How many have had a dog have an EIC episode and not a heat stroke during this very hot summer. How many have seen any dog anywhere have an episode of EIC--not heat exhaustion. We need to see some of these dogs falling over. Lets be honest and just see how many there are. There must be millions. ???????????????

My bitch had her episode last summer on a very hot day. I was working her pretty hard. I had her tested after the episode and she tested affected as we suspected she would.

This year, I have been very careful so she has been fine.

Like the previous poster, I have one that started getting wobbly and glassy eyed after about 30 minutes of hard charging on our morning walks. I tested her and she came back affected. Now I just limit what she does and slow her down when she gets too intense. She has never collapsed when training one on one (less intensity) but when theres competition or a game of chase to play is when she collapses.

She has a 1/2 sibling in a pet home that also collapses. All of my EIC tests appear to be accurate to date.

In the past i think they might have been brushed off as heat induced but now we know better.

I've had none yet with my affected bitch. She will be 3 soon, but, i don't subject her to harsh activity when it's hot out, I wouldn't do that to any of my dogs. But she can fetch to no end, and nothing yet, thank goodness.

My boy only had one case of going down. Awful to watch with a beloved dog. Now just don't push him at all. He was tested EIC affected. It was not as hot as these days are but hot.

There have to be thousands and thousands of affected labradors out there and until I see them falling over in equal numbers and people post those dogs using there names and can evidence an event I will continue to as some of you say "keep my head in the sand"! I test I just don't live and die by it. There is something else going on here!

I have 2 girls from well bred show lines rated affected (no episodes). They are not related. One girl is 6 1/2 & the other is 7 1/2 and they have NEVER collapsed, even when put to the test.

I told this to the experts who do the EIC test, and they said it is possible that some who are rated affected, may carry a gene to protect them.

I have never personally seen a dog blind from PRA or a dog that has any TVD issues. There are few affected dogs listed on OFA. I think those tests/screenings must also a conspiracy to get our money.....

Anecdotal evidence and personal experience is never going to prove anything to anyone else. The fact is, these issues exist and we have tools to manage our breeding programs around them. We can choose to use them or not. Those of us who choose to use the tools are not "breeding to clearances", we are trying to breed healthy dogs the best way we know how, which is in the best interest of the breed. There are plenty of beautiful clear dogs to choose from so type is at no risk of extinction by maintaining a clear in the breeding pair. If a carrier stud dog is not being used, it is either because the bitch is not clear or because there is another stud dog that has everything the bitch owner wants AND is clear. There are a lot of nice boys out there but the reality is that very few of them will get used regularly - that was a fact long before the EIC test ever became available.

Numbers don't lie, but sometimes you have to waterboard them to get the whole truth

Statistics from University of Minnesota indicate that about 10% of TESTED dogs are affected. It also indicates that between 85% and 95% of those tested affected had a collapse before testing. In other words, many (if not most) of those dogs tested affected were tested "for cause" - they had an episode and were then tested. Several of the people who posted to this thread said precisely that.

Now, consider the number of dogs tested compared to the number of Labradors registered and you will realize it is a very small drop in a huge ocean of dogs. Also roughly calculate the approximate number of individuals who read and post on this forum compared to all Labrador owners and you will find another very small drop. Consequently, expecting the small percentage of posters to represent more than a VERY small percentage of affected dogs is unrealistic.

If you only look here for your evidence, then you have on blinders. Perhaps they will help protect your eyes while your head is in the sand

Like I think that every Lab is tested and all Lab owners read this Forum. I don,t need a lecture but really I so appreciate the fact that you were so happy to add nothing to the debate, in fact you proved my point! Thousands and thousands of Labs not tested, so lets just say if they were we would have that magic 10% affected and a percentage of that 10% having an event, believe this, you, me and every Vet in the Country would have seen it and be screaming from the Hills about it. There is something else going on with the affected that display! Time will tell and when I pull my head out of the sand I will have a smile on my face.

I have been around 15 years - but that is not the point. Just because I have not seen some issues does not mean I have not heard about them or believe they exist. I have also never seen an EIC collapse but know people who have.

My pick puppies that I kept were carriers. They are clear for everything else. There is no reason to breed to a carrier as there are several nice dogs who are clear that have everything else I am looking for (in fact, I picked the current mate for my bitch before I learned his EIC status). I know of no one who breeds solely for clearances - I know more people who breed to the flavor of the month (regardless of clearances) or for color than who breed solely for clearances.

