# Artificial insemination and healthy puppies in the long run?



## kath00 (Dec 3, 2013)

Hi there,

I have been reading up on AI and I am not seeing a lot of info on the health of the puppies later on in life. I see lots on HOW to do it and pregnancy rates but almost nothing on whether the offspring turn out ok or not as they grow and mature. 

Does anyone have any insight into this? Thank you!


----------



## 1stGold13 (Dec 1, 2013)

Just an opinion, I would think there would be zero impact on later health and longevity. I'd guess the value comes from pregnancy rates, and avoidance of injury and cross infection. An interesting topic and I hope people with more direct experience will chime in.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

There are tons of studies on humans that show no impact on health/longevity in the long run. AI allows one to do a breeding when distance would prevent it. And some stud dogs simply love the hand and don't know how to breed anymore.. wierd, I know.. but I know a couple of dogs with this issue! 
I can't imagine how offspring might even come to be affected from being the product of AI- the semen is collected and put in the bitch- inferior or damaged sperm aren't fast enough or able to get to the eggs, so they aren't the ones who fertilize the eggs. Semen collected any way, even the natural way, would have primary abnormalities to some extent, but those sperm don't get a chance to be THE ONE.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

I personally stay away from puppies that result from AI or a dog that was previously impregnated via AI. I believe that the AI decreases fertility in the dam and therefore in the long run may cause problems with her eggs. IMHO I expect normal dogs to breed and be willing to breed naturally. 
As far as the stud? Is there a reason why he wasn't able to breed? Was he not healthy enough? Rear legs problems - IMHO if a dog is too old to mount is too old to breed? Fear or lack of confidence?


----------



## LJack (Aug 10, 2012)

AI is quite common not only in dogs, but animal husbandry (horses, beef, etc) and humans as well. It does allow for a breeder to use the boy that is the best fit for their girl/breeding program as opposed to what is easy or convenient. It also allows for the use of seaman after a dog passes which can be a great thing. 
In general, live matings are more likely to be successful (which is why you read so much about how to get the best chance of "taking") but if you cannot travel to the best boy, AI is a good alternative. 
Take Arizona for an example. There are really only very short opportunities the fly a girl to the stud. In winter almost everywhere else is too cold in the summer they won't let dogs fly in to AZ. So, unless your girl times it just right, you have to drive or ship/AI. I don't have a problem driving say 10-20 hours round trip but more than that becomes too much. What if the dog with the best temperament, great clearance history, and has the best combination of traits to complement my girl is in NY? Do I settle for close, easy, convenient, and not the best match? 
It is up to the breeder to choose how to breed and up to you whether to purchase the puppy.

I have never heard of AI having an impact health-wise on the pups or mother.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI. 
Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding. 
IMHO convenience is not a good enough excuse. Breed enthusiasts send their dogs away to training I see no reason for a breed enthusiast to send his stud for a couple of weeks away for breeding.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI.


Tell me where the research is that shows "AI decreases fertility and therefore quality of eggs in the female"? And how is it more "dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding" than it would be for a dog that has previously been bred? 




Claudia M said:


> IMHO convenience is not a good enough excuse. Breed enthusiasts send their dogs away to training I see no reason for a breed enthusiast to send his stud for a couple of weeks away for breeding.


Many AI's are done due the stud no longer being alive. The other is due more to the DANGER of shipping dogs than the inconvenience. And also it is normally the female that travels to the stud.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding.


And how does collection decrease the libido? Almost every time a dog is collected a bitch in season is present as a "teaser" to get the libido going and help make the procedure as "natural' as possible.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

double post


----------



## tikiandme (May 16, 2010)

AI also reduces the chances of a valuable stud dog contracting a sexually transmitted disease that may render him sterile.


----------



## goldlover68 (Jun 17, 2013)

Not an expert, but as most say, it should not have any impact over the long-term other than is allows the breeder access to a much wider pool of candidates. That, in theory, would improve the chances of getting a gene pool that is much better, as you are looking at sperm from dogs that are no longer living or no longer able to breed.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI.
> Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding.
> IMHO convenience is not a good enough excuse. Breed enthusiasts send their dogs away to training I see no reason for a breed enthusiast to send his stud for a couple of weeks away for breeding.


This is not science. It may be what you believe, but from everything I've read, there is zero evidence to suggest any truth to it. And it's the kind of knowledge-free post that will only confuse the OP, not shed any light. Goodness. I know you have some strong beliefs about things, but unless you can point to the science behind your claims, I'm going to suggest that this is the product of your imagination, not science.


----------



## kath00 (Dec 3, 2013)

Thank you for the responses so far. I realize the potential problems for the dogs going through it (ie infection risk) but I am really most concerned about the health, temperament and longevity of the puppies to be honest, since as the future puppy owner, he is going to be my biggest responsibility. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tahnee GR (Aug 26, 2006)

I don't know why there would be any effect on the puppies. I have never seen an issue, and I have been doing AI's for years, as have my friends.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Claudia M said:


> AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI.
> Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding.
> IMHO convenience is not a good enough excuse. Breed enthusiasts send their dogs away to training I see no reason for a breed enthusiast to send his stud for a couple of weeks away for breeding.


Claudia, quite frankly you have no idea what you're talking about. This is crazy. Opinions are great but not when they state "facts" that *aren't true*.

AI has NO negative (or positive) affect on the health or longevity of the resulting puppies. AI is NOT quite dangerous for the female dog -- in fact some may argue that it is safer for all involved. Collection does NOT affect a male's libido.


----------



## lestat1978 (Oct 9, 2012)

I refer to Maiya as my little pupsicle. She is the result of 10 yr. old frozen sperm. There were 10 healthy pups in the litter. She's only 5 months old, so. . .


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

I haven't done AI (yet) but I've had many dogs that were the product of it. My last two lived to 12 and 14, respectively so...


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

I would not agree AI has any negative impact on the stud, dam or puppies.

My Faelan is from an AI breeding (his sire was already dead) that resulted in 11 puppies and at 6 years old he and his litter mates are all very healthy.

My Towhee was bred via AI with Titan1's Titan this past season and she had a healthy litter of 8 puppies - the same litter size as her prior live cover breeding. All of her puppies seem healthy, smart and active at 4 months old. We (Titan1 and myself) are watching the litter to see how they mature some with hopes of repeating.

AIs also protect both stud and dam from sexual infections/diseases and the stress of traveling for breeding purposes


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I had no hesitation in getting my AI pup.


----------



## Heather C. (Sep 25, 2013)

I am not veterinarian, but I was in the human reproductive field for a little bit, I can't see a medical reason why AI would result in inferior puppies. There is no evidence it results in human babies with health problems, and its used in humans too! There is some evidence that human babies conceived via in vitro procedures where the sperm collected and is injected directly into the egg have a higher risk of certain rare genetic defects, but that is different that AI because with in vitro you are actually manipulating the egg and fertilizing outside of the body. AI is just using a frozen sperm popsicle. And the female reproductive organs (dog or human) shouldn't be able to tell the difference between frozen thawed sperm and fresh sperm, so I can't see how it would at all affect future fertility...

Heather


----------



## Leslie B (Mar 17, 2011)

Claudia M said:


> AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI.
> Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding.
> IMHO convenience is not a good enough excuse. Breed enthusiasts send their dogs away to training I see no reason for a breed enthusiast to send his stud for a couple of weeks away for breeding.


 
I have never heard of a stud being sent to do a breeding. It is always the girl that travels to the boy.

Do you have any study or evidence that demonstrates how AI decreases the quality of the eggs in the female? Libido?

I have discussed AI with my vet (a lot) and he has never mentioned decreased egg quality, decreased libido, or decreased fertility.


----------



## kath00 (Dec 3, 2013)

Thank you for the feedback. This is all very reassuring.  We are in line to get one of the pups from an AI and these experiences and knowledgable posts are making me glad that we didn't shy away from this litter.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

Claudia M said:


> AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI.
> Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding.
> IMHO convenience is not a good enough excuse. Breed enthusiasts send their dogs away to training I see no reason for a breed enthusiast to send his stud for a couple of weeks away for breeding.


How does AI decrease fertility?
The eggs have already been released from the ovaries when you do the AI.

I do agree that future naturals are a problem when the boys get spoiled to the hand. There's no evidence it affects the number of sperm in the ejaculate to collect most dogs, but getting them to do naturals after 5-6 collections I hear causes problems sometimes. But that has nothing to do with his libido, just his willingness to work for the reward!


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

That is just very fine and dandy and I stand by my opinion. I admit I only know of two AI breeding situations turning bad for both the puppies and the mom. One from this forum. The other a friend of a friend. If it wasn't for those situations and a fried who was looking into it for her GS dog (even her vet did not recommend it as a first breeding) I would have never looked into it further. 
I probably only spoke with a handful of vets who would not recommend it for the first time breeding for the reasons stated above. A prudent vet would not recommend it unless the dog is already dead and honestly to me that is not an attractive breeding simply due tot he fact that more and more problems have been detected in the breed and the tests were not available for those dogs at the time they were still alive. And even at that I received reactions of why would someone even consider AI breeding as the first breeding and put the life of the pups and mother in danger!
As far as the stud going to the female instead of the other way around - that is simply to avoid the inconvenience and the transportation back of a pregnant dam. Just because it is not "practice" it does not mean that it cannot be done IF the breeding is just so spectacular that it cannot be passed on. Sorry if I went astray from the breeding Bible with that idea. The only reason the female always travels to the boy is because the boy will feel more comfortable on his own territory and therefore you eliminate the possibility of the male dog not mounting the female because of fear of new territories or even worse the female dog. A confident enough stud would though. 
Leslie - I have discussed many things with my vet as well and certain things have never been brought up which later I wished they were. Just because they are not brought up it does not mean that they do not happen.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> That is just very fine and dandy and I stand by my opinion. I admit I only know of two AI breeding situations turning bad for both the puppies and the mom. One from this forum. The other a friend of a friend. If it wasn't for those situations and a fried who was looking into it for her GS dog (even her vet did not recommend it as a first breeding) I would have never looked into it further.
> I probably only spoke with a handful of vets who would not recommend it for the first time breeding for the reasons stated above. A prudent vet would not recommend it unless the dog is already dead and honestly to me that is not an attractive breeding simply due tot he fact that more and more problems have been detected in the breed and the tests were not available for those dogs at the time they were still alive. And even at that I received reactions of why would someone even consider AI breeding as the first breeding and put the life of the pups and mother in danger!


