the three readings were Excellent, Good and Good. I am all too familiar with that case, since most of my dogs I have had done in the last decade were on this cusp and either received a Good or Excellent rating based on a 2-1 split one way or the other.

I would chalk up the earlier Fair to either positioning or quality of the film. The readers are not blessed with a crystal ball and can only evaluate what is sent. A mediocre film is going to get a mediocre reading. It sounds as if the owner was advised to resubmit - and did. No harm, no foul.

"I'd breed fair to excellent only. And probably only if I really loved the girl. As someone said, fair is passing - no disease."

Not just an excellent. An excellent could have 2 fair parents. Look back at the pedigree generations for consistent excellents & goods in the lineage.

Yes. Breed her but study the pedigree of the stud dog.

Maureen,
Since i talked to the vet and the owner of the dog in question, who both talked to Dr. Keller and got such an unprofessional comment and both people heard him say that he had no problem with this dog receiving an excellent a good and a fair rating and that he was content to leave the results as FAIR, which he stated was the policy of taking the LOWEST reading for final results.
You, however, have not talked to anyone involved. I respect your opinion and don't mean any disrespect to you, however i am a bit closer to the issue than you. There fore, i really have no faith in OFA, because Dr. Keller obviously has no issue with inconsistancy in results. So to me, OFA is just a tool that i look at, and consider family history, however, it doesn't tell me that there is consistancy in the way they read the x-rays, and by the way the x-rays were clear as a bell.

Perhaps Dr Keller changes the rules to suit his mood from one day to another???

Yes, you can breed her. But your real question was should you. What you should do is some more homework, if you can, about littermates, and parents/grandparents. That will help tell you more about the genotype that she carries, vs. the phenotype x-rays.

If both her parents are goods, and grandparents are good or excellent, and whichever littermates were checked, passed good or excellent, then you probably have pretty sound genes.

If however, one or more grandparents or parents weren't cleared, or if you know littermates flunked OFA, that may be an indication that she should not be bred from.

My first Champion bitch was OFA Good, but her sire was Excellent, and from a litter of 8 where he was the only one to pass OFA. Said bitch was bred to an OFA good male and produced 100% bad hips! Of course, I didn't know that until I had bred her a second time, to another OFA Good male. That time only 50% had bad hips. :( Needless to say she was spayed.

It's never an easy decision...

Leslee Pope
Huntcrest

Maureen, I respectfully disagree with you here. I have first hand knowledge of the dog that got an excellent, good and fair, and was graded fair. What you say is correct in that we all thought OFA would give a good to a dog with these 3 ratings. But, it did not happen, and it was not just an error. There were many calls placed to Dr. Keller regarding this dog, and he stuck with the fair.

"You, however, have not talked to anyone involved. I respect your opinion and don't mean any disrespect to you, however i am a bit closer to the issue than you. There fore, i really have no faith in OFA, because Dr. Keller obviously has no issue with inconsistancy in results. "

Actually, I have talked to Dr. Keller many, many times and Dr. Corley before him. I don't mean you any disrespect, but unless YOU talked to Dr. Keller and YOU heard him say something unprofessional, you are showing disrespect to him and OFA by repeating something you were told third hand. I know you have no reason to doubt your friend.... but I have had many discussions with the powers that be at OFA and I can tell you first hand that the final certification opinion is ALWAYS a consensus and Dr. Keller is a very professional (as well as kind) person.

Now you have at least as much reason to believe me as your friend - we are both reporting information from a third person that you did not personally hear. The difference is that I have no hard feelings about the issue - it was not my dog that got an evaluation I didn't like. I don't think your friend has the same impartialiaty. Our perspective colors what we hear and how we interpret it. Before casting stones at any organization whose sole purpose is to help breeders, consider both the reasonability of what you were told and the emotional status that may have colored the interpretation.

I have no vested interest in this, Kathy, I just hate to see OFA or any other responsible service organization get publicly ostricised based on third party reports. If you are not speaking of a first hand experience with no emotional envolvement, then is it really fair to condemn OFA and tell people that they do not follow their published policies?

See... this is the result of passing on third party disgruntled comments in public. I can assure you from my first hand experiences that Dr. Keller is very fair and all decisions on final reports are a result of consensus. Dr. Keller determines the prelim readings, not the final ones. The rules are the rules and they apply to EVERY application impartially.

I do know that sometimes a 4th opinion is used when there is a lot of diversity in the first three - perhaps that is what happened in the case Kathy mentioned. If the 4th reader agreed that the hips were only fair, then the consensus would have been "Fair". I had one film that was not of the best positioning and it took 4 readings to get the final consensus opinion - one reader gave it a borderline because he did not want to base an opinion on that film. We ended up with an Excellent, Good, Borderline and the 4th was another Good. The dog received a Good final evaluation.

