# Is EIC over rated??



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I'm not posting to get anything going about EIC and it's affects. I'm not down playing the defect in labs.

Why is there such a wide range of affected dogs. Like one dog will go down in the kennel if they get excited and another has never gone down but has the genes. I posted on another thread that I trained a female that went down 2 times over 4 years and that was because of pressure. She was one of the best dogs that I've trained. I've heard that we have some FC, AFC, NFC, NAFC dogs that are affected but man how do they get to that level if the disease is that bad?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I believe U of M is working on why some are affected but never go down and others go down the first time and die (witnessing that changed my mind on the severity of the condition). Genetics is not simple. They also report that there are affecteds that never go down but they can have offspring that are severely affected, and I do know of such a case personally. You had a good experience but I would not take a risk of producing an affected and expecting that to happen again.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

We were discussing this the other day... Something like 19% of all affecteds show symptoms... That's it...

There has to be "marker" genes involved..

Angie


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

kimsmith said:


> I'm not posting to get anything going about EIC and it's affects. I'm not down playing the defect in labs.
> 
> Why is there such a wide range of affected dogs. Like one dog will go down in the kennel if they get excited and another has never gone down but has the genes. I posted on another thread that I trained a female that went down 2 times over 4 years and that was because of pressure. She was one of the best dogs that I've trained. I've heard that we have some FC, AFC, NFC, NAFC dogs that are affected but man how do they get to that level if the disease is that bad?


My experience is pretty much limited to my affected dog and what people owning other dogs have told me over the last year. EIC is by no means as serious a problem as CNM or dysplastic hips. However, for the types of work that most of us want to do it is seriously limiting. My 15 month old has only had four collapses -- one in training, three while playing fun bumpers with my other dogs. She came very close to collapsing on a vet visit where she was made excited and happy by all the dogs in the waiting room and another time when she almost collapsed while waiting in the holding blind at a hunt test which she passed easily. It's heart breaking because she has all the talent to run trials but I can't take the risk of training her seriously. She is still too wired at 18 months to be placed with a pet family, and I do not think it would be appropriate to breed her even though I could guarantee there would be no affected pups. She is not in any pain. She does not require any unusual medical care and, now that I recognize her triggers and symptoms, I am not really worried about emergencies arising from her condition. With purchase price, vet bills (one of her collapses was life threatening) and eight months of professional training, she is now a very loveable, hyperactive pet who just happens to have cost me over $7000.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Angie I was thinking the same thing but I'm no expert. 

Yardley, that is another thing I've heard about these dogs and mine was the same way. They were hyperactive, fine specimen, great muscle mask, sounds like everything you want in a dog.

If this is a bad disease and we take every dog that is affected or carriers out of the equation what will we have then?


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Angie B said:


> We were discussing this the other day... Something like 19% of all affecteds show symptoms... That's it...
> 
> There has to be "marker" genes involved..
> 
> Angie


I believe Katie has indicated that 85% of all affected dogs that they have tested over the age of three have collapsed at least once:




Katie Minor said:


> Last time I checked, I believe those 3 yrs or older and *not collapsing *was about 15% with more than 600 EE or "affected" dogs identified.
> 
> Finn's picture is up on our office wall, and I'm looking at him right now!


 (emphasis added)


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Evidently I had the percentage's reversed.... It was a discussion during training with clients and one of them threw that percentage out there... I took it at face value. She's pretty sharp and on top of these things...

My personal experience is that affecteds that show no symptoms is higher then the affecteds that show symptoms,,, in my kennel anyway.

I still think there's more to the picture...

Angie


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

> Genetics is not simple.


We always like things in black and white, but genetics aren't always that way. Cystic Fibrosis in humans is a lot like EIC is dogs. All you have to do is go to a CF clinic and you see kids with the same genetic disease, same age, ect with widely varing issues and health. Some do so well you wouldn't know they were sick, and others can be barely surviving.


----------



## Cody Covey (Jan 29, 2008)

is this like magic Johnson and AIDS?


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

How do these dog compete at such a high level? Your right we want it black and white with a little color, but EIC doesn't make sense to this uneducated guy. CNM is clear cut but EIC isn't. Every dog that goes down now has EIC, what happen to all of the other bad things they could have had.