Again this is MY opinion is this is rubbish and whatever vets are making statements as such have NO idea of what they are talking about. A vet belonging to the Society for Theriogenology would VEHEMENTLY disagree with those vets. 
As to not doing an AI on the first breeding for a bitch has a lot more to do with Robin (Prism Goldens) stated than any imagined dangers. Unless the AI is being done by someone who has no idea or business doing such a procedure. Vet or no vet.
There is NO good reason to scare off people from a breeding due to misinformation about the facts.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

deleted...piling on...


----------



## CharlieBear80 (Oct 13, 2013)

I got my pup from an AI breeding, didn't think twice about it. I'd be more worried about getting a dog from a breeder that is just using whatever stud happens to be in close proximity.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

LibertyME - I trained my puppy to do her nails while licking peanut-butter. With enough "incentive" you can get them to do whatever you want them to do. It does not mean that they are comfortable doing it. 

And no, I am not scaring anyone from doing it. As far as I am concerned the jury on the science behind it is still out and I know where I stand as far as that. I do wonder if the Morrison Foundation does differentiate in their study between AI dogs and natural bred dogs. 
The human contraceptives have been used for ever and ever and it is finally coming out the dangers of that to both of mother and child.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

CharlieBear80 said:


> I got my pup from an AI breeding, didn't think twice about it. I'd be more worried about getting a dog from a breeder that is just using whatever stud happens to be in close proximity.


Can you explain what worries would you have with a stud lets say 4 hours away as opposed to shipped frozen semen? 

I can see it if there is an assumption that the two stud dogs do not have the same health clearances.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> And no, I am not scaring anyone from doing it. As far as I am concerned *the jury on the science behind it is still out* and I know where I stand as far as that. I do wonder if the Morrison Foundation does differentiate in their study between AI dogs and natural bred dogs.
> The human contraceptives have been used for ever and ever and it is finally coming out the dangers of that to both of mother and child.


Not to put too fine a point on it, but the science is _not_ "out." There is no science to support what you are saying, or if there is neither I nor anyone else here has ever heard of it, and you haven't provided it. Raising an issue doesn't make it legitimate, just because you raised it. Saying the science is "out" doesn't make it so.


----------



## Kmullen (Feb 17, 2010)

Claudia M said:


> That is just very fine and dandy and I stand by my opinion. I admit I only know of two AI breeding situations turning bad for both the puppies and the mom. One from this forum. The other a friend of a friend. If it wasn't for those situations and a fried who was looking into it for her GS dog (even her vet did not recommend it as a first breeding) I would have never looked into it further.
> I probably only spoke with a handful of vets who would not recommend it for the first time breeding for the reasons stated above. A prudent vet would not recommend it unless the dog is already dead and honestly to me that is not an attractive breeding simply due tot he fact that more and more problems have been detected in the breed and the tests were not available for those dogs at the time they were still alive. And even at that I received reactions of why would someone even consider AI breeding as the first breeding and put the life of the pups and mother in danger!
> As far as the stud going to the female instead of the other way around - that is simply to avoid the inconvenience and the transportation back of a pregnant dam. Just because it is not "practice" it does not mean that it cannot be done IF the breeding is just so spectacular that it cannot be passed on. Sorry if I went astray from the breeding Bible with that idea. The only reason the female always travels to the boy is because the boy will feel more comfortable on his own territory and therefore you eliminate the possibility of the male dog not mounting the female because of fear of new territories or even worse the female dog. A confident enough stud would though.
> Leslie - I have discussed many things with my vet as well and certain things have never been brought up which later I wished they were. Just because they are not brought up it does not mean that they do not happen.


Claudia, how do you know what happened to the mom and pups had to do with an AI?? How do you know what occurred may not happen naturally.

If there is a dog close enough that I deem is a good match for my bitch, I will do a natural. 

How is an AI doing anything different that natural breeding is not?

I am just not understanding logic here?


----------



## CharlieBear80 (Oct 13, 2013)

Claudia M said:


> Can you explain what worries would you have with a stud lets say 4 hours away as opposed to shipped frozen semen?
> 
> I can see it if there is an assumption that the two stud dogs do not have the same health clearances.


What I meant was that I'd be more concerned about a breeding where the breeder chose a stud dog for the sake of convenience (in this case proximity) rather than choosing the stud that would best compliment the bitch, if that meant passing up a dog because frozen semen would have to be used. I did not mean to imply that I think frozen semen is inherently superior or something. 

Was that clear as mud?


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

DanaRuns said:


> Not to put too fine a point on it, but the science is _not_ "out." You sound like the climate change and evolution deniers. There is no science on your end of it, or if there is neither I nor anyone else here has ever heard of it, and you haven't provided it. Raising an issue doesn't make it legitimate, just because you raised it. Saying the science is "out" doesn't make it so.
> 
> And then you go and in a tremendous _non sequitur_ try to rope in something about human contraception? Really??? You have lost the thread of reason on this one, I'm afraid.


Let's stay out of the politics Dana! I did not go there and respectfully ask you not to challenge such a discussion as it is against the forum rules. 

There is absolutely nothing to lose! I expected most breeders to be OK with this. I expected some repro-vets to be OK with this. Yes the jury is still out in my opinion. Meanwhile I stay away from it. Past, current and future AI breeding.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> Let's stay out of the politics Dana! I did not go there and respectfully ask you not to challenge such a discussion as it is against the forum rules.


Yup, I agree. I took out the reference to politics.


----------



## SheetsSM (Jan 17, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> That is just very fine and dandy and I stand by my opinion. I admit I only know of two AI breeding situations turning bad for both the puppies and the mom. One from this forum. The other a friend of a friend. If it wasn't for those situations and a fried who was looking into it for her GS dog (even her vet did not recommend it as a first breeding) I would have never looked into it further.
> I probably only spoke with a handful of vets who would not recommend it for the first time breeding for the reasons stated above. A prudent vet would not recommend it unless the dog is already dead and honestly to me that is not an attractive breeding simply due tot he fact that more and more problems have been detected in the breed and the tests were not available for those dogs at the time they were still alive. And even at that I received reactions of why would someone even consider AI breeding as the first breeding and put the life of the pups and mother in danger!
> As far as the stud going to the female instead of the other way around - that is simply to avoid the inconvenience and the transportation back of a pregnant dam. Just because it is not "practice" it does not mean that it cannot be done IF the breeding is just so spectacular that it cannot be passed on. Sorry if I went astray from the breeding Bible with that idea. The only reason the female always travels to the boy is because the boy will feel more comfortable on his own territory and therefore you eliminate the possibility of the male dog not mounting the female because of fear of new territories or even worse the female dog. A confident enough stud would though.
> Leslie - I have discussed many things with my vet as well and certain things have never been brought up which later I wished they were. Just because they are not brought up it does not mean that they do not happen.


For the limited sample size of 2, I'm curious to which litter on the forum you're referring to and what medical info were you privy to to make the determination that AI was the reason for the issues. There is one litter I am thinking of and a virus which sadly impacted other pups in the area as well was the source.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

First AI was done with dogs in 1784....resulting in 3 puppies!
Learn something new everyday.

Source:
https://www.asas.org/docs/publications/footehist.pdf?sfvrsn=0


----------



## Sally's Mom (Sep 20, 2010)

Well, my Emmie was bred naturally, then the next day, the stud dog owner did AI. She had ten pups. Her mom who was difficult to accept the male got bred with AI when she was barely fertile...for her second litter. She had five, but two died in utero.


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

There are 2 additional points brought up in this thread I would like to touch on 

*Maiden bitches: *AIs are expensive - they just are. Since timing is absolutely critical there is the frequent progesterone testing, the actual procedure (with frozen semen a surgical implant is done, with chilled you still have procedures, with side by sides you are still at a repro vets with those bills), the semen, the shipping, and possible antibiotics and follow ups if the surgery site does not heal cleanly. This is the primary reason my breeder will not do AIs on a maiden bitch - in my area these expenses could easily top $1000 and knowing the girl is fertile before encountering these expenses and all the transporting back & forth just makes life smoother.

*Future health tests: *My Faelan's breeder (as do many many others) has DNA stored in the DNA warehouses so testing can be done after the death of a dog if it is deemed important enough.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Didn't read the whole thread....but also, some females simply will not stand for the male, no matter what. No point in risking harm to my boy.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

ha ha ha I have found that collection DOES affect my boy's libido...he goes NUTS every time we pull up to the repro vet, and if we happen to see her at a dog event, he's a wild man. They usually have a CERF clinic at her vet office every year, and he's sooooooo disappointed when he finds out he's only there to have his eyes checked!
Oh yeah, it upped his libido BIG TIME, LOL.



K9-Design said:


> Claudia, quite frankly you have no idea what you're talking about. This is crazy. Opinions are great but not when they state "facts" that *aren't true*.
> 
> AI has NO negative (or positive) affect on the health or longevity of the resulting puppies. AI is NOT quite dangerous for the female dog -- in fact some may argue that it is safer for all involved. Collection does NOT affect a male's libido.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Totally agree, my boy produces between 7-9 breeding units at each collection, can't ask for more than that.
The repro vet said that one problem it does cause is that the males do tend to let down the sperm sooner if they're used to being collected, especially if the mating takes place in the same vet's office (we do vet assisted breedings), and that can result in an outside tie. Therefore, they keep a close eye on them and if a natural breeding doesn't happen fairly quickly, like within about 15-20 minutes, they'll go ahead and collect the boy, and do a side-by-side AI.
A huge advantage of the side-by-side AI is that the sperm evaluation is done at that time, and if no puppies result you know it was not a problem with the sperm.



Prism Goldens said:


> There's no evidence it affects the number of sperm in the ejaculate to collect most dogs, but getting them to do naturals after 5-6 collections I hear causes problems sometimes.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Barb - why would you opt for vet assisted breeding? Just curious. 

And the rest is a question for everyone else:

Would one really want their stud bred to a dam who would not accept him? Would one really want their female bred to a stud not confident enough to mount her? 

If indeed temperament is genetic (as many on this forum seem to believe), why would anyone want to pass it on to the puppies? A too dominant female or a non-confident male?


