http://www.npr.org/2011/01/13/132908098/new-gene-test-screens-nearly-500-childhood-diseases?sc=emaf

This story brings up a lot of questions about breeding and genetic testing. What are we going to do when we can screen for hundreds of possible genetic mutations?

So many wonderful life saving miracles have come from research, I just wonder if this is really the path down which we are headed. How will anyone learn any humanity if we are surrounded by the perfect? I for one will take a bad hip, a failed
elbow even having to put a sweet pup down because of TVD versus clones. What would happen? No one would have kids, no one would breed a dog? Life is not perfect as heart breaking as that can be, I will take it and I don't want my pups coming from a test tube.

it is the imperfections in life that brings out compassion and humanity in society. We need compassion in life to keep us from being cold and uncaring. Loose these traits and we will parish from anger.

On the flip side, some of this screening can save individuals from needless suffering. I am a big proponent of compassion; however, I suspect most people would rather be the compassionate ones than the ones who are in need of compassion - I think the ones who wind up with the suffering would have liked to have avoided that altogether.

if you've never spent a day suffering you don't fully appreciate the good days. We learn gratitude, rely on hope and strenghten our faith in times like that.

How do you explain the character-building values of suffering to your dog? The most humane thing we, as breeders, can do is to help those pups that came into this world simply because WE decided they should to live reasonably healthy lives. If 500 genetic disease tests were available, then we could better decide WHICH we are willing to pass on to the next generation. Yea, science!

one day your daughter will find out she is pregnant....then she will be required by law to have the 500 genetic test. This test will show her child has a genetic disease and she is told she must terminate the pregnancy because government does not want to pay for this child's care for its entire life.

I work with intellectual disabled adults and many of these folks are the most caring nature people. They are good hearted and wonderful individuals and deserve life just like the rest of us.

Now in breeding livestock and dogs, testing to help eliminate genetic disorders only makes sense, as we are responsible for bringing them into this world and should be responsible for them their entire life.

Sounds like they are planning life committees just like those death committees.

Oh wait, they weren't planning death committees, that was just a lie.

I can't imagine genetic tests being required by law for people. Having said that, even though I am not worried about the government, I would be worried about insurance companies. This is yet another reason why reform is needed. You had better believe genetic testing and insurance companies is a hot topic among the people actually intelligently debating this stuff.

I do agree that animal breeding is a different story and a no-brainer.

Actually, most states require that babies be tested for PKU now. Why? Because if the infant is started on a low phenylalanine diet, severe mental retardation can be avoided. I had a student in my Genetics class last semester who had PKU. I didn't ask her if she would rather have been a college students or a severely mentally handicapped person, but I think I know what her answer would be. There are genetic diseases that we cannot ameliorate, and there are others we can treat. Why would you want to avoid testing that might have a huge positive effect on a child's life? What about the phrase "GOD HELPS THOSE WHO HELP THEMSELVES?" There will still be people handicapped through accidents, suffering incurable diseases, and going through all sorts of hardships -plenty of chances to experience imperfection and to learn and display compassion. We don't need to make life tougher by refusing opportunities to avoid needless suffering.

it is not the testing that will be the issue it will be the requirement (not the choice) to terminate the pregnancy. If you choose not to then any and all medical bills will be your soul responsibility, but since our government wants to control health care they will not want to be responsible and will require termination.

Dont think it will happen?? we are heading that way slowly but surely.

I hope that people have taken the time to listen to the NPR story about the new genetic testing that will soon be available to "would-be" parents. Although the childhood diseases are rare, they account for a significant number of childhood deaths. The tests are not for children in utero; they are for people who are considering having children but might carry genes for rare (and devastating) childhood diseases.

I thought this NPR story brought up interesting questions about screening potential breeding stock for potentially lethal puppy diseases. Although it might be good to have more genetic tests to guide our decisions about possible matings, it might also make find appropriate matings much more complicated--and expensive. I don't think the ability to test for more diseases is far away.

No, I do not think the United States of America will ever require someone to terminate a pregnancy. Your post is one of those we should ignore but unfortunately there are enough gullible people out there who believe this junk and so I addressed it.

This is a great thread however and I hope it continues. Thanks to Kate for starting it.

Assuming genetic testing for many more diseases in dogs is just around the corner, Kate is correct in that breeding could become much more expensive. Of course, those stud dogs who test clear for most things will be making a bundle.

This is a concept that seems to be lost on many, but certainly not the majority of, stud dog owners now. Even if a person does not "believe" in the EIC test for example, having a tested clear dog is just good business to take advantage of the segment of the market who have tested carriers and affected bitches. Not that having a stud dog is just a business, but if business is increased, the expense of the test will be more than paid for allowing you to perform a good deed for these bitch owners without it costing you.

One thing that may have to happen is this. At the present time, the companies that are marketing the tests have convinced most of us that you cannot go more than two generations without testing. This is a good marketing ploy for them. Clear by parentage only holds for the first generation. But there is no real reason why a dog with four clear grandparents would need to be tested again. Maybe we will all need to get all of our dogs DNA tested to be sure of parentage, but once you know your line is free of a disease, your money might be better spent on a different gene. Of course, the problem will be finding a stud dog with the clearances you need. But is that really so different from what we do now, balancing breed characteristics, soundness, full dentition, etc. We will just have better information. And it will more clearly differentiate the people who have tested their dogs from backyard breeders who have not.

A bit off the topic, but I am very surprised AKC has not pursued stronger use of DNA profiles. I had predicted that by 2010 (long gone now) they would require a DNA profile to get a full registration on any dog. The parentage of dogs that will never make it into the stud book is not their concern, but the documented identity of any potential breeding dog is essential to maintaining correct records. That will add $35 to the registration expense of any pup with a full registration, but if it will save the cost of genetic testing down the line (as Peggy suggested), then it is a small inconvenience.