----------



## Sissi (Dec 27, 2007)

kimsmith said:


> How do these dog compete at such a high level? Your right we want it black and white with a little color, but EIC doesn't make sense to this uneducated guy. CNM is clear cut but EIC isn't. Every dog that goes down now has EIC, what happen to all of the other bad things they could have had.


But in Case of EIC we do have the privilege to have a genetic test. So why not using it and avoid to breed affected (to eliminate any risk for possible episodes)? It doesn´t do any harm and you can even breed your affected dog, if it was the best one you ever had. Just breed it to a clear.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Exercise induced collapse, you can do a search and find thread after thread on the subject.



> It doesn´t do any harm and you can even breed your affected dog


With all the hype about EIC you wouldn't find anyone that would touch an EIC affected to EIC clear breeding unless they were well educated about labradors and knew what they wanted.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Sorry Jake for not answering the question, I had to go eat and help with my shape. (round)

I'll give you the uneducated description of EIC.

Dogs with this genetic disorder will loose control of there back legs kind of like heat stoke, but when you cool them down and let them rest they usually jump back in about 30 minutes. Most will try to keep running but the back legs go limp. I've even heard they can loose control of their front legs too. Most owners learn what to watch for that triggers there dog and they don't have as many problems. I've also heard with age symtoms go away. Hope the helps.... Hope I didn't forget anything.

The problem I have is some dogs that have the genetic markers will never go down and some will go down by just getting fed because of the excitement. I've even heard that some have died but how did they know it wasn't heat stoke that killed them.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> If this is a bad disease and we take every dog that is affected or carriers out of the equation what will we have then?


We will have a much healthier population of Field Labs! There is NO shortage of very talented dogs that have tested clear for both EIC and CNM.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *kimsmith*  

_If this is a bad disease and we take every dog that is affected or carriers out of the equation what will we have then?_


We will have a much healthier population of Field Labs! There is NO shortage of very talented dogs that have tested clear for both EIC and CNM.

Second that.


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

> What is EIC, if you don't mind me asking?



http://www1.umn.edu/umnnews/video/AHC.html


http://www.vdl.umn.edu/vdl/ourservices/canineneuromuscular/home.html


.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Mr Booty and Losthwy are you saying that Affected and Carriers should be fixed so we wouldn't have to worry about EIC. What Genetic disease will be next, do you think we will cause more problems down the line by fixing 60 percent of the FT Labradors. I think that is what was posted that 60 percent were at least carriers. Not trying to get into an argument, but just wondering.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> I've even heard that some have died but how did they know it wasn't heat stoke that killed them.


The test was not available for the first dog. His sire is a carrier. The second dog was from the same sire and he was affected from post mortem blood-(just before the test was released). He also had a littermate that died the same way.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

I don't see any need for breeding carriers. Not with all the "clears" to choose from. Of course, if I owned a carrier I might think otherwise. One could argue that there is nothing wrong with carriers and there really isn't, if you are not going to breed them. However, we can't police down the road and people unknowingly will produce affecteds. So, with all the clears to choose from, there is really no reason to breed carriers. 

Other diseases popping up? To me, that is like being scared of the boogie man. I'd rather deal with what we know than speculate.


----------



## Pheasanttomeetyou (Jan 31, 2004)

kimsmith said:


> Mr Booty and Losthwy are you saying that Affected and Carriers should be fixed so we wouldn't have to worry about EIC. What Genetic disease will be next, do you think we will cause more problems down the line by fixing 60 percent of the FT Labradors. I think that is what was posted that 60 percent were at least carriers. Not trying to get into an argument, but just wondering.


Mr. Booty and Losthwy are saying that you should't breed affected and/or carriers to each other. This could result in affected pups. You could, however, breed Affected dogs and Carriers to dogs that are EIC clear. These breeding would result in 100% Carriers within the litter (Affected X Clear) or a certain percentage of Carriers within the litter (statistics say 50% -- but reality says "to be determined" ....)

This means that prospective Dams and stud dogs need to be tested so you can make educated breeding decisions. 

There a lots of clear studs and bitches in the world - so if you have a carrier, you'll have to add EIC clear to your selection priorities.

Just say'in


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Pheasanttomeetyou said:


> Mr. Booty and Losthwy are saying that you should't breed affected and/or carriers to each other. This could result in affected pups. You could, however, breed Affected dogs and Carriers to dogs that are EIC clear. These breeding would result in 100% Carriers within the litter (Affected X Clear) or a certain percentage of Carriers within the litter (statistics say 50% -- but reality says "to be determined" ....)