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Barb - why would you opt for vet assisted breeding? Just curious.
> 
> And the rest is a question for everyone else:
> 
> ...


There are many reasons to do this. Sometimes you want to be able to breed to a boy but you do not have the "right" bitch pedigree a that time. Another would be some of the very genetic issues facing this breed at this time like pigmentary uveitis. There are no answers at this time as to what is best to do when PU is "known" to exist in a line when it comes to breeding. And does it matter how far back in a line it is "known". (I " " "known" because there are MANY dogs out there over the last 20 years who had it that are not known.) By collecting and freezing a boy's goods who otherwise would not be bred due to caution of the breeder, they can later maybe be used once we do know more about it. 
It is MUCH more than a "temperament" issue.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Hank - I was more referring to two dogs present and able to otherwise breed naturally. Given that we get over the "inconvenience" of bringing them together. 

Edit to add: many famous studs are already bred if not overly bred while alive. Most recently I saw a potential breeding where this famous stud was the grandparent in both the dam and the stud. Shook my head! Glad the owner for the dam decided not to go with it. I can honestly see where nowadays you run out of options when it comes to breeding. I do not know if there is an answer to it; especially when it comes to field GRs due to its limited pool.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

And it is not about "inconvenience" all the time either. When I bred Lucy she would NOT stand for the boy. Every time he tried to breed her she would just sit. Made it impossible for him to get to her no matter how hard he tried. We tried to "help" Lucy stand but then the boy felt "three was a crowd" and would not try with me so close. Finally the stud owner collected him right there and we finished the breeding via AI.


----------



## Leslie B (Mar 17, 2011)

Claudia M said:


> Barb - why would you opt for vet assisted breeding? Just curious.
> 
> And the rest is a question for everyone else:
> 
> ...



There are many reasons to do side by side - not just temperament. We just did a side by side AI. My old boy is, well old. At 12 his back does not hold up for the length of the breeding and he tries to do an outside tie. We have been calling him Hugh Hefner because he still wants to do the deed and has good swimmers. However, I don't want to strain his back any more than I have too.

By the way, the bitch for this breeding was conceived via AI. She just whelped 10 beautiful puppies so I don't think that her fertility was compromised by how she was conceived.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

See, in my poor simple mind that was a breeding not meant to be. While we think we know better, the dog I believe knew better than accept the stud. 
Maybe I put more faith in their ability of choosing their partner or rejecting a partner.

May I ask how did the breeding go? I would love to hear positive results from AI breeding procedures.

For the others reading this thread there is also a difference in success rates with fresh, freshly chilled (24 to 48 hours) and frozen semen. I believe that in Europe more than 50% of the AI breeding procedures are done with fresh or freshly chilled semen. Which takes me back to the same question why not just let nature take it's course? If the stud is too shy to mount or the female too dominant to accept the stud why continue on? Especially if temperaments are believed to be passed on.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Leslie B said:


> There are many reasons to do side by side - not just temperament. We just did a side by side AI. My old boy is, well old. At 12 his back does not hold up for the length of the breeding and he tries to do an outside tie. We have been calling him Hugh Hefner because he still wants to do the deed and has good swimmers. However, I don't want to strain his back any more than I have too.
> 
> By the way, the bitch for this breeding was conceived via AI. She just whelped 10 beautiful puppies so I don't think that her fertility was compromised by how she was conceived.


IMHO a 12 year old dog should not procreate just as much as a 65 year old man should not procreate. Glad the puppies are doing well. 

hahahaah - on a side joke - who would really want to have a child with Hugh Hefner! Poor child!


----------



## OnMyWay2MyDreams (Feb 13, 2011)

I think your diving too far into this "temperament" issue now Claudia. You keep altering what is wrong with doing an AI everytime someone talks and confirms about another "problem" is not a "problem". The fact is their are many uses for doing an AI and it does NOT affect the male, the female or the future pups. AI has been around a long long time and will continue to be. My girl, who was just bred in December for her first time, was actually done both ways. They got a natural tie for the first breeding. The second time she was being silly and wanted to play instead of standing. They almost got a natural tie but he "fell out" for lack of better words. So then they collected the rest of him and AI'd her as a side by side in a sense. That had nothing to do with temperament. It just happens. Now if the issue was say a dog fight ..you may have bigger issues..but most of the time that is not why it is being done. So not everything can be natural, their are obstacles, dogs are out showing, they have died, they are too far away. All acceptable reasons to do AI..and in any form. So I am asking you, Claudia, to kindly stop your repeated bashing of why its wrong..because its not and this is not what this thread was suppose to be about.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> May I ask how did the breeding go? I would love to hear positive results from AI breeding procedures.



Breeding took, six pups.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I have yet to meet a perfect dog. I'm sure with every dog someone out there could find a reason the breeding shouldn't happen.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Loisiana said:


> I have yet to meet a perfect dog. I'm sure with every dog someone out there could find a reason the breeding shouldn't happen.


From a non-breeder point of view, every dog is perfect in its own way!  

Not every match is perfect though, no matter how much we want to push it!


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> IMHO a 12 year old dog should not procreate just as much as a 65 year old man should not procreate.


Why not? Cuz you find it "icky"?


----------



## Shellbug (Nov 14, 2013)

Loisiana said:


> I have yet to meet a perfect dog. I'm sure with every dog someone out there could find a reason the breeding shouldn't happen.



Hehe you haven't met Thor ? 
Teasing 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

OnMyWay2MyDreams said:


> I think your diving too far into this "temperament" issue now Claudia. You keep altering what is wrong with doing an AI everytime someone talks and confirms about another "problem" is not a "problem". The fact is their are many uses for doing an AI and it does NOT affect the male, the female or the future pups. AI has been around a long long time and will continue to be. My girl, who was just bred in December for her first time, was actually done both ways. They got a natural tie for the first breeding. The second time she was being silly and wanted to play instead of standing. They almost got a natural tie but he "fell out" for lack of better words. So then they collected the rest of him and AI'd her as a side by side in a sense. That had nothing to do with temperament. It just happens. Now if the issue was say a dog fight ..you may have bigger issues..but most of the time that is not why it is being done. So not everything can be natural, their are obstacles, dogs are out showing, they have died, they are too far away. All acceptable reasons to do AI..and in any form. So I am asking you, Claudia, to kindly stop your repeated bashing of why its wrong..because its not and this is not what this thread was suppose to be about.


Not bashing at all, if temperament is genetic then we cannot pick or choose which temperament is or it is not genetic. Simple as that. 
As I stated before, contraception has been around for a long time. That does not make it safe for either the mother or the future children. 
I do not assume that the OP intended for all the answers to be "there is absolutely nothing wrong with the AI and everything is just fine and jim dandy". As a matter of fact it is not. Puppies die and mothers suffer - is that because of overzealous vets who do not do all the necessary testing? Is that because the testing of the frozen semen was not frozen/stored correctly? Or was it simply because the female did not accept it? 
They are not robots!


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Puppies die and mothers suffer - is that because of overzealous vets who do not do all the necessary testing? Is that because the testing of the frozen semen was not frozen/stored correctly? Or was it simply because the female did not accept it?
> They are not robots!


It does happen in AIs, but it happens in natural breedings as well. It is NOT because of over zealous vets who do not do all the necessary testing. :doh:
We get it Claudia you are against anything that is not natural in your eyes.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> IMHO a 12 year old dog should not procreate just as much as a 65 year old man should not procreate.


I don't know if you're kidding, but to me, the older the stud, the better. If the boy is 12 and hasn't shown signs of PU, early cancer, spondylosis, severe arthritis, joint degeneration, thyroid disease, and a dozen other potentially heritable conditions that don't always show up in young dogs, that's gold in my book.

Comet's dad died at 13 1/2 of old age, and he was a sturdy, active dog really late in life. He passed his last CERF at 11 1/2. Comet was born about 7 months after he died, from a frozen AI litter (Sunrise's Faelan, mentioned earlier in the thread, is a littermate). It is a huge source of comfort to me that his father lived that long without showing signs of PU or cancer and that he was so active and agile so late in his old age.

A bitch can't be bred that late in life, but an older and/or frozen stud can be, and it seems like a truly excellent idea to me to get 1/2 the genetic material (when feasible) from a dog who didn't just pass clearances at 2 but never showed signs of late-onset diseases, was an active senior, and died at an above-average age.

From a scientific standpoint: there is no reason to think that AI would cause any damage to the genetic material or have any other kind of long-term disadvantage. Chilling or freezing might damage the sperm if done improperly, but even then, that would only lower the chances of conception. There's really no way for chilling or freezing to affect the genetic material.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Just a reminder: one is entitled to one's own opinion, but not to one's own facts.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Claudia M said:


> I do not assume that the OP intended for all the answers to be "there is absolutely nothing wrong with the AI and everything is just fine and jim dandy". As a matter of fact it is not. Puppies die and mothers suffer


You keep saying this. It is no more true for AI than any other breeding method. You need to get your FACTS straight before injecting your opinion into something you have no practical knowledge of.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

People named Claudia die and their mothers suffer, too. Must be just as bad to be named Claudia.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

DanaRuns said:


> People named Claudia die and their mothers suffer, too. Must be just as bad to be named Claudia.


Now, that is the second mean spirited personal attack. Uncalled for in a discussion!


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> Now, that is the second mean spirited personal attack. Uncalled for in a discussion!


Oh, baloney. It wasn't a personal attack, and you know it. Enough with the faux outrage, already. Did you miss the logic while pretending to be offended?

And you never answered my question: Why shouldn't a 12-year old boy be bred?


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

tippykayak said:


> I don't know if you're kidding, but to me, the older the stud, the better. If the boy is 12 and hasn't shown signs of PU, early cancer, spondylosis, severe arthritis, joint degeneration, thyroid disease, and a dozen other potentially heritable conditions that don't always show up in young dogs, that's gold in my book.
> 
> Comet's dad died at 13 1/2 of old age, and he was a sturdy, active dog really late in life. He passed his last CERF at 11 1/2. Comet was born about 7 months after he died, from a frozen AI litter (Sunrise's Faelan, mentioned earlier in the thread, is a littermate). It is a huge source of comfort to me that his father lived that long without showing signs of PU or cancer and that he was so active and agile so late in his old age.
> 
> ...


