PRArcd4 - update - another!

[Gillian Kennedy-Sloane]

Due to problems accessing the AHT website Dr Nigel Holmes has kindly agreed to extend the "promotional code" for the South fo England Irish Setter Club until 31st August. Unfortunately the original code cannot still be used so a new one has had to  be issued and will have to be obtained again from the SEISCwebmaster. The AHT apologises for any inconvenience caused!

[eva ciechonska]

Sue, I have done a little research on autosomal recessive genes and it does state that not all dogs (or humans) with 2 copies of the gene develop the condition.  Perhaps that is also why we are not seeing many more blind dogs.  We must have bred carrier to carrier, particularly when you look at pedigrees and see that dogs identified as carriers can feature many times on both sides. 

I too have heard that dogs who have gone blind with cataracts may also have undiagnosed rcd-4.  I do, however, know of one instance where a dog carrying 2 copies of the gene did go blind with cataracts whos eyes were checked by a specialist and who was clinically diagnosed not to be afflicted with rcd-4.  This dog died at 13 years of age without ever having developed the condition.

[Dee Rance]

I agree with every word Mel but the problem is that not everyone is honest...either by omision or down rite lies...but some of us feel that honest is the best policy...and this will hurt some people by way of dogs in the lines...etc etc....but trying to 'shuve it under the carpet' is not the way to go, I know that I have been banging on about eyes for a long time now...because yes it affected me...(so did bloat) but people just wanted it to go away, well its comeing to a head...and we must all work together to find how we can a) irradicate this, (which is actually the esyest thing to do) and b) the more difficult thing is to keep the gene pool at a decent number...

But yes mell agree with every word...and as you can see my problem is Dyslexia...as you so ritely said we all have our problems....lol

[Dee Rance]

Ah Susan...sorry is it getting to difficult to understand what I am bableling on about....after writing this I will give it a go...but don't follow instructions that well either...lol

Thanks a lot Susan, when its put like that how can anyone take offence...well I won't just don't like being picked up in a nasty way in public that is not polite....

Again thanks will give it a try...

There is only one problem all that....WORD-OUTLOOK-MAIL-EDITOR OPTIONS??????ekkkk

But will try...again thanks....

[eva ciechonska]

Susan I agree with you.  I have already posted about this.  Of course if a dog has been clinically diagnosed with rcd-4 his sire and dam would have to carry at least one copy of the gene and of course we would know who they are but there is no reason to use this information other than to make breeders aware that if they have offspring from either parent then they should test.  It is too easy to play the blame game but in reality it serves no purpose.  It is nobody's fault that we have this condition and we are very lucky we have a DNA test so quickly and we can deal with it.  All the information will shortly be in the public domain anyway because it will be published in the KC Breed Record Supplement and subsequently in the yearbooks.

I would also like to take issue with Dee's comment not everyone is honest.......either by omission or by downright lies.....but some of us feel that honesty is the best policy.....and this will hurt some people...  etc etc. for I feel that this is a very jaundiced view and not borne out by the fact that the AHT have received over a thousand requests for test kits.  We should be proud of this response.  We should be proud of breeders like Deb Boutell, Diana van de Valk and earlier Roy and Jackie Rout who have made their information public.  They have not 'shoved it under the carpet'.  On the contrary their contribution has served to bring awereness of this condition to IS breeders and they have responded in droves. 

[Dee Rance]

Susan I am with you there...and appologise for what seemed like a 'dig' at your kind offer for the 'spell check' not meant at you...and you can tell me where I have spelt something wrong please.....so sorry if I caused offence...

But as far as all the speculations are concerned.. we shouldn't be blameing anyone. or anything...(dogs that is) we now know about it and should start dealing with it, not digging at others...we should be testing all the breeding stock and all the others ( if we don't test 'the others' then we will not know if they are going to maybe go blind, bad English!!!) that would be just for our information...for worned is for armed...

But the future is all that matters at the moment...don't buy puppies from people that haven't tested, know what the status of the parents of future litters are, so no more Carriers or Affected dogs like Rcd1 and CLAD.... its taken maybe years ( we will probably never know) to get to this point..and we can stop it in a very short time.....but test...and don't 'throw stones' at anyones house because yours could be made of glass too...we could all have been carriers...its the very lucky ones that are clear, and it is only by luck that the clear ones exist, because we didn't know about the problem...but those that are carriers and affected can still be used, with one of the lucky clear ones, and this will end...if we didn't know about it then how can anyone be blamed...

Sorry about babbleing....hope this makes sence...

[Val Martin]

GENETICS

Following these guide lines will in about 99% of cases produce the following :-

clear x clear =           clear

clear x carrier =        50% clear       50% carrier

clear x affected =     all carriers

carrier x carrier =     50% carriers   25% affected      25% clear

carrier x affected      50% carrier     50% affected

affected x affected   100% affected

The best way to clear all future litters of this affliction is to mate carrier to clear and test the litter.

Mating clear to clear only would result in narrowing down the gene pool too quickly, causing even more problems!

The reason all these problems are turning up in the first place is because of the linebreeding and inbreeding which is now common place! 

We humans don't breed with our close relatives and for very good reasons!

[Agnieszka Rola]

carrier x carrier =     50% carriers   25% affected      25% clear

carrier x affected  =    50% carrier     50% clear

...I'm not a specialist but can't imagine how potentialy worse combination (carrier x affected) can produce better litter than better combination carrier x carrier....... is it really possible??

[Val Martin]

carrier x affected = 50% carriers x 50% affected

[Jean Lippett]

But, speaking as an owner but not a breeder, if I knew a certain amount about the bloodlines, had no strong preference and had to make a selection between, maybe, 20 litters during my 'looking for a puppy' period I have to be honest and say that even the carrier x clears wouldn't be on my list, despite the puppies I was offered being tested and proved clear. I'd only approach the breeders of clear x clear. Sorry, but that's a large part of the problem, the non-show / non breeding puppies finance the entire system and there will be different strata of value according to the status of the parents.

[Val Martin]

 

If all you are concerned about is breeding 'types' for looks rather than health then your outlook is extremely narrow minded!

Perhaps if linebreeding was not so prevalent, you would not have to be worrying so much about test results!!

[Val Martin]

If you knew me better, you would realise, I have absolutely no problems with dog showing!

I have attended many championship shows in my time.

We all love the breed, thats why we own them in the first place.

 

[eva ciechonska]

Wilko I totally agree with you.  Breed characteristics were cemented on line breeding.  It has always gone on.  That is indeed how you maintain type.  Within that and with the knowledge and science we now have we can preserve it. 

Val, if all you want is a healthy dog then there are plenty of crossbreds you can have.  You want an Irish to look like an Irish, not just a red dog.  You have this breed because you love the look of it and everything about it.  For this you have dedicated breeders to thank.  You sit back and criticise (constantly) while we get on with the (often) heartbreaking task of breeding the Irish Setters you so love.  It is us (not you) who will clear this breed of rcd-4 but in our time and in our way and without compromising it's look or it's character.  We need your support not your unremitting denigration...........and you accuse me of snide comments.....god!!!