Please do not put words in my mouth. Reread my post. I see no reason for breeding carriers to clear simply because there are many very talented FC AFC's who are clear. In my book, clear x clear is the only way to go. Just to many fine Labs to choose from to have to go to a carrier.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Pheasanttomeetyou that is not what I'm getting from their post. Everyone that knows about EIC will try not to produce an affected dog, but I can't see talking all of these dogs out of the equation. Booty if we only breed clears are we not going to bottle neck our breedings if at least 60 percent are carriers. How many of the 40 percent are clear of everything else?


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

Let's get the numbers right:

From the start of official testing at the end of July-mid-Jan:

3307 Labradors tested.

355 affected - Realize that this includes a lot of diagnostic testing for collapsing dogs, as well as litter testing from parents found to be carriers. As such, it is inflated compared to the population at large.

1185 carriers

1767 clears


11% affected
36% carrier
53% clear


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

ok, let me be the boob to ask about the 500-lb gorilla(s) in the room - - - 

did this just pop up recently like aids?? was there an issue with dogs collapsing 10 or 20 or 30 yrs ago and everyone just scratched their heads like it was a mystery? like SIDS in human babies? or ADD?

what is the origin? another breed? is it lab only? did the relentless pursuit of FT robots create it, or is it also inherent or latent in bench lines? i have hunted and run dogs at a moderate level for 30 years and never heard of it until recently....and certainly never witnessed it at all 

i am NOT demeaning, it, i am just asking WTF? i WILL test my dog if he ever reaches a level worthy of breeding, but i still gotta wonder....how did this happen?


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Booty if we only breed clears are we not going to bottle neck our breedings if at least 60 percent are carriers.


No bottleneck with Labs, just too many to choose from that are clear.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

surfgeoD300 said:


> ok, let me be the boob to ask about the 500-lb gorilla(s) in the room - - -
> 
> did this just pop up recently like aids?? was there an issue with dogs collapsing 10 or 20 or 30 yrs ago and everyone just scratched their heads like it was a mystery? like SIDS in human babies? or ADD?
> 
> ...


While EIC carriers are widespread, they are not in any way affected by their carrier status. The actual number of affected dogs is estimated at 3-5% and it is found among both show and field lines. However, it is not generally apparent. Attacks only happen under certain circumstances and are often very mild. They were typically diagnosed as heat stroke. As people began to suspect that there was a more specific problem, it could only be diagnosed through process of elimination -- exclude other causes and caqll what was left EIC.

The genetic research project showed that a specific genetic mutation was directly linked to a large number of these collapses. It also showed that many dogs have collapses for reasons unrelated to EIC and that many of the dogs affected by EIC have only a small number of collapses during their entire lives, making misdiagnosis easy and leaving the affected dogs in the breeding population. This unlike CNM where affected dogs typically become apparent long before they are bred and the illness was unambiguous. Until the research project was done, it was not apparent that EIC was genetically inherited. Thus, a carrier like Lean Mac could be bred with no consideration of his carrier status. 

EIC has been found in some other breeds (including Chessies) but is primarily found in Labs.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> was there an issue with dogs collapsing 10 or 20 or 30 yrs ago and everyone just scratched their heads like it was a mystery?


 Basically yes. It has been around for awhile and usually was thought to be overheating. The heavy use of now presumed carriers, plus probably that we hear more about them now is why. Talk to any of the pros that have been around for awhile and it has been around a long time. A couple of years ago I would have never believed that it was that common, but the conformation labs have it also-they just need to test.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Ok we have 53% clear and out of those 53% how many are carriers of CNM. Let say just playing with numbers. 10% are carries of CNM. Now what percent of the 43% left have good hips and elbows. What percent after that has clear eyes. What percent after that don't throws pups that have all kinds of behavior problems. Man It's going to be hard to get a clean dog that has nothing in it's closet. Just saying keeping it real like Randy Jackson would say.


----------



## ghak99 (Jun 1, 2007)

surfgeoD300 said:


> did this just pop up recently like aids??


 The test for EIC is a relatively recent development. EIC is genetic, aids is not.



surfgeoD300 said:


> was there an issue with dogs collapsing 10 or 20 or 30 yrs ago and everyone just scratched their heads like it was a mystery?