However the genetic quality of the sperm does degrade with age but I guess some would also consider that as an opinion and not fact.  What about it's motility? It is not always in the quantity as it is in the quality!


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Claudia M said:


> However the genetic quality of the sperm does degrade with age but I guess some would also consider that as an opinion and not fact.  What about it's motility? It is not always in the quantity as it is in the quality!



You seem to pick and choose some physiological fact and then twist its significance to suit your opinion.
If motility is decreased and the sperm is somehow inferior -- IT WON'T BE THE ONE GETTING TO THE EGG FIRST.
I still am baffled as to why AI or any type of conception technique has any bearing on the health of the offspring....
So what happens if we go look at your dogs' pedigrees and point out all of the ancestors who were conceived via artificial insemination? Will you march them back to their breeders and demand a refund?


----------



## HiTideGoldens (Dec 29, 2009)

Hi all, even though I know this is turning into a spirited discussion, just a reminder to everyone to keep things polite. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## kath00 (Dec 3, 2013)

Thanks to everyone who gave us their insight and experiences in the health of puppies who were conceived from AI. 

We have decided to go ahead with the adoption after reading this thread and discussing it with the breeder in detail. The puppies seem happy and healthy so far and we are confident that this is the right choice for us. Thanks to all!


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> See, in my poor simple mind that was a breeding not meant to be. While we think we know better, the dog I believe knew better than accept the stud.
> Maybe I put more faith in their ability of choosing their partner or rejecting a partner.
> 
> May I ask how did the breeding go? I would love to hear positive results from AI breeding procedures.
> ...


It only shows how little you know about the dogs you are referring to when you call Lucy (AmbikaGR's female) dominant and Echo (the male she was bred to) shy. Let me assure you that my Jersey, who resulted from that breeding, is more than just a "positive result." He is a healthy, happy 8 year old who completed his JH this past winter and is currently working toward his MACH in agility (he has 13 of the 20 double qualifications needed -- 2 of which were just achieved this past weekend). He is sound and active and gorgeous (if I do say so myself  ). That breeding was absolutely "meant to be," even if it doesn't fit within your very narrow view of what is proper.

I'm curious -- were both of your dogs conceived via natural breeding only (as in no AI added to get in an additional breeding)? Would you have walked away from either litter if they had wound up doing a side-by-side AI either as the primary mode of breeding or as a supplement? And to take it a step further, was every single dog behind them in their pedigrees also conceived via natural breeding only? Would you even know? Did you even ask? 

You've made a lot of very bold and definitive claims about ways the health of the dam, sire and puppies are all affected by AI. Care to share any ounce of scientific evidence to back any of it up? Not what your vet says (and is your vet even a repro vet?)... I'm talking about real peer-reviewed scientific research. I'm sure the breeders reading would appreciate you sharing information with them that could keep them from causing so much pain and suffering to their dogs and the puppies they produce.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Several reasons, the main one being that I have no experience in assisting a breeding. You'd be surprised how many breedings need help, for whatever reason. And it's not a lack of desire, or a lack of confidence, I've seen Tito try unsuccessfully for 45 minutes (repro vet commented that it's a good thing he's in "hard working condition"). Frequently it's the bitch's "fault", she won't stand, or keeps turning around. This is especially the case if she's been used as a teaser bitch, or if she's a maiden bitch.
More scary, once they achieve the tie, which can last as long as 45 minutes, the boy can suffer permanent damage to his penis if she keeps trying to sit, or to break or run away. And a lot of the bitches will. Not work risking something happening to my boy.
It's fast and easy. If they need to do an AI, we're right there. It's PROOF that a tie took place, and it's documented how long the tie lasted. 



Claudia M said:


> Barb - why would you opt for vet assisted breeding? Just curious.
> 
> And the rest is a question for everyone else:
> 
> ...


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

AH, this is important....it's quite common for the first breeding to be a natural tie and the second one to be AI. 
The repro vet says that, if the first breeding "takes", the hormones change and the male/female aren't nearly as interested because she is already pregnant and the hormones don't send the same signals. The second breeding is done to be on the safe side, but the dogs' lack of interest tells you that you were successful the first time!




OnMyWay2MyDreams said:


> I think your diving too far into this "temperament" issue now Claudia. You keep altering what is wrong with doing an AI everytime someone talks and confirms about another "problem" is not a "problem". The fact is their are many uses for doing an AI and it does NOT affect the male, the female or the future pups. AI has been around a long long time and will continue to be. My girl, who was just bred in December for her first time, was actually done both ways. They got a natural tie for the first breeding. The second time she was being silly and wanted to play instead of standing. They almost got a natural tie but he "fell out" for lack of better words. So then they collected the rest of him and AI'd her as a side by side in a sense. That had nothing to do with temperament. It just happens. Now if the issue was say a dog fight ..you may have bigger issues..but most of the time that is not why it is being done. So not everything can be natural, their are obstacles, dogs are out showing, they have died, they are too far away. All acceptable reasons to do AI..and in any form. So I am asking you, Claudia, to kindly stop your repeated bashing of why its wrong..because its not and this is not what this thread was suppose to be about.


----------



## OnMyWay2MyDreams (Feb 13, 2011)

And I am pretty sure it was that natural tie that resulted in pups too. The pups all are doing wonderful, no problems seen so far (cleft palate/nose, intestines out, missing legs etc...). :Much like the reason behind having to do AI for Tito, Tag's owner didnt want to get him hurt..he still has a lot of work to be done!

Claudia.. And I dont get what the whole vet testing before its done? If it is done at a vet (not a side by side like at Tag's house) they do check it for motility,sperm count and if they appear normal. Beyond that not sure what you are asking or saying? 

Frankly, the OP's answers have been answered and they are getting the puppy from said breeding from an AI ..and there is no stopping of the misinformation that keeps getting thrown around that I think the thread should be closed now. Just IMO.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

Claudia M said:


> IMHO a 12 year old dog should not procreate just as much as a 65 year old man should not procreate. Glad the puppies are doing well.
> 
> hahahaah - on a side joke - who would really want to have a child with Hugh Hefner! Poor child!


I'm not argumentative on most things so I'll agree first that no one in their right mind would want one of Hugh's babies....lol! BUT a 12 YO dog is a best bet in my mind, AI or no, he has all his production to look at, and a breeder can even see generations of clearances below him as well as behind him! He's a good bet to me.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Just a slight (probably unnecessary) clarification, Tito's breedings are done "vet assisted". They are a natural tie if possible, which is usually possible, but they are done in a vet's office rather than in my back yard. It's sort of like having your baby in the hospital instead of on your sofa at home, you don't expect anything to go wrong, and nature's pretty good about doing what needs to be done, but you have a helper there if you should need one. A lot of times the stud dog can benefit from a little "help" with his aim if he's particularly worked up, and it saves him a lot of energy and frustration. (hey dummy, other end of the bitch...LOLOLOL, just kidding). The vet will help him rotate so they are "butt to butt", just to make it quicker and easier for both dogs. And while they are tied, the vet will hold her arm under the bitch's belly if she's showing signs of trying to sit down or break away. The assistant holds the bitch's head, reassures her, and keeps her calm for what can be a long time while the tie is happening. When all is done, the vet checks the boy to be sure he has properly gone back into the sheath, there's no hair caught, etc.
There is nothing "romantic" or "erotic" about a breeding. It's a bit frantic, and can be almost violent. Bitches are sometimes known to scream the whole time. I don't think it's something they find especially pleasant.
And when it does need to be done as an AI, rather than have my dog frustrated and worked up, and have to drive an hour to the vet, we're right there and the AI can be done at once. Nothing fresher than fresh collected semen and the bitch already on the table waiting for the insemination....only difference is that the semen is checked before it's used.



OnMyWay2MyDreams said:


> And I am pretty sure it was that natural tie that resulted in pups too. The pups all are doing wonderful, no problems seen so far (cleft palate/nose, intestines out, missing legs etc...). :Much like the reason behind having to do AI for Tito, Tag's owner didnt want to get him hurt..he still has a lot of work to be done!
> 
> Claudia.. And I dont get what the whole vet testing before its done? If it is done at a vet (not a side by side like at Tag's house) they do check it for motility,sperm count and if they appear normal. Beyond that not sure what you are asking or saying?
> 
> Frankly, the OP's answers have been answered and they are getting the puppy from said breeding from an AI ..and there is no stopping of the misinformation that keeps getting thrown around that I think the thread should be closed now. Just IMO.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Prism Goldens said:


> I'm not argumentative on most things so I'll agree first that no one in their right mind would want one of Hugh's babies....lol! BUT a 12 YO dog is a best bet in my mind, AI or no, he has all his production to look at, and a breeder can even see generations of clearances below him as well as behind him! He's a good bet to me.


Then why not use an offspring instead of risking genetic mutations caused by age?


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Then why not use an offspring instead of risking genetic mutations caused by age?


AGAIN, where do you get that there are "genetic mutations caused by age"?? It is simply NOT true. It is NOT a fact.

Edited to add
And using an offspring can bring in other unwanted things from the offspring's other side of the pedigree.


----------



## SheetsSM (Jan 17, 2008)

My only guess as to why one would continue to argue against using long-lived studs and all of the other info presented in this thread is that it gives validation to purchasing from BYBs who not do clearances & breed under-aged pups for profit.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Not sure how, but another duplicate post.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Sometimes a little humility in admitting that the science is not up to par (more and more discoveries are made that make us <at least me> realize how little we actually know about sperm fertility and genetic mutations) instead of pretending that we know it all, is necessary if the intent is indeed to better/maintain the breed. 
I guess some already seem to know it all, or they just pretend they do.


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Sometimes a little humility in admitting that the science is not up to par (more and more discoveries are made that make us <at least me> realize how little we actually know about sperm fertility and genetic mutations) instead of pretending that we know it all, is necessary if the intent is indeed to better/maintain the breed.
> I guess some already seem to know it all, or they just pretend they do.


Multiple people have asked you to point them to these new "discoveries." Is there any reason that you still haven't?

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

AmbikaGR said:


> AGAIN, where do you get that there are "genetic mutations caused by age"?? It is simply NOT true. It is NOT a fact.