I have two friends who have lost dogs to EIC. Both were performance dogs who had a severe event in a situation where they could not be saved...one was out hunting and they couldn't get the dog to a veterinarian quick enough. The other was swimming and drowned.

Neither knew before the incidents that their dog was affected. In one case, they tested the remaining littermates--2/3 were affected (had been washed out as trial dogs because of "heat stroke") and the others were all carriers.

It is serious, it is worth testing for.

MWK

The one Affected that I bred a few years ago (show lines) had another collapse recently. So far her triggers had been Chuck It w/ the son (who knows now she can't play that very long) and opening day of pheasant hunting in the Dakotas. The good news is she's learning to seek out her owner when she gets wobbly during hunting. He won't take her duck hunting for fear of a water incident.

Recently I asked about her again and rec'd this note back: "She did have another EIC on a hot day about a month ago. My nephew was playing catch in the backyard and Molly kept running back and forth when they threw the ball. I need to pay more attention when she is getting excited."

I may never have known if I didn't ask for updates. Some people are better than others about communication but in this case, the guy is an uncle to one of the vets at my clinic, so it's been an education for all, including my primary vet who has had Labs for years.

What I proved was that if you are using THIS forum as your primary source of council for what is happening in the broader real world, your head is somewhere other than in the sand. Every veterinarian I have spoken to in the last two years (at conferences, shows, events, clinics, offices) has seen EIC in their practice. For years they didn't know what it was, but thanks to education and an OPEN mind, they now understand the symptoms and may even refer their clients for testing if appropriate. The condition is real, the risks are real, the testing is real.

Amen! And may I add, far too many people have to watch their beloved Labs suffer because some folks seem to think that orthopedic clearances don't apply to their breeding programs.

Each person is going to believe what they want, and what works for their breeding program, especially if they own stud dogs and KNOW they are hiding the truth. These breeders, most very seasoned and experienced, claim they do not test for it, bull pucky!!!!! What a shame, and shame on them!

What exactly are they going to treat? If the incident is over w/in 20 minutes or so, most of us couldn't drive to the vet in that amount of time even if it happened right next to the car.

Most vets, from what I've seen/heard, initially write it up as a "seizure" if they are told about the incident.

Can anybody tell me what the difference between EIC episodes and heat stroke???
Here in Iceland I have never heard of or seen any episodes of either heat stroke or EIC collapse.

Excellent post and very good questions Doubtful, the answer to all of them is lack of funding. The EIC research as with CNM was helped greatly by the support of the LRC due to the influence of the Field Community in our Mother Club. In the world of pure bred dogs most of the funding for research is channeled to the various parent clubs for distribution. What they deem as important gets the bucks.

The only info from U of Mn I have seen is 2-5% not 10% Only on this forum and another a 10% figure. Of course there is concern amongst the performance and field people. This is money to them- there is panic and the FUD factor. That's why after years of non testing they test everything & every pup from their litters. And the % from the research don't support the overal population with 200,000 labradors registered every year at 10% thats 20,000 or 5% 10,000 new labs every year and 85% are suppose to collapse. Per one leading repo vet -there is more to this then just the gene. Yes I have seen PRA affected go blind and at least 10 people purchasing puppies or inquiring have had labs that went blind- everyone from a backyard breeder. We use the test but it is only one part of the puzzle. Breed a carrier or an affected to a clear even though the jury is still out. Simple. And most breeders I know test -they just don't advertise...remember stud services are to approved bitches, not just anyone.

Old information from the UofM website:

So what we are saying is- if 10% of all tested are affected- then the original 85% of all affected dogs collapse isn't possible because over a 10 year period that would be 170,000 collapsing dogs- that would seem real obvious considering we are only talking about registered dogs. Must be something else combined with the gene causing the collapse.

Just because YOU haven't seen 170,000 Labs collapse doesn't mean it has not happened I have had two EIC affected dogs. I only SAW one collapse. That doesn't mean the other one didn't. My vet has says he gets several Labs in each week of hunting season that have had episodes that sound like EIC. I wonder how many hunters in our little area don't bother to consult a vet when the same thing happens. I have no doubt that there are LOTS of collapsing Labs or those who would under the right conditions. That I have not personally SEEN them collapse doesn't change my concern for the problem.

