Health Testing Pets

^^ there's a BC breeder I know who, when her litters turn 2, have a 'kennel day' where she can see how her puppies turned out, and they get together with her vet who does offer a discount. But I think this works best for her, since she only sells puppies close by.

THIS.

If a dog is not going to be worked/shown/bred, then the benefit of the health testing is for the breeder, and the breeder should be the one paying for it. If they want to tack on the fees for their puppies, that's fine in my book (it's a business, charge whatever the heck you want--the market will settle on a fair value).

Dunno though...once someone buys a puppy, the law has proven that it's difficult for the breeder to enforce any kind of contract. I'll be very surprised if you could actually require the owner to complete the exams.

It depends. I wouldn't ask for a full battery.. unless it was warrented.

But lets put it this way. If say a breeder is already loosing hundreds if not a thousand or more on a litter (don't ask ) Why is ok for them to be expected to loose more.. just because its good to know. Ultimately isn't it YOU the puppy buyer that wants to know? Isn't that why you go to a good breeder in the first place.

I am fine with the idea that breeders don't make money lol.. I am a bit shocked that they should be expected to loose even more when you (as puppy buyers) are the direct beneficiaries.

I was thinking this too... I doubt a breeder would be able to do anything to force an owner to test their dogs... and people may mean well when they sign the contract and have all intentions of doing it and then other things come up and they cant.

The only way to even attempt to get full compliance would be (like i think Dekka said) to add the price into the purchase price and then refund it after health testing is complete.

There are some things I would never do though... for example in Yorkies, the big health issue is liver problems (shunts and MVD)... the only way to get an accurate diagnosis is with a liver biopsy... now Chloe is having one done when she is spayed because we suspect MVD, however it is not a minor procedure, my vet is very concerned because he said liver biopsies tend to bleed a lot... if the breeder said "oh get Armani checked just for my own information" I would refuse because I wouldnt want to take the risk when he has no symptoms.

I also would not put either of them under for xrays because yorkies have increased sensitivity to anesthesia and I want to use it as little as possible, basically only when there is no other option.

Dekka, I hope you weren't thinking I was saying the breeder should loose more money.

I would assume that in the purchase price of a puppy the cost of the health tests for the parents are already factored in. Since this is STRICTLY a pet, I wouldn't need any health tests done on my dog for myself.

However, for the sake of the breeder knowing their lines and being able to better them, I would be willing to spend an additional amount(prob up to about $300) on health testing. So if I spend that $300 up front and get it back later or I spend it later(which I would prefer) that's how much I'm willing to spend on health testing.

If a breeder was asking for an additional $600 or so for health testing... then I prob wouldn't buy from that breeder.

and PM, I know armani is neutered.... so what if the Breeder asked you to wait until he was maybe 1 year old to neuter and do x-rays at the same time. This way she can at least get prelims on him & he only went under once... would you say yes or no to that?

It's not like the puppy buyer is the only one benefiting though, and I think it can be argued that the breeder is benefiting more than the puppy buyer. The puppy buyer generally ultimately concerned with their own dog. They may or may not ever buy from that breeder again or even continue to have that breed later in life.

However, the breeder is benefiting HUGELY by being able to put those results in context with results from other dogs from their lines and those could ultimately help determine the trajectory of their breeding program.

Now, if the pet owner does it on their own, then that's all on them as far as I'm concerned unless the breeder wants to help with the cost. However, if the breeder is going to require it and benefit from the info as well, I just think don't think it's right for it to all be on the puppy owner.

I guess someone could lie to the breeder and agree to do the tests, and then when the time comes to step up they step down. But that just sickens me, when they could just as easily go to someone where they can actually keep their end of the bargain. Granted, life is impossible to predict and who knows what's going to happen in 2 years... but I also don't know one breeder who wouldn't work with their buyers, but if it's just because they change their mind (or knew all along they weren't sure if they wanted to go through with it) then maybe people need to stop complaining about breeders making it difficult to purchase one of their puppies. . . because that's a great way to ruin a breeder's trust of future prospective owners. (and wasn't speaking to anyone in particular)

^^ Hopefully that made sense, been a long day so far, lol

From my experience those who choose to go to a (responsible) breeder do so because they want peace of mind they are getting a HEALTHY, well raised puppy. Well when you the buyer could help the breeder continue to strive to breed healthy, sound dogs. . . you decide it's a bit too much (again, not speaking to anyone in particular). Seems a little backwards, to me.