As a matter of FACT more and more diseases are correlated with genetic mutations in sperm exactly due to age. But who knows, maybe the more recent science is wrong and the 70s science is correct.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Sometimes a little humility in admitting that the science is not up to par (more and more discoveries are made that make us <at least me> realize how little we actually know about sperm fertility and genetic mutations) instead of pretending that we know it all, is necessary if the intent is indeed to better/maintain the breed.
> I guess some already seem to know it all, or they just pretend they do.



Yes you sure seem to, don't you?


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> As a matter of FACT more and more diseases are correlated with genetic mutations in sperm exactly due to age. But who knows, maybe the more recent science is wrong and the 70s science is correct.


Where do you get this stuff? :doh:


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

I am stopping at this point as I am tired of going round in circles with you. If folks want to know the facts about it they can consult with a specialist - like a member of the Society of Theriogenology. 
Just remember just because someone posts something on the internet does not make it true. As with all things do your own research, look for FACTS and then make your own informed decisions.


----------



## LJack (Aug 10, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> As a matter of FACT more and more diseases are correlated with genetic mutations in sperm exactly due to age.


Could you please point me to the studies that include the facts you are pointing to here?


----------



## Mayve (Aug 21, 2012)

Ya know. I have looked and looked and looked for articles that say that older dogs/people who have children/puppies have a higher incidence of health problems in their offspring.....I cant find one who says old sperm causes birth defects etc...I have found a few that say that the incidence of abnormalities in offspring is very low and not necessarily because of the age of the stud.. It does say sperm counts are lower as one ages so may make getting pregnant harder. Personally I think that the age of the bitch would be much more important to a good outcome in an older stud dog breeding...




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Deleted bc funny, but maybe sarcastic- dont want to break any rules.


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

kath00 said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I have been reading up on AI and I am not seeing a lot of info on the health of the puppies later on in life. I see lots on HOW to do it and pregnancy rates but almost nothing on whether the offspring turn out ok or not as they grow and mature.
> 
> Does anyone have any insight into this? Thank you!


The use of the tool of AI has no impact on the health of the offspring produced.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Mayve said:


> Ya know. I have looked and looked and looked for articles that say that older dogs/people who have children/puppies have a higher incidence of health problems in their offspring.....I cant find one who says old sperm causes birth defects etc...I have found a few that say that the incidence of abnormalities in offspring is very low and not necessarily because of the age of the stud.. It does say sperm counts are lower as one ages so may make getting pregnant harder. Personally I think that the age of the bitch would be much more important to a good outcome in an older stud dog breeding...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Something must really be wrong with the search engine!

Paternal Age Effect Mutations and Selfish Spermatogonial Selection: Causes and Consequences for Human Disease


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

Claudia M said:


> Then why not use an offspring instead of risking genetic mutations caused by age?


Because the offspring is not that dog, just half the dog, and the other half factors into the offspring's appeal as a stud dog. Liking the offspring plays into why I like the old stud dog. But every generation adds other genetic material into the mix, and I will not be able to assess the production of the younger dog as well as I can the older boy, not to mention look at his own health and aging.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> Then why not use an offspring instead of risking genetic mutations caused by age?


Because you bring in a whole new unknown set of genes.


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> However the genetic quality of the sperm does degrade with age but I guess some would also consider that as an opinion and not fact.  What about it's motility? It is not always in the quantity as it is in the quality!


Generally speaking, the quality, quantity and motility of sperm begin to degrade as a dog ages. However those changes are unique to the individual and are representative of overall health. (Healthier dogs remain fertile longer and live longer.) Thus if you find a dog that has good sperm quality, quantity and motility at advanced age it is a benefit to the breed because his general health is robust enough to support his fertility.

I want the genetic influence of a dog that was fertile at 13 and lived to 16 to be included in the gene pool.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> However the genetic quality of the sperm does degrade with age but I guess some would also consider that as an opinion and not fact.  What about it's motility? It is not always in the quantity as it is in the quality!


Motility and count can go down with age, but "genetic quality" does not necessarily "degrade with age." There are some interesting studies on DNA fragmentation in the gametes of older human males, but I'm not aware of any such information on dogs, and I don't think the human research particularly supports the claim that the "genetic quality" "degrade with age." Do you have any such information or research?


----------



## Mayve (Aug 21, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> Something must really be wrong with the search engine!
> 
> Paternal Age Effect Mutations and Selfish Spermatogonial Selection: Causes and Consequences for Human Disease


Um ok.....

No this one didnt come up in my search but 20 others did that dont come to the same conclusion this one did. Maybe because my search centered around dogs not humans. I personally think that studies to validate both sides of the debate can be found and therefore we will pick and choose to some extent the ones that support our view. Since I personally wouldnt have an issue getting a puppy from an AI or an older stud breeding I will admit to taking that study with a grain of salt but I am nothing if not open minded so will read more and ask the repro vet these questions...and no I am not a breeder or will ever breed but I do have access to a repro vet.

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> Something must really be wrong with the search engine!
> 
> Paternal Age Effect Mutations and Selfish Spermatogonial Selection: Causes and Consequences for Human Disease


Let's give Claudia credit for coming up with science when everyone has been asking her for it.

:appl:


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Swampcollie said:


> Generally speaking, the quality, quantity and motility of sperm begin to degrade as a dog ages. However those changes are unique to the individual and are representative of overall health. (Healthier dogs remain fertile longer and live longer.) Thus if you find a dog that has good sperm quality, quantity and motility at advanced age it is a benefit to the breed because his general health is robust enough to support his fertility.
> 
> I want the genetic influence of a dog that was fertile at 13 and lived to 16 to be included in the gene pool.


The more we poke around cancers in the breed the more we will learn. Darn it! Those people in Iceland just could not leave a sleeping dog sleep.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Swampcollie said:


> Generally speaking, the quality, quantity and motility of sperm begin to degrade as a dog ages. However those changes are unique to the individual and are representative of overall health. (Healthier dogs remain fertile longer and live longer.) Thus if you find a dog that has good sperm quality, quantity and motility at advanced age it is a benefit to the breed because his general health is robust enough to support his fertility.
> 
> I want the genetic influence of a dog that was fertile at 13 and lived to 16 to be included in the gene pool.


Let's assume Claudia is right, and that there is some perceptible level of increased risk of health problems from breeding to an old sire. If that's the case would you rather breed to a dog that was fertile at 13 and lived to 16 with no cancer and good health who produced generations of healthy pups, or would you rather breed to a 3-year old dog with all its clearances and in apparent good health whose only offspring are still puppies?

Me, I'd choose the former. I'll take that increased risk of degenerated sperm but with fantastic known health history and observable offspring over the young, frisky guy, any day.


----------



## HiTideGoldens (Dec 29, 2009)

I agree, Dana. It's like you either risk the (assumed) possibility of some degeneration of the sperm due to age but benefit from a lot of depth of knowledge of the dog himself, the offspring of the dog and the pedigree in general or you breed to a very young dog to get that wonderfully young sperm (never thought I'd type that in a sentence ) but risk the lack of knowledge/info about the dog himself and his offspring. Certainly there are pros and cons to both decisions but personally, I would also take the former, in theory. Although that's not to say I would never breed to a young dog. It just seems odd, though, for one to act as though there is no benefit to breeding to an older dog. Certainly there is...


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

DanaRuns said:


> Let's assume Claudia is right, and that there is some perceptible level of increased risk of health problems from breeding to an old sire. If that's the case would you rather breed to a dog that was fertile at 13 and lived to 16 with no cancer and good health who produced generations of healthy pups, or would you rather breed to a 3-year old dog with all its clearances and in apparent good health whose only offspring are still puppies?
> 
> Me, I'd choose the former. I'll take that increased risk of degenerated sperm but with fantastic known health history and observable offspring over the young, frisky guy, any day.


As will I. I'll take the older "Proven" dog every time.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

hahaha - if that holds true, women should line up to have babies with Hugh Hefner - he is 85+ in pretty good health and proven good in business.


----------



## Shellbug (Nov 14, 2013)

Ahhh your argument is becoming silly now ?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Shellbug said:


> Ahhh your argument is becoming silly now ?
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


It was a joke as Hefner was brought up in the earlier posts - also as a joke!


----------



## HiTideGoldens (Dec 29, 2009)

Well isn't there something to be said for health and longevity in a human? For instance, my friend's father in law died very young of a heart issue that is known to be hereditary. Her husband is very concerned about his own cardiac health because of it.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

I do not pretend to say that it is easy or that I know it all. I take everything with a grain of skepticism. If one wants to dig further into it can find that in humans for example some diseases are avoided if the mother is more mature (mid 20s to 30s). The fact is that the science has concentrated too much on just the female reproductive system while just assuming that sperm is sperm and it will eventually do its job, if one little guy doesn't get there then another one will. 
And if this indeed does turn to be correct (which I believe it is a matter of time - same as the spay/neuter theories), I can only imagine the racket that it will cause on those sperm banks. 
But maybe it will actually be able to eliminate more cancers and diseases in the line and actually be able to breed for longevity which in the end means less cancers. 

Fact is, humans have meddled with those lines and more and more diseases are showing instead of being eliminated. Is that because we do not know what we are doing ( I am sure some will get defensive at this question)? Or is that because more testing brought things to light! I wonder.


----------



## Shellbug (Nov 14, 2013)

Claudia M said:


> It was a joke as Hefner was brought up in the earlier posts - also as a joke!



lol okay ?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## SheetsSM (Jan 17, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> Fact is, humans have meddled with those lines and more and more diseases are showing instead of being eliminated. Is that because we do not know what we are doing ( I am sure some will get defensive at this question)? Or is that because more testing brought things to light! I wonder.


Since science is getting better at detecting, more diseases are showing now. In goldens, this science is what was used for the justification of the 4 core clearances which are major drivers on our breed. For someone pushing for science & research in this thread, it makes me wonder why you don't believe in such clearances and would continue to seek out those breeders who don't do clearances & breed puppies to puppies. With the research being so important, then why are you not supporting the older, proven stud where you can look @ and evaluate the offspring--there is actual data to be analyzed as opposed to the 1yr old being used in the BYB that just happens to be conveniently available.