It is so great to see so many really nice dogs out there who are EIC clear. More and more people are testing. I think this is fantastic.

It is also great to see people posting on their websites when they have a carrier. Transparency and honesty are among the things which helps us make our breed better and better.

You are absolutely right. There is something else going on that we don't yet understand. Testing "affected" only means you are succeptible to collapse and does not mean a dog will. Testing "clear or carrier" means that it is very highly unlikely the dog will collapse.

I have a dog that is 14 yrs old that is a carrier. So, I would say that this has been around for a long time. If this is the case - wouldn't you think that if we have been breeding w/o knowing - that we would have tons of affected dogs by now. I think that we are throwing alot of money at this test - and it is not complete.

Here is the problem. Lots of people are not doing the test. Then, if a dog collapses, they quickly order the test to see if the dog comes back affected or not.

So it is not as if an entirely random sample is being tested. Add to that, the person who hears a dog in their dog's pedigree is a carrier. That would make the owner more likely to test. They would want to know if their dog is a carrier too. Numbers are never easy.

This disorder was tagged "Exercise Induced Collapse" by the field people long before the researchers discovered how the progression to collapse happened. The field people saw the collapses associated with training or running in the field and assumed (there's a good word) it was related to the exercise. In fact, the researchers discovered that temperature is the triggering element for breakdown of the neurotransmitter.

Air temperature can be a factor, excitement that leads to adrenaline release can be a factor, exercise can be a factor, condition can be a factor. Anything that contributes to the internal temperature reaching the "critical" point for breakdown of the neurotransmitter is a factor. A dog that may never collapse in Iceland might do so in Texas. A dog that might collapse occasionally in Michigan could have a fatal episode in an equitorial climate. It isn't simple.

What is simple is preventing any future Labs from having two copies of the gene that leads to the neurotransmitter breakdown.

An EIC collapse does not last as long as the effects of heat stroke. With an EIC collapse, the dog can recover in as little as 5 or 10 minutes and then look normal. Blood tests for heat stroke and EIC collapse are completely different.

My understanding is that a dog with EIC lacks an enzyme that is necessary for energy to be metabolized at high body temperatures. As soon as the body temp drops, energy is metabolized fine and the dog goes back to normal with no ill effects. BUT, some dogs have died from EIC collapses so I guess there can be problems if the episode is not noticed and dealt with right away.

The one and only collapse I had to deal with, I brought the dog into the shade and had her lie down and relax. I was pretty sure it was not heat stroke as it was only affecting her back legs which I think is typical. I recognized it right away as most likely being EIC. A little while later, we walked home (on lead) as if nothing had ever happened. If it were heat stroke, she never would have recovered so quickly and her blood tests would be different even hours later I think.

Sorry no math play- The phrase is Trust but Verify. I own a calculator There are over 200,000 labradors registered last year. If 10% are affected that is 20,000. 85% are suppose to collapse according to U of MN that is 17,500. So over 10 years that is over 170,000 collapsing dogs. If you haven't seen cleft pallets, blindness from PRA I doubt you are very involved with many breeders. In the last 5 years alone I have seen 8 cleft pallets. And 10 dogs having gone blind or going blind from PRA. I only know of 2 dogs collapsing from "EIC" outside this forum and it was during extreme heat not extreme exertion.Neither were verfied by a vet as EIC it was the owners opinion. And the episodes have not happened again in those dogs. Again we test but I don't believe the gene is the cause or the complete indicator- if you understood statistics the test size is not large enough to draw the conclusion (there is a statiscal equation to determine test size needed for proof) and the figures may be skewed due to the samplings being submitted from dogs that have already collapsed. Over time these stats will change.

Have been breeding for years. In the last two years sent in 9 dogs. 4 CLEAR, 4 CARRIERS and one affected. One to many ! Not same litter but 2 generations of same pedigrees, of course, mixed with different pedigrees of studs. So if you think it is not in your lines I would start testing. I will bet you it is there. Only time will tell ! Top well known stud dogs added to mix. But before EIC testing.