The thing to keep in mind is that OFA is trying to do the best impartial job of helping breeders evaluate their dogs. They have no hidden agenda. I'm not sure breeders whose reports are not to their liking can say the same

Perhaps Maureen sends better whiskey with her films.....

No... just been working my way up the hip ladder for 40 years to get pretty consistent results. Believe me, I still get those that would make you shudder occasionally. I have one 18 months ago that was so bad the ball and socket didn't even touch!

I did send a cheese and fruit tray to the staff at Christmas- just to let them know they are appreciated. Whether you get the results you want or not, those people work tirelessly to service everyone equally and have always been pleasant when I have had occasion to talk to one of them.

Well, as I said, they may have had a 4th reading done to settle the issue. I'm sorry if the people were so disturbed over a fair that there were many phone calls made to Dr. Keller. He would not have discussed the individual evaluations with anyone but the owner, breeder (with permission) and the vet. Since you have first hand knowledge, which one were you?

Maureen, Nothing second hand about mine.

"I had one come back Fair. Since that was totally NOT what I was expecting, I called and asked for the 3 individual ratings. The dog got one good, one fair, and one moderate dysplastic."

It is not appropriate to complain about aone without acknowledging another.

Yep... a consensus, not the lowest rating. As I mentioned, the one I had that was an Excellent, Good and borderline - they got a 4th opinion that rated it Good to settle the issue. Sounds like they might have got another Fair on yours as well I don't know about other applications, but I think that is not uncommon when the readings do not have two of the same evaluation - especially if one is really quite a bit different from the others as happened with both yours and mine.

I've seen an OFA fair dog live a sound life up to 16yo, I also have seen an OFA excellent dog become dysplastic at 4yo. Just another piece of the puzzle.

that's why objective ratings are better

I appreciate that we are talking philosophy here, but it is sometimes worthwhile to understand the underlying definition of the terms like "subjective" and "objective" when using them in a discusssion. Since objectivity is just shared subjectivity, the OFA consensus methodology can be considered "objective" in its application. It relies on using measurements and scientific observation by multiple trained individuals to draw overall conclusions. Although the report is not made as a numerical rating, but as a comparison to an ideal, it is no less objective in its OVERALL worth.

I know this is sort of a mind bender, but "objectivity" is very "subjective" in its application to our shared reality.

My dog's prelims came back as Excellent and I had the radiographs returned to me ($5 extra). When finals were done, we compared those to prelims and I was so excited! I sent them in and got ready to party. You can imagine my devastation when they were read as Fair -- and yes, the readings were Excellent, Good and Fair. Fair is passing, but why should I accept Fair and dismiss the Excellent and Good? There was TOO MUCH DISPARITY in these three readings. I called Dr. Keller -- and YES -- he told me that they take the lower of the three readings for dogs. But he also said that they do not send out the original radiograph - they send copies -- so there is always room for error and to resubmit in a few months (apparently there is a time frame for resubmission).

So, here is my question.... If you had your own hips x-rayed and your doctor said "awesome" and then sent photocopies of that x-ray to 3 of his/her colleagues, and one said "awesome", another said "good" and another said "fair" -- would you accept the fair as the definitive? I wouldn't for myself and I would not for my dogs.

No wait a minute! If we are going to talk terms, let's skip the daffy-nitions.

The following is from http://dictionary.reference.com/

sub·jec·tive (səb-jěk'tĭv) Pronunciation Key
adj.

1. a. Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision.
b. Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience.
2. Moodily introspective.
3. Existing only in the mind; illusory.
4. Psychology Existing only within the experiencer's mind.
5. Medicine Of, relating to, or designating a symptom or condition perceived by the patient and not by the examiner.
6. Expressing or bringing into prominence the individuality of the artist or author.
7. Grammar Relating to or being the nominative case.
8. Relating to the real nature of something; essential.real nature of something; essential.

ob·jec·tive (əb-jěk'tĭv) Pronunciation Key
adj.
1. Of or having to do with a material object.
2. Having actual existence or reality.
a. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair1.
b. Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.
c. Of, relating to, or being the case of a noun or pronoun that serves as the object of a verb.
d. Of or relating to a noun or pronoun used in this case.
3. Medicine Indicating a symptom or condition perceived as a sign of disease by someone other than the person affected.
4. Grammar
a. Of, relating to, or being the case of a noun or pronoun that serves as the object of a verb.
5. Of or relating to a noun or pronoun used in this case.

