If we don't know the mode of inheritance, it is wise to breed to a non-tested parent?
In reality, how much more likely are we to pass on the disease breeding an Affected parent vs. one that has a clear Echo?
I imagine it's similar to HD. We can only do our best by breeding dogs that do not have he problem. Yet do we have statistics that show that if we bred a dog with TVD (or even if you have HD stats), we are that much more likely to see it in offspring.
And why are we not all choosing to do the testing just like we all do hips and elbows? Some folks seem to be exempt. Breeding a echo cleared girl to an untested boy doesn't guarantee anything. Does it guarantee any more than just breeding 2 untested parents? Or a ausculation only cleared bitch to an untested boy. I don't think I would trust any pedigree these days as TVD seems to randomly pop up all over the place.
Does it guarantee any more than just breeding 2 untested parents? Or a ausculation only cleared bitch to an untested boy. I don't think I would trust any pedigree these days as TVD seems to randomly pop up all over the place.
Just wondering...
Well, using echo cleared parents guarantees you can sleep at night knowing you did SOMETHING to attempt to reduce the production of puppies with TVD.
Do you really want to breed a dog not knowing whether it has heart defects? For my purposes untested is as good as affected. Just like with hips, elbows, and eyes.
I think TVD is far from random in pedigrees. However, access to TVD pedigree information is very random! My TVD dog, I later found out, is from a long line of TVD producers on one side of her pedigree. You can bet I avoid those dogs now.
Edit: Don't really know the purpose of your post. I know of no such statistics, the researchers probably have data like that for their study, maybe it will be made public someday.
You might be surprised to learn that some folks say they don't test, but in reality did test and don't like the results. They think they can fool us by saying they don't test because they haven't seen it in their lines before and, therefore, don't need to test. They figure we'll never learn the truth, I guess...
Sorry, but I'm not willing to take that risk. Besides, I haven't found a dog yet that hasn't been tested that is so drop-dead gorgeous that I feel compelled to breed to him.
I test my dogs, and I breed to beautiful dogs that have been tested so I can sleep at night.
JMHO
again
If we don't know the mode of inheritance, it is wise to breed to a non-tested parent?
In reality, how much more likely are we to pass on the disease breeding an Affected parent vs. one that has a clear Echo?
I imagine it's similar to HD. We can only do our best by breeding dogs that do not have he problem. Yet do we have statistics that show that if we bred a dog with TVD (or even if you have HD stats), we are that much more likely to see it in offspring.
And why are we not all choosing to do the testing just like we all do hips and elbows? Some folks seem to be exempt. Breeding a echo cleared girl to an untested boy doesn't guarantee anything. Does it guarantee any more than just breeding 2 untested parents? Or a ausculation only cleared bitch to an untested boy. I don't think I would trust any pedigree these days as TVD seems to randomly pop up all over the place.