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> I do not pretend to say that it is easy or that I know it all. I take everything with a grain of skepticism. If one wants to dig further into it can find that in humans for example some diseases are avoided if the mother is more mature (mid 20s to 30s). The fact is that the science has concentrated too much on just the female reproductive system while just assuming that sperm is sperm and it will eventually do its job, if one little guy doesn't get there then another one will.
> And if this indeed does turn to be correct (which I believe it is a matter of time - same as the spay/neuter theories), I can only imagine the racket that it will cause on those sperm banks.
> But maybe it will actually be able to eliminate more cancers and diseases in the line and actually be able to breed for longevity which in the end means less cancers.
> 
> Fact is, humans have meddled with those lines and more and more diseases are showing instead of being eliminated. Is that because we do not know what we are doing ( I am sure some will get defensive at this question)? Or is that because more testing brought things to light! I wonder.


You've completely lost me here. What are you referring to when you state, "And if this does indeed turn out to be correct..." Are you referring to the fact that older males are more likely to produce certain genetic disorders (according to the one study you posted)? If we all subscribe to that theory, you've actually strengthened the case to collect a boy young and use AI on litters later in his life (when his health and production record can be best assessed). I suspect the sperm banks would appreciate the increased business. 

Would you care to explain how we will eliminate more cancers and diseases if not by breeding dogs who lived long without presenting with them whenever possible? I'm not following your train of thought there very well.

While I think we all appreciate you citing your source on the statement regarding older studs (Though I'm not entirely sure that study can be instantly generalized to dogs. They were speaking of very specific disorders being produced in humans and I don't know that there's any corresponding disorders you could link that to in canines), there's still been no reference made to any study that indicates that puppies from AI are less healthy than those born via natural breeding, nor that AI effects the fertility of the female or the libido of the male. Or any equivalent studies on humans. Those statements still seem to be opinions rather than the facts they were presented as.

As to your last question -- I think a TON of it has to do with us testing more. Before people x-rayed hips, how many displastic dogs do you think were bred? I'd be willing to bet many were. SAS has dropped significantly since screening for the disease became standard practice. Nobody was looking at elbows until a couple decades ago, so how could anyone know unless the dog was visibly lame? Way back when.... when your dog got older and stopped eating or getting up to walk around... you put the dog to sleep. Now we're running expensive tests to determine the cause and decide whether it can be treated. Now we find out that it's cancer. We amputate to extend the life of a dog with osteosarcoma. We remove the spleen of a dog with hemangio in hopes of buying more time. We use radiation and chemo -- sometimes with miraculous results, sometimes not. But we are getting answers to illnesses that were previously explained away as "an old dog." 

If not for "humans meddling in those lines," we wouldn't have the breeds that exist today. They didn't exist in the wild. Perhaps people in the early 1900s were okay with their dogs only living 5 or 6 years... but breeders today and working to do better and produce better and pet owners are (or should be) demanding the best a breeder can do. So now we run tests on breeding dogs to stack the odds in our favor and we use older studs when we can to provide as much predictability as possible in such an unpredictable situation. Sometimes the best a breeder can do is achieved by AI. In the absence of any actual evidence that the practice is harmful, I remain perfectly okay with that.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

My apologizes! I was honestly having fun with the lack of willingness to even google it and the claims of "knowing it all" posted by some. 
There are many more links to read if one just wants to do the research! If one is really interested that is. Like I said before, I started researching it because of my friend and what I have read on this forum. And I haven't even read it all. 
As I see on the Optigen thread, even conclusive tests are being dismissed, so I certainly do not expect this to be admitted.


----------



## SheetsSM (Jan 17, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> I was honestly having fun


Purposely derailing an OP's thread in the name of fun--how disrespectful


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> My apologizes! I was honestly having fun with the lack of willingness to even google it and the claims of "knowing it all" posted by some.
> There are many more links to read if one just wants to do the research! If one is really interested that is. Like I said before, I started researching it because of my friend and what I have read on this forum. And I haven't even read it all.
> As I see on the Optigen thread, even conclusive tests are being dismissed, so I certainly do not expect this to be admitted.


I've googled it. Not finding anything... hence why I (and others) have asked you repeatedly to share your sources. Yet again, nothing.

I haven't read the Optigen thread, and don't know what bearing that would have on your having the courtesy to share this information that you claim to have. Then again, I also don't know what contraception (mentioned twice) or spay and neuter (mentioned earlier on this page) has to do with this discussion... so maybe I'm just lost. 

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## AlanK (Jun 28, 2008)

This is quite an interesting thread and I have learned much. I would enjoy seeing this discussion kept civil.


----------



## GoldensGirl (Aug 2, 2010)

AlanK said:


> This is quite an interesting thread and I have learned much. I would enjoy seeing this discussion kept civil.


I second the desire to see this conversation kept within GRF standards of courtesy.

Providing evidence when asked to do is part of that expectation, especially on matters of health.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

GoldensGirl said:


> I second the desire to see this conversation kept within GRF standards of courtesy.
> 
> Providing evidence when asked to do is part of that expectation, especially on matters of health.


I am sorry - I thought that you were referring to the pilling on and personal attacks, which I have seen as part of the GRF rules; I however did not see where I have to substantiate my opinion. It is easily searchable if there is a will. Especially by someone who is involved in genetics and reproduction as the claim is to be. Since 2012 there have been studies on this and there has been an awakening of how the scientist look at the sperm health and not just the quantity. 
As a poster very nicely put it, do your research, don't just rely on what bloggers put on the internet. 
I have researched quite long and hard on this issue without pretending to know it all. If someone does not like my opinion then they should rebut it with their own facts and not just: "You don't know what you are talking about!" - sorry if I just do not see that as constructive conversation. 
Cancer is a fact in the breed. How much was that due to the frozen sperm of a "proven" dog. I use quotation marks because that word comes from the same people who claim to know their lines, dogs, temperaments and even reject Optigen testing in lieu of OFFA testing which has repeatedly IMHO proven not to be very predicable. You can still breed an excellent to a normal/good and still get a fair or barely fair. Is it good to have, yes. Is it a necessity? Not in my opinion. More than 50% of the dogs are genetically affected in some way and that is pretty much clear; however genetics seems to be thrown out the window, including genetic mutations. 
How many of the people that have done AIs have had their dog's sperm genetically tested each year? None, because it is not considered necessary. Just like the current vets do not look at alternatives for spay/neuter because that is what they have been used to do since the 50s. Reason why I would never purchase a female pup from a breeder who requires spay in the first 2 years of life of a female dog or requires neuter ever of the male dog.


----------



## HiTideGoldens (Dec 29, 2009)

Actually, there has been a sticky in the health forum for almost a year to that effect: Golden Retrievers : Golden Retriever Dog Forums - Announcements in Forum : Golden Retriever Health, Anatomy, Physiology & Breed Standard

Given that this thread is discussing the health implications of certain breeding practices that board announcement would apply regardless of the location of the thread in the forum. It's also nice to offer support for statements as a general matter, just for purposes of having a productive discussion.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia M said:


> Since 2012 there have been studies on this and there has been an awakening of how the scientist look at the sperm health and not just the quantity. I have researched quite long and hard on this issue.


If you have done so much research and know what people here do not, how hard would it be to post that research so others could benefit, with the side effect that it would help you by making your statements much more credible? Why not? Why make every person go through the "quite long and hard" research process that you went through, when you could help people by posting what you've found?


----------



## hollyk (Feb 21, 2009)

As always for me the take away from this type of discussion is, when looking at litters you want to be able to verify results of any pre breeding testing done and you need to establish a relationship with the breeder in which you can ask questions and discuss concerns.


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> I am sorry - I thought that you were referring to the pilling on and personal attacks, which I have seen as part of the GRF rules; I however did not see where I have to substantiate my opinion. It is easily searchable if there is a will. Especially by someone who is involved in genetics and reproduction as the claim is to be. Since 2012 there have been studies on this and there has been an awakening of how the scientist look at the sperm health and not just the quantity.
> As a poster very nicely put it, do your research, don't just rely on what bloggers put on the internet.
> I have researched quite long and hard on this issue without pretending to know it all. If someone does not like my opinion then they should rebut it with their own facts and not just: "You don't know what you are talking about!" - sorry if I just do not see that as constructive conversation.
> Cancer is a fact in the breed. How much was that due to the frozen sperm of a "proven" dog. I use quotation marks because that word comes from the same people who claim to know their lines, dogs, temperaments and even reject Optigen testing in lieu of OFFA testing which has repeatedly IMHO proven not to be very predicable. You can still breed an excellent to a normal/good and still get a fair or barely fair. Is it good to have, yes. Is it a necessity? Not in my opinion. More than 50% of the dogs are genetically affected in some way and that is pretty much clear; however genetics seems to be thrown out the window, including genetic mutations.
> How many of the people that have done AIs have had their dog's sperm genetically tested each year? None, because it is not considered necessary. Just like the current vets do not look at alternatives for spay/neuter because that is what they have been used to do since the 50s. Reason why I would never purchase a female pup from a breeder who requires spay in the first 2 years of life of a female dog or requires neuter ever of the male dog.


So cancer in all dogs was caused by using frozen sperm? All dogs? All breeds (because all breeds get cancer, although the types may tend to vary)? How about people? Is that also the cause for genetically based cancers in people? That is a big leap to make without providing some sort of credible source! Care to share one?

In this thread you have gone back and fourth between saying that you're sharing an "opinion" and saying that what you believe is "FACT." (the capitals are yours, not mine) Which is it? If this is truly "fact," why doesn't every vet in the US know this? Why hasn't the American Veterinary Association issued a statement? And don't tell me that it's all about the $$... because you seem to have solved that problem too by assuming that every male dog who may ever be breed should have a sample taken and tested every year of his life (although, I have to wonder what this would do the males' libido? That's an awful lot of manual collection compared to what you were railing against earlier in the thread.... isn't that interesting?). 

I get it... you think OFA testing is for the birds. The problem with your hard stance on this is that we do not have specific genetic tests for the most debilitating diseases and disorders in goldens. I think every breeder would sing a hymn of praise if a simple blood draw could tell them whether their dog will produce dysplastic puppies or cancer somewhere down the line. For now, we have tests that give us the best information available and reputable breeders use those tests (in accordance with the COE) to do their very best. It's certainly better than throwing caution to the wind and a blind eye to anything they can't see with their own two eyes while breeding dogs without doing any testing as reckless, irresponsible breeders do. I went and looked at the Optigen thread and I didn't see anyone there completely dismissing the genetic tests, regardless of what you keep claiming here. Even if they were... those genetic tests, OFA screenings, spay and neuter, and the use of contraceptives in humans have absolutely, positively nothing to do with this discussion. Ducking and weaving into other controversial topics doesn't distract anyone from the fact that you've yet to provide a single ounce of evidence to support your claims about AI.

