Juska wrote:"Or those idiots who think every female dog should be put through at least one estrous cycle and/or bred and have to endure a pregnancy and birth BEFORE they get spayed. If I ever met the person who made up that myth I'd knock their teeth out."
BlueBaby1023 wrote:Also, just so you know, there is a lot of evidence that shows a high correlation between early castration/hysterectomies and increased rates of osteosarcomas in all breeds of dog. It's not a myth.
That would be all fine and well in the discussion we're having, but I never said anything about the benefits of spaying and neutering other than uneducated people not breeding them when they don't need to be bred. I said nothing about cancers or any other health problems, so I don't know where you came up with it to add to your argument.
The reason why I stated that about cancers and other health problems is due to the fact that it is the scientific reasoning why it's recommended to wait to spay a dog. You said that you didn't know why people say you should wait to spay a dog until it's been through an estrous cycle, I was just trying to explain the scientific reason why you should. Because, scientifically speaking, dogs that are spayed/neutered young (ie before their first heat cycle) are more likely to die younger due to increased rates of cancer.
I know most people don't read scientific journals, but that's often where most of these "myths" start. They heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend, who heard it from their breeder, who heard it from their vet. And often times it does get mixed up down the road, but there is truth to waiting until after the first heat cycle. That's why I pointed that out. I know what you were trying to get at, I was just saying it isn't all hearsay, there is some truth to it at it's core.
And I definitely agree it shouldn't be for every owner. Most people are not responsible enough to keep their dogs from becoming pregnant during their first or even second estrous cycle. I'm just saying that for people who are, and are also looking to the best interest of their dogs health, they should wait until the dog full matures and is done with puberty due to the cancer/joint risks.
As far as purebreds go, that's really all we have to study on, unfortunately. The reason being is that a difference in genetic makeup (ie, if we used mutts that naturally have a lower risk of cancer) is a potential bias. If the animals are not closely related in breed, then it could be said any difference in result could be due to genetic factors, not in the actual experimental factor. It's part of the variables that you mention. All studies have some, but since it's replicated across several breeds and even the control groups within those breeds, it's fairly likely that it's more accurate than not.
Ash wrote:Meaghan, I think the above statement by TG is where you and I probably disagree. I do believe it is our right to own these animals. BUT I do believe a person can lose that right if they, for example, abuse or neglect their animals, or fail to properly take care of them. I do believe we should have the right to own whatever animal we choose to make us happy, and be able to have as many as we are truly able to care adequately for. And reasonable legislation is what's key there.
See, that is where we differ.
But isn't a right just that, a right? You can't lose your right to freedom of speech just because you say something that could land you in jail (like liable or slander). You can't lose your right to not have soldiers invade your house and demand shelter (what is that, Amendment 3?) even if you break housing codes or other home related laws. You can't lose your right to not be punished by cruel and unusual means even if you have broken a law by being cruel or doing something considered "unusual punishment" like murdering someone in a crude way.
You can lose your ability to have animals if you break animal related laws. You can lose your ability to keep your children with you if you break child protection laws. You can lose your ability to drive if you break enough driving laws. And many more examples, which is why I think it's categorized as a privileged and not a right. Legally speaking, at least.