It has been around a while. 



surfgeoD300 said:


> what is the origin? another breed? is it lab only?


As it is now, I understand it to be a genetic mutation. Other breeds do carry the gene.



surfgeoD300 said:


> did the relentless pursuit of FT robots create it, or is it also inherent or latent in bench lines?


No. Bench or show ring lines also carry the gene.


----------



## labraiser (Feb 5, 2004)

So let me get this right, you would not breed a clear dog to a carrier, so hypothetically if you could breed your clear dog to honcho or super chief, ect, you wouldn't because you don't know their EIC status, I think your short sighted if you think you should not breed carriers to clear. 
As long as you test and can be assured your not producing affected. I think your removing too many dogs and who knows what will come out limited gene pools.


----------



## Jason E. (Sep 9, 2004)

Anyone out there still doubt the test ?


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Jason E. said:


> Anyone out there still doubt the test ?


No,,,, but I think there is* more* to the equation,,,

Angie


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

ghak99 said:


> The test for EIC is a relatively recent development. EIC is genetic, aids is not.
> 
> 
> *It has been around a while. *


can you be a bit more specific? this could mean 5 years to 100 years.....

great thread, i appreciate the well-thought out input


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Angie B said:


> No,,,, but I think there is* more* to the equation,,,
> 
> Angie


me, too angie.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Unless they are doing DNA testing for dogs blood that was sent in to match the parents DNA, I'm not sure if you can be 100 percent sure. What would keep people from sending clear dogs blood in for affected dogs to get a clear status. I'm sure they would get caught down the line but if people would register dogs from different litters why would they worry about EIC.

I might be dreaming but didn't some of the first people who sent in for the CNM test come back carriers then for some reason they retested and come back clear.

Cerf the test just came out and some think we have had this problem in labs for many years, just didn't know what it was.


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

i remember a guy in Tejas HRC circa 1990 who lived on the NW side of Houston (someone out there will remember his name or Tejas people may have a record) who had a super star dog named Rambo, got a GHRCH at some ridiculously early age and went on to run some FT's and jammed left and right for a bit so he and the dog were totally legit. then one mild October day the dog just flat out collapsed and died in training, from what i remember was the first retrieve of the day on a 70 deg day (cold for October here in texas. it was devastating for the man, obviously, as well as all of Rambo's fans in the club. if the facts are correct could this have been EIC but no one knew at the time???


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Only a idiot would try to fake clear status. The first breeding would likely produce a carrier if tested. What would they have to gain.
________
GLASS PIPE PICTURES


----------



## Jason E. (Sep 9, 2004)

Would be a risky move and stupid


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Just saying things have been done before by people who don't care. Look at the people who have been bared from AKC.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Kim, I’ll attempt to explain where I am coming from on this.
I have had too many Labs with health issues to not take health seriously. I still have two at home with bad hips. Last year, I gave a way a youngster that I had over 15k into because I couldn’t sell him with a bad hip.
So, for my current 18 week old pup, I went with a sire that has all the health clearences like OFA Excellent hips, normal elbows, EIC and CNM clear. He has over 100 All Age points and two Opens wins and other placements so far in 09. He also represents the breed well in terms of how the AKC defines a Labrador Retriever. 
If I am going to spend my time, money and emotions on a dog, I want it all. Health, field talent and breed conformation.
For the dam, I wanted a solid bigger female with field talent, as well as OFA Excellent hips Normal elbows and EIC and CNM clear. I feel this improves my odds of better skelital health and avoiding carriers of EIC and CNM was no problem.
So far, so good. At 6 months he will go to his Field Trial trainer after I have done a hip prelim. At 14 months if he has a great Penn Hip score, I will continue to have him trained. Then he has to be able to handle the pressures of training and he has to be a good marker of birds. One can’t win if a dog can’t mark. Only time will tell but, at least I personally feel comfortable that we are starting out with something worth starting out with. He was CERFed clear at 16 weeks and I am awaiting PRA results from Otigen.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

YardleyLabs said:


> **snip** Thus, a carrier like Lean Mac could be bred with no consideration of his carrier status.


Is this a known fact or an assumption based on offspring?

Thanks,


----------



## labraiser (Feb 5, 2004)

Mr booty, 

If you think the sire represents what AKC thinks a lab should be? then did you breed to a lab that fits the current breed standard? I don't know many that have 100 AA points and fit the breed standard?