The greatest value in this forum is the sharing of information among breed enthusiasts. You claim to have a ton of information regarding the health implications for puppies, sires and dams due to the use of AI.... why do you repeatedly evade all requests to share any of it? What is the point in participating in a conversation like this one if you are unwilling to share actual, verifiable information? It defies logic.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## GoldensGirl (Aug 2, 2010)

Claudia M said:


> I am sorry - I thought that you were referring to the pilling on and personal attacks, which I have seen as part of the GRF rules; I however did not see where I have to substantiate my opinion...


I do object to personal attacks and rude communications of every kind and continued violations in this thread may lead to its closing. That would be unfortunate for many reasons and we try to avoid it.

And, as fellow Mod goldenjackpuppy has pointed out, it is clearly an expectation that references will be provided on request when the subject is related to health. That we have not moved this thread to the Health forum does not mean that expectations are different.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

So if it is for the purposes of testing all of a sudden it becomes "an awful lot" but it is completely insignificant if it is for the purposes of breeding? Now I can finally understand the logic behind it.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

GoldensGirl said:


> I do object to personal attacks and rude communications of every kind and continued violations in this thread may lead to its closing. That would be unfortunate for many reasons and we try to avoid it.
> 
> And, as fellow Mod goldenjackpuppy has pointed out, it is clearly an expectation that references will be provided on request when the subject is related to health. That we have not moved this thread to the Health forum does not mean that expectations are different.


It is an impossible expectation that all announcements and stickies be read especially since there is no mention of them (to my recollection) under the rules and regulations or the registration agreement. I have tried to keep myself appraised to rule/regulation] changes but to assume that I would go to a different topic to check an announcement from a year ago it is a bit of a stretch. 

IMHO it is more dangerous to state no possible medical problems with nothing to back it up as opposed to I personally would not get a pup from such breeding.


----------



## GoldensGirl (Aug 2, 2010)

Claudia M said:


> It is an impossible expectation that all announcements and stickies be read especially since there is no mention of them (to my recollection) under the rules and regulations or the registration agreement. I have tried to keep myself appraised to rule/regulation] changes but to assume that I would go to a different topic to check an announcement from a year ago it is a bit of a stretch.


You have been alerted to it now.


----------



## Ruffus mom (Feb 25, 2014)

Hi! My name is Chelsea & I'm mom to a wonderful 14 month golden/lab cross (a rescue). This board is a wonderful resource & I love following people's stories & discussions. Thank you everyone for sharing a wealth of knowledge.

This thread prompted me to register to post because it's driving me crazy. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my recollection of biology 101 recalls that male mammals are not born with a finite number of sperm cells, but produce sperm cells throughout their mature lives. Thus, the produced sperm is always fresh from the donor, so to speak, irregardless of the age of the donor (Unlike the female mammal who is born with a finite number of eggs which can and do begin to degenerate over the woman's lifespan). For males, the issue becomes more one of the frequency of sex and the physical ability to perform the act.

Am I missing something?
Thanks.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Ruffus mom said:


> Hi! My name is Chelsea & I'm mom to a wonderful 14 month golden/lab cross (a rescue). This board is a wonderful resource & I love following people's stories & discussions. Thank you everyone for sharing a wealth of knowledge.
> 
> This thread prompted me to register to post because it's driving me crazy. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my recollection of biology 101 recalls that male mammals are not born with a finite number of sperm cells, but produce sperm cells throughout their mature lives. Thus, the produced sperm is always fresh from the donor, so to speak, irregardless of the age of the donor (Unlike the female mammal who is born with a finite number of eggs which can and do begin to degenerate over the woman's lifespan). For males, the issue becomes more one of the frequency of sex and the physical ability to perform the act.
> 
> ...


Disease-Causing Genetic Mutations In Sperm Increase With Men's Age


----------



## Ruffus mom (Feb 25, 2014)

Claudia, I saw the article the first time you posted it, thank you. A sample of 6o seems pretty limited, in my opinion.

Looking up paternal age effect of Wiki provides a good overview of available research studies that used much bigger sample populations. Haven't been able to read more that the abstract for the top 10, but a couple of things come up: one is that there's no hard and/or conclusive evidence suggesting increased age of father is bad for the human baby. Second is that since reilable paternaty testing only became routinely possible in the early 70's, there is not a great deal of longitudinal studies on this subject. Interestingly, the dog breeders may be way ahead of human research in this regard as they have a stronger certainty of who the parents were, going back generations, and because canine lives tend to be shorter over all than those of humans.


----------



## hvgoldens4 (Nov 25, 2009)

Because of the number of people who come to the forum looking for answers about golden retrievers, I feel the number of inconsistencies and untruths that are in this thread need to be addressed.

First, there is absolutely, positively no evidence that says that dogs who were bred via and AI will have any difference in their life span or their health. This does not even make sense. When doing an AI, TCI(Trans-cervical) or a surgical insemination, the semen is collected from the dog and deposited either in the cervix or in the uterus, depending on the procedure used. This has no effect on eggs nor does it have any effect on the sperm. Actually, it is often quite the opposite. Many times extenders are used when doing AI's and so the semen actually lives LONGER and thus has the chance to fertilize more eggs than it would with a natural breeding. Some of my largest litters over the past 15 years have been done with some kind of AI.


Doing an AI also poses no danger to the dog. Their are costs that are involved so many times breeders do not want to do an AI with a maiden female simply because she is not a proven producer yet.


Doing an AI also has nothing to do with the dogs temperament. Breeding is about improving the breed. It should not matter where this dog is located. Medical advances(AI's) allow us to open the gene pool more because dogs can be used from different countries, across the country and yes, sometimes locally. But, breeding should not be about convenience. Each dog has its own set of faults and merits and breedings should be planned to try to improve on those faults.

Temperament is also NOT something that is strictly inherited, as has been stated. Behaviorists now know that the first 12 weeks of a puppy's life play a huge role in who and what that puppy will grow to be and IF that puppy will grow to match the genetic potential that it was given at birth. Early socialization and stimulation are key to making sure that the dog reaches the potential that it was given. If a puppy is not taken outside of its surroundings and exposed to different things, as an adult, yes, it could be fearful of new stimuli. But, this is not inherently temperament-this can be because of a lack of socialization.

There has also been a link posted a couple of times about semen, age and humans. There are a number of issues with this paper. First, one cannot extrapolate from species to species. What is true in one species is not necessarily true in another. Dogs and people do not have the same genetics, genetic anomalies or chromosomes. This is why research is conducted on a number of different species. Second, the sampling size was rather small and third, even the author of the paper said that results could not be duplicated so there may be other issues coming into play that skewed the results one way or another. You can pretty much make research fit your hypothesis by juggling statistics. Lastly, we must look at the life span of our dogs. Obviously, it is much shorter than that of humans. I have owned a number of stud dogs over the years and have not seen any differences as far as congenital issues being produced(cleft palates, etc) even when a dog was 10-12 years old. I know the same is true of many other breeders that I know who have had dogs that stood at stud at this age and even breeders with females who keep statistics of the type of breeding, age of the dogs, etc. After a dog reaches 12 years old, to register a litter with the AKC a veterinarian must certify that the dog is still fertile before any litters can be registered so this is not something that happens on a regular basis because most dogs do not have a high enough sperm count after they reach the age of 12 and many do not make it to 12.

When dealing with frozen semen, which is called cryopreservation, dogs are collected and semen frozen when they are at an age where they are in their prime thus their sperm count, motility and morphology are at its best. Damaged semen(low counts, poor morphology,etc) will not freeze/thaw well and will not be able to be used to impregnate a female. It simply won't be able to get the girl pregnant. When the semen is frozen, it is not really aging. It is stuck in a state of suspension. So, one must really look at the age of the dog at the time the semen was collected and not at the age of the semen. Dogs have gotten females pregnant with semen that was more than 20 years old. Again, frozen semen allows us to keep the gene pool open and breed to a larger variety of dogs and a larger gene pool is important in sustaining the health of a breed. As far as genetic testing goes, semen is easily used to perform genetic testing and samples can also be submitted while a dog is still alive and preserved for future testing that may become available.

There is no correlation between AI's and cancer-absolutely none!! Dogs can develop cancer whether they are from natural breedings or an AI and the same is true of any species. Whether or not a dog develops cancer is partly genetic and also partly environmental. Frankly, breeders need to be doing exactly the opposite of what has been recommended by some in this thread. Breeders need to search out dogs who have lived into their teens and have good longevity with parents and siblings. Those dogs have a lot to contribute to our gene pool.

There is also no correlation between the OFA and genetic testing. The OFA is a registry that is used to record results of phenotypical(what is presented) testing that is done on breeding stock and would include screening for hips, elbows, eyes and hearts. Genetic testing is not available for hip or elbow dysplasia, nor is it available for SAS which is the main issue with hearts in goldens. There are a couple of eye issues that can be done with genetic testing, however, even if a dog passes the few genetic eye tests that are available, that does not mean that the dog should be bred on that information alone. There are many eye issues that do not have genetic tests and would not pass CERF. Eye exams with an ACVO ophthalmologist need to be done on breeding stock.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

So well thought out, well written. Thank you for taking the time to do this.
:thanks:



hvgoldens4 said:


> Because of the number of people who come to the forum looking for answers about golden retrievers, I feel the number of inconsistencies and untruths that are in this thread need to be addressed.
> 
> First, there is absolutely, positively no evidence that says that dogs who were bred via and AI will have any difference in their life span or their health. This does not even make sense. When doing an AI, TCI(Trans-cervical) or a surgical insemination, the semen is collected from the dog and deposited either in the cervix or in the uterus, depending on the procedure used. This has no effect on eggs nor does it have any effect on the sperm. Actually, it is often quite the opposite. Many times extenders are used when doing AI's and so the semen actually lives LONGER and thus has the chance to fertilize more eggs than it would with a natural breeding. Some of my largest litters over the past 15 years have been done with some kind of AI.
> 
> ...


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

And the studies to your opinion? None! Why, because there are none. 