The "math play" is the result of applying data from a specific subset to a broad, unsorted population. The 10% affected figure is from a small population of TESTED dogs. The figures from UofM also clearly state that 85-95% (two different sub populations) were submitted for testing AFTER a collapse. This means the affected percentage was not derived from a random, genetic cross-section sample, but included a preponderance of dogs tested "for cause". So, how can you take this small, specific subset percentage and apply it to the general population of Labradors? The answer is - you can't.

Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't 170,000 affected dogs in this country either. You just can't apply what we DO know from the very small tested population to the general population. As I said at the start, numbers don't lie, but sometimes you have to waterboard them to get the whole truth

Maybe we are not saying something very different my point is even if 10% of all dogs are affected then there is not the direct correlation that is being made to a direct collapse. Its like saying fat people are more prone to heart attacks- it doesn't mean you will. You can't take a sampling after the fact and draw a general conclusion that all who have a smiliar trait will suffer the same fate
I am trying to find the latest link with 200,000 because I was suprised at the jump from 150,000 registrations to 200,000 and as always the difference between #1 and #2 is over 100% to 300% over the years Link for http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2389 2004 146,714

Well apparently you have not been around very long "if" you have not seen a blind Lab from PRA, a Lab affected by TVD, or a puppy with a cleft pallet.
Just a note on the 200,000, I think that is close to correct, all the Labs not registered plus another 46,000 in the UK, how many others in the Scandinavian countries, South America, Mexico, Russia, the far East and the list goes on.........

I have had Labs for about 50 years. I have been VERY fortunate to never have the problems mentioned. I know others who "said" their dogs had those issues, and I do believe they are telling the truth. Unlike a few others on this forum, I don't have to see the problem in my own yard to accept scientific evidence that it exists

That was precisely my point. Even though I have never seen any of these common problems (and a few others like CNM, DM, narcolepsy, etc.) personally in the nearly 5 decades I have been in dogs, I understand these are all disorders that affect the life and health of the dogs, owners and sometimes even the breeders. I screen and make decisions accordingly - because the numbers don't lie.

If you are/were active in the Lab community, specially prior to this internet age, I cannot imagine anyone NOT seeing these conditions as most of all activities were in person either at shows, specialties, puppy parties, or just plain visiting other breeders. With a large circle of friends anyone was/is bound to come into contact with these things.

Statistics,

In the past 50 years, can you tell me how many labs you have owned? Maybe we are imagining you are an active breeder, and that may not be correct. Those of us who like Gregg have had many dogs and have a large circle of breeder friends are having trouble making sense out of this.

In the last 5 years you have seen 10 dogs going blind from PRA??? Does the PRA test not work or do the breeders involved not test for that either???

AND NO, being affected does NOT mean you are "suppose to collapse". Being clear or a just a carrier means you won't. Big difference! As you know, there is more too it than just 1 gene. But again, being clear or a carrier means the dog won't collapse.

What I know for sure is that my bitch collapsed. It was hot and she was working hard. Her episode was clearly like EIC episodes are described by the articles about EIC. I tested her and the results came back affected. I tested another bitch I own from the same bitch line and she came back as a carrier.

How can I do anything but limit the studs I use to EIC clear? I am so glad there are so many clear EIC stud dogs around so I can make a good decision which includes a whole lot more than just EIC. If I had a clear bitch, I would not hesitate to take her to an EIC carrier or affected. The test seems to work and again, there are more and more very high quality EIC clear dogs out there. This is so easy to work around. It seems so much easier to work around it than to fight it.

Having said all that, I can't wait for the researchers to figure out the whole story.

There were 146,714 Labradors registered in 2004, the latest data I could find in a hurry. Since the Labrador is still the number one dog in the AKC, for more than 20 years running, it would be safe to assume the numbers would be close to 200,000 in say, 2010.

http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2389
The top 10 most popular dogs in 2004 are:

Labrador Retriever (146,714)
Golden Retriever (52,560)
German Shepherd Dog (46,054)

You want my "stats"? OK. In the last half century I have bred over 150 litters, kept some from many of those and also purchased dogs from other breeders to build my lines. I have had over 50 champions in various countries, a dozen or so group winners and a couple of BIS winners. My dogs have also done well at specialties with sweeps wins, winners and reserves, BOB or BOS at several and a number of AOMs. Quite a few owned by those who enjoy the activities have performance and hunt test titles as well. I have been around as a breeder and exhibitor longer than many of you have been alive!