Here I strongly disagree. Why go with a good breeder if you don't care about purchasing a pup from healthy tested lines? Why not go with a byb cheaper dog then? If you do care to have as healthy a puppy as possible then step up and take action lol! Why is all the onus on the breeder to loose money, etc? Don't you ultimately benefit as the puppy buyer?

As a breeder, yes I have my rep, yes I care about my dogs. BUT if I want to sell pups to the sort of people I want too.. I need to prove them. Ok so I title my dogs, health test my dogs. Why NOT have the puppy buyers pay for a CERF test? Its good for them to know too, even if its just a pet.

Anyway there is no way you would ever know if breeder X was tacking on an extra 200 for the health testing or only a 100 and 'splitting' it with the owner.

Obviously if I am going with say, a lab breeder that is health testing and paying $500 or $600+ more than a BYB for the fact that they are tested, then I care about testing. Because I think it's a little much to expected to pay for hundreds of dollars in testing on an otherwise healthy dog whose parents have had a full battery of tests who is only going to be doing the activities of a pet doesn't mean that I don't. What it means is that since the breeder will also be DIRECTLY benefiting from the testing, they should pay for some of it, work with vets for a discount, if they are going to require it.

I would say yes... because then he is still only under once and its not invasive... thats really the only thing that would worry me. I wouldnt even mind footing the cost (assuming its within reason)... I would just worry about additional risks to my "pet" dog with such a small benefit to me (and yes I realized after I typed that out that it sounds really selfish, but I just worry about my babies too much )

Some vets WILL do OFA x-rays without putting a dog under. Mine did not, but I do know of one in the general area that will... it's just like a three hour drive to him. So if I was super incredibly concerned about that, it was possible to get a vet to do it without putting him under.

How does the breeder DIRECTLY benefit separately from the puppy buyer?

So breeder ads 150 dollars to puppy price and does them all.. or has cheaper upfront puppies and gets in contact with buyers and still gets everyone a discount. Dont' see the difference really.

Just to chime in ... if you say DM to a Collie or Sheltie breeder, it's dermatomyositis that they are thinking about. Sometimes when a vet says 'DM', they mean demodectic mange. Too many diseases share the same initials!

/end hijack

I guess I'm not sure how it benefits a "mainstream" dog owner? Unless I'm trying to do something strenuous with my dog, how does knowing if the dog has poor eyes or hips at 2 years old help me? Most peoples' dogs are just going to run around the backyard and go on walks through the park, no matter what their health level.

Side note, can you get mutts health tested? Or is this only for purebred dogs?

You can get a mixed breed dog tested, yup.

If Happy were my dog I would have taken him to get OFA x-rays on his hips years ago, and certainly NOT for his "breeder" since he's from a puppymill... but because I would really like to know exactly how bad his hips are. It's about knowing the internal health of a dog so I could better plan for the future and manage better for him. His hips may not be as bad as they appear to be, I can't see anything about the joints just from watching him walk around. I'd also be curious to know if one side is worse than the other, because he actually wrenched his leg really good as a puppy and broke it and that may have more to do with it than hip displaysia...


Some people may not care, but others certainly would like to know about the condition of their dog's joints. Maybe not right at two but that's a really good age to start thinking about it since a majority of dogs are done growing by then (or way beyond done growing!)

It definitely helps the breeder more than the owner.

The owner gains what exactly for most tests? Once you buy the dog, my thought is that its now your gamble. I guess you could try to enforce the health guarantee, but at 2, you're now rather attached to the dog. I don't really see the benefit unless you plan on going back to that breeder.

The breeder however, gains data on their line. They can also now advertise that they had all the puppies test clear, and raise the price even if they don't pay a cent into the health testing. So, basically, its the same thing as the breeder showing, it proves their dog, so either take a loss on it, or charge more.

Hopefully they could find a bulk discount with their vet, since they're already spending enough there.

A good breeder should refund and let you keep the dog if somethign shows up. And forewarned is forearmed. Knowing your dog has an issue allows you to deal with it, potentially treat it before it becomes a problem.