Re: [pyrnet] Pyr eyes

["Linda Weisser" <lmweisser@olywa.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <JGentzel@aol.com>

Give me the name of a dog who comes from a show breeding kennel and I will
bet you I can find a Dwarf carrier back there within 8 or 10 generations
you
mention. >>

Yes, I suppose that I could give you those names.  However, you need to
specify some parameters for the definition "show breeding kennel".  And
while in a couple of cases there is a dwarf carrier way back, in these the
test breeding has proven the line to be dwarf free.  I have a personal
friend who finishes dogs on a regular basis but does not special anything
so has no group recognition and her lines are free of any known dwarf
carriers as far as the eye can see.  She knows the problem, she doesn't
want the problem and often rejects certain stud dogs due to their dwarf
risk.  I know someone else who altered and placed a 3 yr old male and
female because their sister has probably produced a dwarf.  There really
are people out there who want this problem so little that they have made
some reasonable "sacrifices" to be rid of it.

<<Dwarfish, is much more serious as it
has infested the whole gene pool essentially, >>

No, it has NOT.  And it exhausts me sometimes to hear this over and over.
There surely are lines that are not infested.  And, even if you don't
accept them as important, there are many lines of working dogs that
probably have zero risk.  I think that dwarfism is a very little problem in
terms of pain and damage to the dog and/or the breeder or owner compared to
the very real horrors of HD or PL or (should we ever be this unfortunate)
elbow dysplasia.  To say nothing of SAS, other heart defects and blindness
causing eye problems.  Or epilepsy.  And on and on.  I'd rather have dwarfs
any day of the year than most of these others.

Linda


 What I am saying is if you really believe the 50% always
probability, this is of such a high probability we should always inform our
puppy buyers.  If we really believe this, it is only fair and honest that
we
do this.  This is one of those statistical areas that are misleading to the
lay person or the person with just a little knowledge.  While it might be
purely true making assumptions, probability wise it is wrong.  More
importantly it places wrong conceptual ideas in folks minds i.e. those
outside the world of statistics who would not understand the strict
adherence
to their assumptions.

As far as the decrease of incidence in Malamutes using the recommended
breeding assessment, I was under the impression that they had much success
using the what is essentially a mathematical probability formula in
calculating the breeding potentials.  Much the same as Darrell quoted from
some experts on other conditions.  These things are out there and being
used
by many.  I have Padgetts book and I will take a look at it.  I will also
go
the Malamute resources and refresh myself on what I thought I had read
previously.

Joe