Through all of those years I have been very fortunate to NEVER personally see a dog exhibit PRA, TVD, CNM, DM, narcolepsy, cleft palate, bloat, megaesophagus or some of the other unpleasant disorders people talk about on this forum. I have never observed any of these problems in dogs owned by personal friends either. They may have had dogs that were affected, but I either never knew it or didn't have an opportunity to observe the dog after diagnosis. Just because I never SAW these problems doesn't mean that I don't believe they exist and should be addressed by responsible breeders.

Over the years, I have seen craniomandibular osteopathy and RD/OSD in dogs owned by fellow breeders. I suspect none of the younger beeders have seen either one. I have had dogs with hip dysplasia, PPMs, one cataract and a couple of extra eyelashes. One had seizures. We have had a few bad bites and ONE missing tooth. I bought a Lab puppy one time that didn't drop one testicle. However, I HAVE had two dogs with EIC. Based on my personal experience, it is the only DNA test I should need to use, right? Of course not!

Gregg, I appreciate that you see the world based on YOUR experience of it. That is not everyone's experience. Either I have been around and visited only other breeders who also didn't have those problems OR they failed to disclose it. That is one of the real issues in dog breeding. I may have seen dogs that were nearly blind with PRA, BUT if the owner didn't admit to it, I may have just thought the dog was clumsy from age. I can only report reliably what I have seen in my own yard or in the kennels of others who believe in full disclosure. Years ago full disclosure was a very rare bird that seldom sang. Unfortunately, it still is only heard sporadically.

This is why I turn to science, research and numbers. They don't lie or try to hide problems. While they may be occasionally misleading or even hard to interpret, they beat the heck out of denial, deceit and conceit.

I feel like we beat this to death. It is so easy and so simple to breed them all whatever status they are and never have to worry about producing an EIC affected pup. Indeed you have to look at the big picture....

I've stated my personal experience(through someone I know who has an EIC affected that has collapsed) before when this subject comes up so I shall repeat it incase some never saw it. This bitch I know personally is a MH titled bitch. They discovered her EIC status well before she earned that MH title.

I don't care the weather, hot or cold or inbetween, she has never collapsed in the field/swimming. Hunt tests are controlled, as are tests. Put this bitch on a rabbit and she'll collapse for you everytime. AGain, hot or cold, that rabbit zig zagging her and the excitement level of that chase is this bitch's trigger.

I have had labs for 35 years & been showing/breeding for 23 of them. Either I or personal friends have had 3 TVD dogs, 9 dogs with epilepsy, 3 dogs go blind and a host of other problems. Nobody I know has had a dog collapse from EIC.

I think if you go back and review I was answering the poster who had been in Labs 50 years but had never seen a case of PRA, TVD, or even a cleft pallet. There was no mention of EIC.
I know quite a few long time breeders that have never seen EIC. We have seen one.

All of the 9 had seizing relatives. I saw one of them seize and it was not like the video of the EIC dog.

Lab Breeder said "I have been in Labs for 25 years and have never seen a dog collapse from EIC".[/quote]

I have been in Labs 36 years and have never seen a dog collapse from EIC, BUT, 2 of my group of close breeder friends have. At least one of these animals had collapsed before my friends had even heard of EIC. I had heard of it and had made some enquiries, discovered that the test had just been released and was able to point my friends to the research.

The outcome of this is that of 5/5 in our closest group,all test our dogs.

I have only been in Labs for 10 years, know of 3 affected dogs and have seen 1 collapse. It was not a hot day and she was not working hard. She was in her kennel run. She got excited when the house dogs went outside and that is when she collapsed. We brought her to the house, body temp was 103 and 25 minutes later, she was fine. If my husband had not gone outside with the house dogs, the collapse would not have been witnessed. So...how many affected dogs experience an unwitnessed collapse and recover before anyone knows it happened. EIC exists, it's a cheap test to determine status and easy to breed around. I wish there was one for TVD!

As one person said -- I have been in labs longer than most of you have been alive. I have also worked and trained with field trainers in Texas (HOT weather) and the south. I have run my dogs in hunt tests and gone hunting with them in all kinds of weather and conditions. I have run scent hurdles, etc.... I have never seen a dog go down to EIC and have only one friend who knows of one dog who went down from EIC. I have seen dogs have heat strokes - BIG difference.