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

labraiser said:


> Mr booty,
> 
> If you think the sire represents what AKC thinks a lab should be? then did you breed to a lab that fits the current breed standard? I don't know many that have 100 AA points and fit the breed standard?


It wasn't an easy search. First off, most bench champions do not fit the breed standard. The breeder of my pup and I discussed possible studs via emails for over a year! We both identified a dog that we felt could deliver the Big 3 - health, field talent and good breed conformation. I believe the stud has over 115 AA points currently and still as a good 3-4 years left to compete.


----------



## labraiser (Feb 5, 2004)

so your saying he has a CC or does he have a CH? or none? Or do you think he fits the breed standard? I just have never seen any trial dogs that fit AKC's written standard. None of mine make it, nor do i want them built like the standard.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

labraiser said:


> so your saying he has a CC or does he have a CH? or none? Or do you think he fits the breed standard? I just have never seen any trial dogs that fit AKC's written standard. None of mine make it, nor do i want them built like the standard.


No, he is an FC AFC. I think he looks the way The Standard intended, not what it is being shown today. A big overboned heavy dog would never make it in Field Trials physically. They'd fall over with a heart attack.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

I'll just add this. Obviously no affected pups is what everbody wants, but your main sale's pitch shouldn't be an EIC clear litter IMO. It should be about the 2 dogs being bred.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> I'll just add this. Obviously no affected pups is what everbody wants, but your main sale's pitch shouldn't be an EIC clear litter IMO. It should be about the 2 dogs being bred.


Huh? That reads like a back yard breeder pitch? Again, too many EIC clears out there that one doesn't have to go to a carrier. What desirable traits would a carrier have that couldn't be found in a clear dog?


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2009)

surfgeoD300 said:


> the dog just flat out collapsed and died in training, from what i remember was the first retrieve of the day on a 70 deg day (cold for October here in texas. it was devastating for the man, obviously, as well as all of Rambo's fans in the club. if the facts are correct could this have been EIC but no one knew at the time???


What are the facts you are presenting? Would you have ever used the term "collapsed" if you had not heard of EIC? Or would you have said suddenly "dropped dead"?

There are NO facts in the case you are describing.

David, I am sincerely not out to get you personally, but for gawd's sake, you are so dang easy to pick on.

Booty, which of your dogs' pedigrees can you show us that doesn't have a Carrier in it?

Love,

Melanie


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> Booty, which of your dogs' pedigrees can you show us that doesn't have a Carrier in it?
> 
> Love,
> 
> Melanie


All pedigrees will have dogs with health problems if that is what you are asking? However, with both sire and dam tested as clear, I'll bet my pickup truck my pup is clear.

Love,

Booty


----------



## Cedarswamp (Apr 29, 2008)

Rick_C said:


> Is this a known fact or an assumption based on offspring?
> 
> Thanks,


Lean Mac has an EIC affected offspring listed on OFA which makes him a carrier. Gates and Banner also have affected offspring listed.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Mr Booty said:


> Huh? That reads like a back yard breeder pitch? Again, too many EIC clears out there that one doesn't have to go to a carrier. What desirable traits would a carrier have that couldn't be found in a clear dog?


Back yard breeder? No.

I'll take an EIC carrier from a stacked pedigree, with good-excellent hips, CNM Clear, normal elbows, and will cerf than a pup who has a litter that's primary selling point is an "EIC Clear Litter" anyday of the week and twice on Sunday. 

Why would you limit the dogs to pick from right now? Yes, 1 day you can move to breeding EIC Clear dogs only or atleast almost only, but today isn't really the day. In the end, it's on the buyer to do their homework to get what they want.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2009)

Mr Booty said:


> *No bottleneck with Labs, just too many to choose from that are clear.*





Mr Booty said:


> All pedigrees will have dogs with health problems if that is what you are asking? However, with both sire and dam tested as clear, I'll bet my pickup truck my pup is clear.
> 
> Love,
> 
> Booty


I asked if there were any Carriers in any of your dogs' pedigrees. Period. Would any of them be alive if the Carriers had not been bred?

