How does your breed rate? OFA info-

Red brought up a point that I wanted to talk about. When x-rays are done, some people may opt not to send them in because of obvious abnormalities (although a "general practitioner" type of vet is not really qualified to judge hip and elbow x-rays, especially being as abnormalities vary some by breed). So the results on hips and elbows can be slightly swayed because of that.

You will generally see many more hips listed on the site because OFA has been doing hips since 1966, but elbows only since 1990.

Cardiac, patellas, thyroid, etc. are not valid as far as ratings per breed on the OFA site because those are not rated by OFA. Owners opt to send those in and the majority of people probably wouldn't send them in if they're not passing. I think most (if not all) of the testing other than hips and elbows is done elsewhere and then sent in separately for listing on the site. If you have a dog that passed everything, then you would probably want to list it!

Most people who have their dogs OFA'd are serious breeders, too. There are vast numbers of dogs out there being bred/shown who never have the dogs x-rayed. If I were going to buy another dog, I'd certainly check OFA results (or other valid forms of testing). It's so easy to go on the site and do a search for a dog's name or even part of a name.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska

Great website, thanks

they're way up there for other things, too. amstaffs are 12 and apbts 21 for elbow dysplasia. amstaffs are SEVENTH and apbts 23 for cardiac. amstaffs 21 and apbts 11 for thyroid.

i would be very interested to see how the so called "game bred" lines test. but of course, they don't have any health issues, so they don't test *eyeroll*

Grammy, back when you were breeding Goldens, was it common practice to OFA hips on breeding stock?

I don't find that to be true. There are a hell of a lot of dogs out there who have a lot of heart and therefore never physically show the pain of HD or other problems. These 'working' breeders who don't test are doing just as much of an injustice to the breed as their showdog counterparts. Dogs can work through pain, especially when it is in their genes and they live for it.

I agree that dogs can work through pain, but I've never heard of a dog that works (and by works I mean actually working a livestock establishment on a regular basis, not hobby herding with dog-broke sheep in a paddock) well and gets around well at home while having some underlying, crippling problem like hip dysplasia. Even an intense, stoic Border Collie will show the effects of the condition, whether it is while working or at night after the dog is off the stock.

If a dog can do that job and not show any signs EVER (not just on stock, becuase I can understand a dog working through a considerable amount of pain) that it has a problem, then it is a sufficiently sound working dog IMHO. I would prefer that everyone test their dogs too, but this breed did just dandy for hundreds of years before OFA existed, and I don't think that people who don't OFA their real working dogs are harming the breed at all.

Collies: 2.3% hip dysplastic
0.0% Elbow dysplastic
4.0% idiopathic thyroid
0.0% autoimmune thyroid

No cardiac or pettular stats

RD, I know of two dogs who -- while they may not be stock dogs -- put in their hard weekend's work. Both have genetic health problems that you'd never know about if nobody told you. They're both good weight pull dogs, and at least one of the two runs agility as well. Both are the kind of dogs that will go all day if its something they want. Both had their problems identified through health-testing and are out of the gene pool.

I've said it before and many times. I've even blogged it. Health testing is a tool. It can only help in a breeding program, not hurt. (Unless one is afraid of what they're going to find.)

Greyhounds: 138 for HD with 2.3% being abnormal. Truth is, I have yet to meet a retired racer with HD. It is more common in the AKC-bred Greyhounds, but obviously not even THAT common.

Alapahas: No ranking, only 6 dogs tested and hips were 50/50. The thing is, with Alapahas there is no true standard since they are still considered a breed in development, and from what I've seen there are two very different lines of Alapaha, one looking more like an AB (Athena's type) and one looking more like an EB. So which types were tested? Which breeders, which lines? I definitely wish it told you more.

Akita/pit bull: well Mike's screwed. LOL! the Akita part of him is ranked 67 and the APBT part of him (assuming that that is what makes up his "pit bull" portion) is ranked 26. Lately I've been thinking his back end looks a little stiff, but I may just be imagining things since I'm a hypochondriac. LOL!

That's what I was thinking of when I mentioned working lines If you're attuned to your dogs and watching them on a daily basis, you're going to see things - even intuit things - subtleties that might not even show up on tests.

Showpug ... OFA didn't start until about mid sixties . And yes , after that all good breeders had their studs or bitches checked . Elbows came in much later .

Miniature schnauzers are not ranked in any of them. I'm guessing that that is a good thing.

TIBETAN MASTIFF
Registry Rank Evaluations Percent Abnormal Percent Normal
CARDIAC N/A 1 0.0 100.0
ELBOW 29 211 10.4 89.1
HIPS 69 658 12.9 85.4
THYROID N/A 37 21.6 70.3

Two N/A's. I expected the hips.. tibet's are quite large.. elbow not too bad.

BELGIAN TERVUREN
Registry.................... Rank .Evaluations Percent Abnormal Percent Normal
BAER HEARING TEST.... N/A ...2 .............0.0 ...................100.0
CARDIAC.................... 49 ....145 ..........0.0 ...................100.0
ELBOW....................... 51 ....2081 ........4.1 ...................95.6
HIPS .........................133 ....4695 ........3.6 ...................96.0
PATELLA..................... N/A ...29 ...........0.0 ..................100.0
THYROID...................... 53 ...383 ..........2.1 ...................82.2

That is very interesting. I wonder where the other 48% is on those PRA evaluations. I've seen some OFA numbers be a bit off, but that's quite a discrepancy.

I get my dogs' eyes CERF'd every other year. We have a genetic test for late onset PRA. You can know if your dog is not carrier, a carrier, or affected. My older bitch is a "B" meaning, shes a carrier, not affected. Her daughter from my litter has not yet been tested, but she is either an "A" or "b" because of what her parents are. If you do an "a" to "a" breeding there is almost no need to do the genetic test on the puppies because they are all obligate "A's". So I think some people have slacked off on the CERF'ing, or else these could be the results of our genetic test. As in the 48% are the "B's" carrier's but not affected.