Here is an excerpt from the monograph I wrote some years ago on subjectivity vs. objectivity. You may find it relevant since you have used some of the same definitions I did in the article.
*****
One of the differentiating factors of objective evaluation seems to be its basis in scientific method. Although relatively recent in its definition, the methods used to investigate and evaluate "scientific" data have been agreed on as a means of determining what is real from what is just thought to be—-the objective as contrasted to the subjective. Scientific method relies heavily on observation (sensory input), reproducibility (observing the same output from the same input repeatedly) and consensus (agreement by others on what is a correct observation). Even within the scientific method, there is heavy reliance on interpretation of sensory data, a function of the mind, to prove that a phenomenon (subjective) actually exists (objective) separately from the individual’s perception of it. It would appear that at its most essential level, all objective facts are recognized through repeated subjective experience by enough concurring individuals for them to be accepted as facts. There are many examples throughout history of accepted "facts" that changed dramatically when enough persons experienced a conflicting phenomenon or perceived the old phenomenon in a different context. Copernicus changed what we know of science forever with his introspective insights into celestial observations, which had been interpreted differently and accepted as objective facts and laws for many years.
*****

As I said, as long as humans are part of the equation, nothing is completely objective. The subjective choices of WHAT to observe and HOW to interpret that observation make all experience subjective to varying degrees. Again,this is philosophy, not veterinary science. It is relevant, but is not the topic of this thread.

"I called Dr. Keller -- and YES -- he told me that they take the lower of the three readings for dogs. "

I just talked to Dr. Keller today and asked about this representation of their policies. He categorically denied it. The final opinion is always a consensus. As I have repeated several times, if there is a great discrepancy in the readings, a 4th input is used. If that one was also Fair, then that would tip the scales. I gave the example of just such an incident with one of my own dogs that required a 4th opinion to make a determination. I trust that you believe Dr. Keller told you what you are reporting - I don't see that you would have any motive to make up such a comment. I don't see that Dr. Keller would have any motive to lie - to you or to me. I also do not believe they would change the rules for ONE person, when all the other evaluations are based on consensus. You may have asked the wrong question to get the information you really needeed or Dr. Keller may have explained it poorly. Today he absolutely reaffirmed the position that all final opinions are consensus based.

I am sorry you had this disappointing experience. Did you resubmit the x-rays as suggested? What was the final reading when you did? Are you the person that was described in the other thread?

Suffice it to say, my experiences with OFA have been good and bad, expected and unexpected. I've spoken with Dr. Keller on several occasions and sometimes have gotten the answers I was looking for and sometimes been quite dissatisfied with an explanation. As long as OFA is operating as they are, we all have a chance of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". I wonder if anyone has ever asked for and received copies of the reviews to back up their final reading. It certainly would have been more definitive for me. I'm now bowing out of this thread. It just isn't how I want to spend my Tuesday evening. G'night everyone!

"As long as OFA is operating as they are, we all have a chance of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". "

OFA is not the only system where this is true. Look in LabraData at Dog 942. She was done twice by PennHIP at 8 months and 5 years. There is no similarity in the readings at all. If the owners had gone by the first reading (.51 DI on one hip), she would have been spayed and placed. Her adult reading was .38, which is a fairly decent evaluation. Her other hip improved in the second reading as well, but not as dramatically.

So, the real problem is that there is no hip scheme that is consistent in its readings because there is not enough consistency in the quality of the films that are used for evaluation - even when done by the "experts".

Thanks for your input. As one who has had a couple of dogs with very diverse opinions, I appreciate that it can be a little frustrating.

Everything done by people has some degree of subjectivity. I think that people, and even many scientists themselves, forget that.

Also, reproducibility/consensus/precision certainly increase confidence in conclusions but in no way guarantee accuracy.

Science is not perfect and we are wiser for realizing that. Besides, a little mystery/risk/doubt make everything more fun.....

I was going to post earlier while people were arguing about subjectivity vs. objectivity......rather than talking about something being one or the other, it is better to realize you are dealing with degrees of both. How objective is that conclusion? How much subjectivity was involved in making that decision?

Even if you could be perfectly objective or subjective, would you want to be? Why not use both tools?

I'm glad to find a fellow philosopher in the discussion - especially when so many want to be pragmatic and literal. You might enjoy the concluding sentence in my previously-mentioned article. Have a nice evening
***
"Determining the relative value of subjectivity versus objectivity, especially for the purpose of scientific investigation, seems to be as meaningless as the pre-Columbian debates over whether there were monsters at the edge of the known world or just a bottomless pit."

I have talked personally to Dr. Keller and found him to be very, very professional and empathetic.

I also have a dog (from another breeder) from parents who are OFA excellent who came back with mild to severe HD. It is not just what the parents are but (again not to beat a dead horse) but the grandparents, their siblings etc. You must really DO YOUR HOMEWORK!
Do not rely on just the clearances. You must also keep you dog in a good healthy weight and do not overstress a puppy work/exercise-wise.
When in doubt, redo the xrays - positioning is everything.
A