Gotta Dodge Ram 2500 of my own, thanks,

Melanie


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I truly understand where you are coming from Booty and I'm not saying anything is wrong in what you did. Knock on wood, I've never owned a pup with bad hips, bad eyes, hip problems, cnm carrier or one that has gone down with EIC so I've been lucky. I've only seen one go down in the last 10 years missing with dogs and it was one of the nicest dog that I've trained. This dog went 5 for 6 in master and it was my fault the dog failed the 1 test. This dog only went down twice and it was also because I was putting to much pressure on the dog. It just seems hypocritical to think you can get a clean dog by breeding Clear to Clear when there are so many other things that can go wrong. Not saying Clear to Clear wouldn't be great but if a carrier had better traits why would we want to pull them out of the gene pool.

By the way and it might be rumors but I've heard of dogs going down that were tested carriers also.


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

If there is so many out there maybe someone could tell me of half a dozen non Lean Mac EIC and CNM clear studs with good hips and elbows and clear eyes. On top of that NFC or NAFC or At the least FC/AFC. I have been looking not coming up with a long list.
________
Michigan dispensary


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> I'll just add this. Obviously no affected pups is what everbody wants, but your main sale's pitch shouldn't be an EIC clear litter IMO. It should be about the 2 dogs being bred.


How many today would breed your dog to a dog with HD? With all the available dogs out there that are EIC clear why do it? I don't buy into the limited gene pool. I see it as a positive devolvement more and more are asking for EIC and other clearances before breeding. The market will be a guide, for breeders have a choice of clear dogs to breed to. And choose not to breed to EIC and CNM carriers tomorrow just like they don't breed to dogs with HD today.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> I asked if there were any Carriers in any of your dogs' pedigrees. Period. Would any of them be alive if the Carriers had not been bred?
> 
> Gotta Dodge Ram 2500 of my own, thanks,
> 
> Melanie


No but, I don't get your point. Today we have the tools to identify both EIC and CNM. With the amount of clear Labs available, why would anyone want to keep EIC alive? Again, I have to ask; what qualities can only be found in carriers that can't be found in a clear dog? 

I understand that with Goldens and Chessies one may have to go with a carrier because of the limited supply of quality field studs but, this is not the case with Labs.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Losthwy said:


> How many today would breed your dog to a dog with HD? With all the available dogs out there that are EIC clear why do it? I don't buy into the limited gene pool. I see it as a positive devolvement more and more are asking for EIC and other clearances before breeding. The market will be a guide, for breeders have a choice of clear dogs to breed to. And choose not to breed to EIC and CNM carriers tomorrow just like they don't breed to dogs with HD today.


How in god's name can somebody breed their dog to mine without my permission for 1 and who in the world would be dumb enough to breed a bitch to a 10 month old pup?

Read the 2nd post regards.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

scott spalding said:


> If there is so many out there maybe someone could tell me of half a dozen non Lean Mac EIC and CNM clear studs with good hips and elbows and clear eyes. On top of that NFC or NAFC or At the least FC/AFC. I have been looking not coming up with a long list.


Checkout Kip Kemp's(I think he uses the handle Butt Munch here on RTF) dog FC AFC Blue. He not only has all the health clearences, Blue is also choco factored. Lean Mac is his grandsire.

FC AFC Ford has all health clearnences and is a Lean Mac get plus, he is an annual high point dog and has well over 200 AA points.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Mr Booty said:


> No but, I don't get your point. Today we have the tools to identify both EIC and CNM.


I'll simply ask this and then leave this alone. If there was a test for EIC back in the day, are you saying you wouldn't breed to LM (Lean Mac.) if you had an EIC clear bitch that was good enough to be bred?


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Over the years some very nice EIC clear pups have come from carriers. I find it interesting that we use such high standards in the reproduction of our pets. Many of us were glasses but have children we have heart disease and carry the cancer gene but have children but we won't breed a carier to clear interesting thought process
________
**** Tube Tv


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

scott spalding said:


> Over the years some very nice EIC clear pups have come from carriers. I find it interesting that we use such high standards in the reproduction of our pets. Many of us were glasses but have children we have heart disease and carry the cancer gene but have children but we won't breed a carier to clear interesting thought process


We don't think about that kind of stuff when we see a nice looking butt in tight fitting jeans!;-)


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2009)

Mr Booty said:


> (I think he uses the handle Butt Munch here on RTF)


Gawd, I miss him. How can we get him to come back to us?


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> Gawd, I miss him. How can we get him to come back to us?