You are however correct, many dogs do not live to be 12 years old, reason why you hardly see the DOD or the COD in many of those dogs. How many lines would be deemed cancer prone if that was indeed posted? How many died even before of the age of 12 due to cancer? 
You are also correct that you cannot breed temperament - something you see posted in this forum over and over again with nothing to back it up. 

Paternal Age has been documented since the 40s however the science was not up to par to prove it. It has not been until quite recently that genetic mutations have been recorded in the sperm to finally make a break-thru. It has nothing to do with sperm count. But I guess the pool is too small, John Hopkins and the rest have inexperienced scientist etc is much easier to dismiss.

Ahh, no correlation between species! Is that why there are studies on gene mutations in dogs to pinpoint disease predisposition in humans? Or do we only correlate the ones we like? Here is one article, just a few days old: Dogs develop OCD due to genetic mutation, study says | KSL.com

It would be scary to correlate that if there are two gene mutations in the human sperm with each year, how many would be in a dog. 

Lastly - you are also correct that there is no correlation between OFFA and Genetic Testing. What I did say is that I personally put more weight on genetic testing than the OFFA.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

I'm not sure you can extrapolate anything relevant to dogs from Claudia's human study. Humans and dogs are significantly different on a genetic level.

Geneticists sequenced the 2.4 billion "letters" of the dog's DNA code, representing 39 chromosome pairs. Humans by comparison have 23 chromosome pairs. 1 extra chromosome pair creates Down Syndrome. Scientists found that about 5 percent of the human genome is also shared with dogs. They also compiled a catalogue of 2.5 million genetic units that vary between different dogs.

Dog Genome Mapped, Shows Similarities to Humans

Dogs suffer from more than 350 genetic disorders, many of which resemble human conditions. The most common diseases among purebred dogs include cancer, epilepsy, heart disease, allergies, retinal disease, and cataracts.

"[This research] increases the possibility of using dogs as a model for human disease," Ellegren said.

The study could also help researchers identify genes that govern behavioral traits, such as aggressiveness or kindness.

So there is some overlap, but it looks to be quite limited. I see nothing, anywhere, that makes the connection between dogs and humans that Claudia asserts. Mouse DNA is much closer to humans than dog DNA.


----------



## DanaRuns (Sep 29, 2012)

Claudia said:


> Paternal Age has been documented since the 40s however the science was not up to par to prove it. It has not been until quite recently that genetic mutations have been recorded in the sperm to finally make a break-thru. It has nothing to do with sperm count. But I guess the pool is too small, John Hopkins and the rest have inexperienced scientist etc is much easier to dismiss.


First, hvgoldens4 talked about freezing semen in a dog's prime. You are not addressing that. You are only talking about genetic mutations in the sperm of old men. Perhaps if you'd talk about the same things it might have some meaning, but you talking about old dudes when she's talking about collecting dogs in their prime is . . . well, you might as well be posting recipes for all the meaning it has in the conversation.

Second, Johns Hopkins is not being dismissed, your assertions are being dismissed. And it's not because John Hopkins has inexperienced scientist or too small a pool, you are being dismissed because you are talking about old men with 23 chromosome pairs while the thread is about dogs (proven and in their prime) with 39 chromosome pairs and you are dissing the experience of breeders here who have had generations of experience that would be the equivalent of 200 years of human reproduction without citing to anything that actually supports the vague and shifting assertions you have been making.

I think that it would be much more persuasive when posting alleged facts that run contrary to conventional wisdom if the poster would support the assertion with something that directly relates to it, not something that relates in only the most tenuous of ways, requiring several leaps of faith to make the parallel. I might say that Roundup is causing cancer in Goldens, and if I support it with a study showing that Roundup may be responsible for a reduction in the honey bee population in Montana, it makes it very difficult for others to accept my assertion as supported fact. There may be some connection between cancer in Goldens and honey bee population reduction in Montana, but by making the factual assertion and supporting it with something that does not directly establish what I'm saying, I am not proving my point, I am merely asking the reader to make more assumptions.


----------



## Leslie B (Mar 17, 2011)

Claudia, discussing(?) this issue with you is like "wrestling with a pig in mud - you get dirty and the pig enjoys it".

Despite the opininon of experienced breeders on this forum and significant research on AI and use of the proceedure to back it's value - you merrily continue on with insistance of it's danger. 

While I have read your posts over the years with interest it will be difficult for me to read one again without being reminded of your far out opinion on this issue.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Just a quick note on the way that proof works in logical arguments: positive assertions (like the assertion that frozen sperm is at a higher risk for cancer-causing mutations than naturally delivered sperm) can be proven, so you can fairly be asked for proof of such an assertion when you make it.

However, it is frequently impossible or impractical to prove the negative of such an assertion. Nonetheless, that does not mean the assertion has any merit whatsoever. It is impossible to prove that unicorns don't exist. However, the inability to provide evidence of the lack of unicorns is not proof that they do exist or proof that we should significantly alter our behavior to allow for the possibility that they do. The two viewpoints are not equally valid, even though a person could ask for proof that there are no unicorns.

So in this situation, it is fair to ask for proof of an assertion (i.e., proof that there are such risks), especially when the assertion is presented as fact. However, proving the negative (i.e., the absence of risk) is impossible or at least impractical, at least at this time. The absence of something is typically impossible or at least impractical to prove. However, that's not evidence that the thing is present or evidence that the original assertion has validity.


----------



## hvgoldens4 (Nov 25, 2009)

Claudia M said:


> You are however correct, many dogs do not live to be 12 years old, reason why you hardly see the DOD or the COD in many of those dogs. How many lines would be deemed cancer prone if that was indeed posted? How many died even before of the age of 12 due to cancer?
> You are also correct that you cannot breed temperament - something you see posted in this forum over and over again with nothing to back it up.


The average lifespan of a golden retriever is 10-12 years old. Of course, none of us like this fact as we would like our dogs to be with us for much longer. The average lifespan has been 10-12 for many, many years. This would mean that most dogs will pass between the ages of 10-12. Some dogs will live longer and some shorter lives as this is how an average is derived. This has been shown to be true of our dogs in the US with surveys done on the age at DOD and the average lifespan of dogs in the UK is also very similar to our own.

Just because a dog is over 12 years old and does not have a DOD or a COD listed in K9data does not mean a thing. Quite possibly, the dog is still alive. I got many emails and messages asking about our foundation bitch and if she was still alive because there was nothing on K9 data. Well, she lived to be just over 16 years old so until she actually passed away, there was no information listed and she also did not die from cancer. The same would be true of her son who recently passed away at a little over 14.5 years old. His littersister is still alive so obviously no information has been entered into k9data.

There is also no written rule anywhere that says that breeders, owners or anyone else have to put information on K9data. While it may make it nice when looking at pedigrees, it is still very limited information unless all the littermates and offspring of dogs are listed and that is something that would be very rare. Many dogs are also added to K9data by the administrators and others who use show information to enter dogs into the database. It is a database and because anyone can enter information, information on k9data needs to be verified for accuracy. Over the years, I have found many inaccuracies in K9data. It is just a tool. If you want to know how or why a dog passed away, the best way has always been to contact the breeder or owner of that dog. A quick google search will yield contact information for most everyone.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Leslie B said:


> Claudia, discussing(?) this issue with you is like "wrestling with a pig in mud - you get dirty and the pig enjoys it".
> 
> Despite the opininon of experienced breeders on this forum and significant research on AI and use of the proceedure to back it's value - you merrily continue on with insistance of it's danger.
> 
> While I have read your posts over the years with interest it will be difficult for me to read one again without being reminded of your far out opinion on this issue.



Personally I'm starting to think James Lamb Free must have strong negative opinions on AI.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

tippykayak said:


> Just a quick note on the way that proof works in logical arguments: positive assertions (like the assertion that frozen sperm is at a higher risk for cancer-causing mutations than naturally delivered sperm) can be proven, so you can fairly be asked for proof of such an assertion when you make it.


_No such assertion was made - other than the fact that the frozen sperm has not been tested for genetic mutations over time. The conversation was moved from the older "proven" dogs who were just to old to do the deed to now the prime times dogs. I do not think anyone has asserted that the procedure of freezing sperm is causing mutations. But I can honestly see the fear of the continued break-thru in genetics_

BTW - to another poster trying to be cute - That is James Free Lamb not James Lamb Free - but who cares!?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> _No such assertion was made - other than the fact that the frozen sperm has not been tested for genetic mutations over time. The conversation was moved from the older "proven" dogs who were just to old to do the deed to now the prime times dogs. I do not think anyone has asserted that the procedure of freezing sperm is causing mutations. But I can honestly see the fear of the continued break-thru in genetics_


I was using a hypothetical specifically to avoid pilling on you. Nobody made assertions about unicorns either.



Claudia M said:


> BTW - to another poster trying to be cute - That is James Free Lamb not James Lamb Free - but who cares!?


Umm, are you sure?


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

One good expert to contact is Dr. Robert Hutchinson. He is a preeminent reproductive veterinarian. He is often contacted by other vets from around the country, and widely chosen by breeders. My vet calls him the Wizard of repro medicine for dogs. You can google his seminars and presentations pretty easily, and he is very accessible. His expertise is pretty amazing.

Animal Clinic Northview

Animal Clinic Northview


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

Claudia M said:


> Cancer is a fact in the breed. How much was that due to the frozen sperm of a "proven" dog.


No such assertion was made? I guess you might call it more insinuation than assertion... but you definitely threw it out there. 

Also, you seem a little confused as to standard practice of sperm collection and storage. Males are generally collected and the sperm frozen when they are in their prime... that way it is available to use when they are no longer fertile (either due to age or eventual death). An older male may also be collected for a side by side AI if his sperm count and motility is still good, but generally those late-in-life collections are not frozen. So the conversation didn't move from one to the other... it's you who keeps changing the subject and focus to avoid providing any evidence for the many other assertions you have made in this thread. 

For example, from the first page of the thread:


> AI decreases fertility and therefore the quality of the eggs in the female. Also it is quite dangerous for the female dog reason why it is not recommended as the first breeding to be AI.
> Collection of semen decreases the male's dog libido thus causing problems in future natural breeding.


We are now on page 14 of people asking you to back up these claims with any verifiable proof.... and, nothing.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------

