Collies as experimental animals?

Dear readers,

some of you might already know our German project www.mdr1-defekt.de. On this homepage we show tested dogs and provide informations about this serious mutation within the MDR1 gene.

Further we are looking for news about this defect in the mdr1 and today we were shocked about finding this information:

http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/sep07/070915a.asp

So as this text is quite difficult to understand (and I prefer to thinking it's not true what I understand ...) we have a question:

Is it already usual to breed mutant/mutant collies to test avermectines and is our breed already used as experimental animals ? Or does this information say that these informations are plans for the future to find the right dosage?

Can someone please explain this information for me in "easy words" ?

Best regards from Germany,
Kris

As for our project - we already show more than 600 dogs from all over the world! And every owner worldwide is invited to send us pictures and results.

Unfortunately, I cannot read your page.

It does appear as though Collies are being breed with that specific genetic mutation for the sake of testing

Breeding fpr the sake of testing - that would be ... I just can´t find the right words!

But if so - does somebody know more?

And as for our side - excuse me, please. Here comes our english version: http://www.mdr1-defekt.de/index.php?lang=EN

Kind regards,
Kris

I am not sure how they would do research on this issue, without having a control group?

Would pulling shelter Collies/mixes/dogs positive for this gene and using them be more acceptable to you? Is it the breeding you have a problem with...or the experiment itself?

Just want to be sure so I can know how to respond.

Well, it is research that will help humans, and other dogs. I'd personally prefer they got shelter dogs, instead of bringing more defective animals into the world. And I certainly hope their experiments are as humane as possible, and that the animals are adopted (if that's at all practical) when the research is done. But as much as I feel sorry for the dogs, there is research that can save human and animal lives that can only be done on animal subjects. That's unfortunatle, but true. I guess it depends on where your values lie. I'd rather lose some animals now to save people and animals later. However, the experimenters should at all times remember that the animals are being sacrificed for the greater good . . . they must be treated with the highest level of respect and care.

research is only as good as the controls. The issue with shelter dogs is that heritability cannot be known. That would seem an important aspect for the experiements...that they be able to study various things passing along lines, or not...esp if they want to mess with altering markers or removing them.

Granted. It depends on whether they are studying heritability or effects.

i agree, hounded. if you want a cure for this issue, or a solution, then you must expect the research to occur on dogs affected with the gene. just another reason we need animals in research a computers 'dna' does not really give anyone any solution to this and most other health issues for dogs and people. i find nothing offensive about a research facility who has a group of dogs or other animals they are breeding and using for information regarding a disease to find the mode of inheritance breeding would be necessary and id rather have dogs raised in a research facility than those that were used to being pets, found in a shelter, and put in a research facility. dogs are happy wtih what they know they dont think 'i wish i was a house dog' if they dont know what a house dog is we have to remember always these are dogs not humans and they do not think like humans no matter how much we like to think they do.




sheepjoke

looked like they were studying the amount of something that would cause ex reaction? In that case similar or identical sizes, weight, body condition, etc would only be helpful I'd imagine.

My breed is one of the ones most used in research. I do not have a problem with properly conducted and supervised animal research, and plan on taking advantage of the results of said animal research, myself should I become ill, ditto my hounds.

I´m really shocked about your answers.

Do you really accept animal testing so easily? Are shelter dogs of no worth?
Do you really think that this tests are to help dogs affected by the defect?
How many dogs you want to be poisened to find out which drugs are safe?
Have you informed you about the defect at all?

Well, over here in Germany especially "dog people" think otherwise about it. There are several organisations against animal testing and they inform about alternatives (like in vitro...).
Poor country if that is not so there!

As for the defect - of which my dog is affected - I had to learn, that nearly every drug can cause unknown and/or unwelcome side effects. What do you think - how many tests do you need to know for sure for ALL drugs which will be safe or which dosage will be safe?
I loosed one Collie due to a wrong drug - and this I wouldn´t wish even my biggest enemy!
So be sure that I at least know very well about what I speak. I now the risk for my dog.
But I never would set my hope in animal testing!

The only way to help dogs is to breed it out! Here in Germany some breeders already started this.
But what about proud and big USA? Nothing?

And as for humans - some people here had to learn that an animal test wouldn´t say much about effects of a drug for human beings.

yes i accept it easy and if you know what has been accomplished by it, you would to.

shelter animals are not always a good candidate for testing and why do you think that is better than dogs bred specifically for the purpose of testing i dont get that. research needs very specific parameters to be able to find the answers they need. shelter dogs usually wont fill these parameters nor do they provide consisency in genetics needed for proper reliable testing.



if they figure out how to fix cure or otherwise get around the defect with out PET dogs suffering then they can poison as many dogs as it takes to get there so that MY PETS YOUR PETS OUR PETS do not suffer those consequences. sounds harsh but thats how i feel.




almost all of our pets and id ventur to say almost all of our families have been saved or helped by animal testing. it is a necessary evil that cannot be done with computers or simulators or past results. thats reality. animal rights want you to believe that is not true but it is.



its not always as easy as 'just breed it out' as you can breed yourself into a corner when/if another more serious defect comes along and it will. it sounds good in theory but you cannot look at breeding animals in such a black and white light as there are genetic defects hidden that may pop up and ruin a breed entirely if it is limited in teh first place i believe this almost happened to basenjis.

we are america and i thank my lucky stars that we do animal testing for the benefit of humans and animals.





sheepjoke