I was one of the first people to test my dogs for PRA and I have seen many weird things not only in labs but in many other breeds.

I believe in testing for the betterment of our breed and the health of our dogs.

Do I believe in EIC - yes. Do I test for EIC - no. Why - I do not think it is a complete test. Something is missing. I know of too many dogs that have tested "affected" for EIC and have shown no signs no matter how much they are stressed or how hot the weather. Until it is a complete test, I will not plan my breedings around it. I will not sit here fat and happy thinking all is well and then have the floor fall out from under me. If there is a GOOD tool, then by all means use it. But I will not put all my eggs and money in a basket that is only half a basket and cannot hold them. JMVHO

Hi Janis, as one of the recipients of your decision to test for PRA using the first test, I will always be grateful for Chase and his clear/normal rating. I knew that my bitch was at least a carrier of PRA because her mother became blind late in her life.

At the same time, I understand your reluctance to jump on the EIC testing bandwagon. Like you, I think there is something missing in the test. From looking at the research, I think the researchers have identified a gene implicated in EIC but not the only one.

I decided to use the EIC test. The results have limited some of my choices, but they have not as yet prevented me from using a stud dog I wanted to use.

I see the good in the test, but I also support your position. I see both sides of the coin. You had to live with all the results of using the early PRA test. I did as well. Two of my boys were well past their prime before the accurate test would tell me that they were clear/normal. But I also had the benefit of using Chase because you used the early PRA test.

Mistakes can be made on either side of the coin. We can only decide which kind of mistake we prefer and take responsibility for our decisions.

Great message Kate.

The first PRA test gave me an A, B and C. The A was one of my stud dogs and the B was his son which meant my bitch line carried PRA. The C was an import bitch. I was looking at starting all over yet once again.

But when they refined the test and tested my dogs again, they were all As!

Isn't the EIC test dilemma a completely different situation than the initial PRA test? My understanding is that the current EIC test is VERY accurate (there is no perfect test) for determining the presence of the single gene they are testing for. The dilemma is not due to the inaccuracy of the test, but whether or not other genes are involved as well.

JanisG

Great message Kate.

The first PRA test gave me an A, B and C. The A was one of my stud dogs and the B was his son which meant my bitch line carried PRA. The C was an import bitch. I was looking at starting all over yet once again.

But when they refined the test and tested my dogs again, they were all As!

Cost for EIC test = $58 (discounted to $48 with multiple dogs)
Fee charged for stud fee = $1000+

Goofus Breeder thinks EIC is not a complete test, refuses to test even though many do believe it is an accurate test.
Goofus Breeder saves $58 and loses several stud fees.
Goofus Breeder doesn't have to plan her breedings around this test.
Goofus Breeder doesn't care if others want to protect the health of their puppies.
Goofus Breeder would rather lose money on stud fees than pay $58.

Gallant Breeder thinks EIC is not a complete test but because of the low cost has the test done anyway.
Gallant Breeder loses $58 on a test that she feels is missing something but picks up several stud fees.
Gallant Breeder doesn't plan her breedings around this test.
Gallant Breeder allows others who believe in the accuracy of the test to plan their breedings for the health of their puppies.
Gallant Breeder laughs all the way to the bank.

I own a carrier bitch and I will not support someone with a goofus position because there is no harm in doing the test. You don't have to plan your breedings around the test but give us that choice or we will go elsewhere.

Well "no thanks", maybe when you have contributed just a tiny fraction of what Ms Grannemann has to our breed maybe, just maybe someone might give your opinion the slightest relevance, Goofus Breeder indeed!
For someone to make a post such as you have, is the real Goofus!

So, the early PRA test was faulty in what it was testing for. The test itself was actually a problem. I am looking for confirmation that the current EIC test is very accurate for what it is testing for and therefore the test itself is very good for what it is looking for.

I do understand that being affected does not guarantee an EIC collapse. The issue here is that the disease itself is not totally understood. But, we do know that dogs who do not carry that gene, will not collapse due to EIC. Therefore the information the EIC test provides is incomplete at one level, complete at another, but very accurate in what it does test for, unlike the original PRA test.

Please confirm or specifically point out my error.