I understand he still lurks but eveytime his wife Karen sees him touch a keyboard, she slaps him on top of the head.


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Mr Booty said:


> We don't think about that kind of stuff when we see a nice looking butt in tight fitting jeans!;-)





Melanie Foster said:


> Gawd, I miss him. How can we get him to come back to us?


Use you're power of persuasion Melanie.
________
Black Girl Live


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> I'll simply ask this and then leave this alone. If there was a test for EIC back in the day, are you saying you wouldn't breed to LM (Lean Mac.) if you had an EIC clear bitch that was good enough to be bred?


Yup!

It is not all about winning, it is more about doing the right thing.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Sounds like to me Booty, people who run FT's are going to love your ideas. When all of these clear to clear breedings can't compete with those carriers because there's more to pick from. Just saying that if you are only looking for clear dogs then your chances go way down to find the next FC, AFC, NFC or NAFC dog by at least 53%.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Sounds like to me Booty, people who run FT's are going to love your ideas. When all of these clear to clear breedings can't compete with those carriers because there's more to pick from. Just saying that if you are only looking for clear dogs then your chances go way down to find the next FC, AFC, NFC or NAFC dog by at least 53%.


I have no problem looking at my face in the mirror when I shave and I also sleep well at nights. ;-)

P S There are also a lot of clear x clear to choose from.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

It's 11:30 so maybe you are right. At my age I need all the beauty sleep I can get. My wife is going to leave me if I don't go to bed. I'm not sleeping very good at all.

53% less so you have 47% to pick from. Then you got to take out % for the CNM carriers and I wouldn't have clue on how many that is.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2009)

Mr Booty said:


> I have no problem looking at my face in the mirror when I shave


Two words for you. Contact lenses.

Love you, you handsome devil you.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Heck, I'm blind as a bat looking at anything within three feet! At restaurants, I have to take the menu into the men's room where there is enough light to read the damn thing with my bifocals.


----------



## Jason Brion (May 31, 2006)

Mr Booty why don't you make your approach a little more reasonable. You could accomplish the same thing if breeders sold their carrier pups with limited registration. Still have clear pups from all the great dogs but the problem would stop cold turkey.

But then again, maybe most of us in the retriever games world got into this to win. And if someone believes they want a puppy out of one of our dogs...so be it. If not, maybe they would rather have a genetically perfect lap dog that no one wants to have a puppy out of.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

You need to be careful with the idea that only a limited number of affected dogs go down. Dogs have different triggers. Some go down from just having someone twirl a bumper (an extreme), other do not go down at all when training or running trials or HTs. And it is with this observation that many folks get the idea that a dog won't go down or that the concern is over blown. But I have now seen several that do not go down at all training or trialing but will go down hunting. Others go down playing chase with the grandchildren. I've seen one that never went down training, trialing or running HTs but saw the dog go down within seconds of jumping some deer while pheasant hunting in 37 deg temps just after being released to hunt.

From those observations & others that have been related to me, I believe most affected dogs will go down and should be watched closely to avoid high risk behavior that might trigger an event in circumstances where the dog could not be restrained quickly & removed from the trigger environment.


----------



## kjrice (May 19, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Heck, I'm blind as a bat looking at anything within three feet! At restaurants, I have to take the menu into the men's room where there is enough light to read the damn thing with my bifocals.


I bet you wear muck boots just to pee.


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

Melanie Foster said:


> What are the facts you are presenting? Would you have ever used the term "collapsed" if you had not heard of EIC? Or would you have said suddenly "dropped dead"?
> 
> There are NO facts in the case you are describing.
> 
> ...


what is your problem ma'am? i am merely asking this:

"_could_ this have been EIC before it was known what EIC is"?

i am not trying to get into any of this debate. i merely asked a question, i just want to learn and all i did was state a few "things that happened" (i guess there is a difference between the fact that the dog either "collapsed dead" or "dropped dead", but i am not an atty). why does this upset you and why must you attack me for this? yeah, the dog "dropped" dead, and heat appears to not be the reason. this is not a "fact debate" so please dont make it one.

its a question so i can understand EIC a little better.

now, you are free to attack me again if you see fit.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Originally Posted by *Mr Booty*
> _*No bottleneck with Labs, just too many to choose from that are clear.*_


Well it looks to me that a hand full of the non-LeanMac EIC clear sires are really getting a ton of breedings, some of them so young we have no idea what they are going to producebut it's tied up to marketability rather than those that actually will run field trials. That in itself Mr Booty will be another bottleneck for the time being until this works itself out.