I'm not a vet, but I am a researcher in the field of molecular biology. You are correct. The original PRA test was a marker test, using a polymorphism (difference in the DNA) that was NOT the actual mutation that was associated with the disease. The EIC test is a test for an actual mutation in the dynamin1 gene. The research tying the condition to this specific mutation has been published, I've read it carefully, and am convinced that the mutation for which they are testing must be present in order for a dog to experience true EIC collapses. The linkage data has an extremely high probablity, and the dynamin1 gene is an excellent candidate to produce such a condition, as the fruit fly version of the gene causes a similar muscular paralysis in friut flies. BTW, Dynamin1is not a neurotransmittor, but a protein that aids in the recycling of neurotransmittors. If such a protein were defective, it might very well cause paralysis in situations in which a synapse was under heavy use, as it might be when a dog is especially active or excited.

I also believe that there are other factors required for a collapse, probably genetic as well as environmental. So the test would not be a reliable way to produce collapsing dogs. But THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT TO DO! We want to avoid producing dogs that might collapse, and the test allows us to do that reliably.

I have known Janis for over 30 years, have enjoyed her hospitality and have tremendous respect for her as a breeder, but I will not be breeding my carrier bitches to her stud dogs unless they are tested and are clear for EIC. I do not understand why she fails to see the value of this test. It need not eliminate any dog from a breeding program. I have carriers and intend to breed them, but not to an untested dog or another carrier. Does it limit my choices?- certainly. But I have produced one dog that collapsed from EIC in a pet home, and that is one too many. I have seen a collapse in a show bred dog and I have had private emails from at least a dozen conformation breeders who have produced collapsing dogs. Just because an affected (E/E) dog never collapses does not mean that his progeny will not. A friend of mine has had that experience from a breeding done before the test was available. The conformation bred stud dog was tested later and was E/E. Her field bred girl was a carrier, as she suspected. Ironically, she had done the breeding to a show bred MH to avoid the EIC gene. Multiple puppies in the litter were affected and were not able to be used for the purposes (hunting and hunt tests) for which they had been purchased because they collapsed. If you stay within your own lines you might luck out for generations, as whatever protective agent is keeping your dogs from collapsing may be present in all of your stock. But if you do any outcrossing, the EIC condition may appear.

I purchased a high energy field (NAFC & AFC parents) American lab from a breeder in Texas 10 years ago. She had a few collapses before she was 2. Her rear gave out first, which at the time we thought was hip dys, so we OFA'd her, it wasn't. One time both her rear & front collapsed & our vet suggested that it was EIC after I showed him the research info. from Canada. After that, we spayed her, so then we restricted all her activity (nothing that will excite her), play ball, frisbee, swim with another dog fetching a bumper, etc. It's really sad, because she is a great dog for retrieving and could of went far.

Thank you Peggy and Greg. The feeling is mutual.

Peggy as always you make very good points. But I still remember talking with Katie Minor and "She gave a figure of 1% of either carrier or clear dogs that collapse in a fashion that cannot be told from EIC." The 1% is not 1% of the total population, it is 1% of those dogs that were tested and came up either "clear or carriers." Is that number acceptable for this type of test?

So why should I trust a test that has "clears and carriers" collapsing and "affected" not collapsing??

I do not want to be one of those people that does a test and then puts blinders on thinking I will never have that problem. Then one of my "clears" has an attack and drowns.

Thanks,

Jan

The problem is that an occasional collapse occurs from some other condition that cannot be distinguished from an EIC attack by the information available to the researchers. Remember that most attacks do not occur in situations where a dog can be accessed by a veterinarian immediately, and furthermore that many vets are not familiar with the condition. So I don't think it is surprising that some dogs that collapse from a heat stroke or some other condition are diagnosed after the fact as having collapsed in a manner that is consistent with EIC. But this accounts for only 1% of the reported cases. 99% are E/E = affected. If I can do a test that cuts my chances of producing such an attack by two orders of magnitude, I'm going to do it!

I do want to point out that the figure of 1% is the same for carriers and clears, which is an important point. It means that carriers have no higher likelihood of collapsing from the other factors than clears do and that carriers therefore are phenotypically normal. The only thing you can do with a clear that you can't do with a carrier is breed them to a carrier or affected. That's the only difference.

OK Peggy I will think more about it. Thank you for your input.

Jan