----------



## Ken Archer (Aug 11, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Just saying things have been done before by people who don't care. Look at the people who have been bared from AKC.


A pedigree is only as good as the word of the breeder. That is the reason why, when you are looking for a new puppy, you first select the breeder and then the litter. I wouldn't buy what might be presumed to be the best pup in the world from a breeder I didn't know and trust.


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

There is also another way to do it.I will buy prospects out of the "carrier bloodlines" as long as they test clear by test or parentage.The two I compete now are out of untested parents.....but have been tested and are clear of everything.To me,thats the best of both worlds,and should they be bred,only to the same standard....I have no baggage to deal with.Maybe selfish,but if littermates are carriers,Oh well,somebody will still want them,and yes the little carrier may be the next phenom,and that is great for someone else.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I'm an uneducated barefooted red neck from TN and I can't understand how we can say that all carriers should be fixed and not bred. I'm sorry but the numbers tell my little mind that we would cause all kinds of problems down the line.


----------



## Cedarswamp (Apr 29, 2008)

I think part of the reason people are looking for non LM studs is that a lot of dogs have him in 2 or 3 generations, quite a few already have him twice in that many generations. Out of my five, I have three granddaughters, a great-grandson and one that does not have him there. I'm guessing that like me, they're looking down the line at "do I want to breed two line bred LM dogs together".

If you look back in most of mine's 5-6 gen ped, Itchin to Go is there 4-5 times. I'm sure there's others in there multiple times as well, Itchy is just on the top of my head.

If they're just avoiding LM breeding trying to avoid EIC, without testing, it's not a good way to do it...one of my two affected had no LM in the pedigree.

Alison


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

I have to agree with Kim on this one. There is no reason to not breed clears to carriers. Would I ever breed to an affected, NO. EIC is about education. If buyers are educated about buying a pup out of a clear bred to a carrier, and understand the consequences, then what is the problem? We are getting totally carried away with trying to create the perfect genetic specimen in dogs. And it will never happen. I am all about trying to better the breed through genetics, but commmon sense has to prevail, or we will end up screwing with mother nature one too many times, and could possibly end up not breeding for the betterment of the breed.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Steve Hester said:


> I have to agree with Kim on this one. There is no reason to not breed clears to carriers. Would I ever breed to an affected, NO. EIC is about education. If buyers are educated about buying a pup out of a clear bred to a carrier, and understand the consequences, then what is the problem? We are getting totally carried away with trying to create the perfect genetic specimen in dogs. And it will never happen. I am all about trying to better the breed through genetics, but commmon sense has to prevail, or we will end up screwing with mother nature one too many times, and could possibly end up not breeding for the betterment of the breed.


I said before the test came out that I would still breed carrier to clear, good thing as I'd have had to eat my words otherwise, like some did later, when more than 1/2 my dogs came back carriers. Everyone has their personal choices in what they breed and what they believe, rhetoric isn't going to change most. My bottom line is not producing affecteds, nor bad eyes, hips/elbows. I can GUARANTEE using the science we have now that I won't produce a CNM or EIC affected dog from my breedings, I can only warranty the hips/elbows because even with the current tests available, dysplasia can still happen. Eyes have some things that can be tested genetically, some not.
I'm not rushing to cull all carriers from my program, there are things more important to me. My last litter, FC AFC clear stud to MH carrier female. I planned on keeping a yellow female. I chose not to test the 3 YF that were whelped, even though the other two were already spoken for and going to spay homes and didn't care about carrier status. I could have tested the 3 and chosen one that was clear, if there was one. I didn't want that to be my basis for choosing. So I didn't. For all I know the two spay homes got clears and I got the only carrier. There is so much more that has to happen in the next couple of years, hips, elbows, (pup CERF was normal whole litter), training, ability, EIC carrier status is a blip in that equation and I wanted to choose the pup I felt would work the best for me in being a HT candidate and a full time housedog/companion. With this particular line, being vocal was far more of an issue for me so I kept the one that didn't scream when she didn't get what she wanted when she wanted it. Everyone has different goals and I can certainly understand why some only want all clears, fortunately, our breed is so big and diverse, they can go the all clear route if they choose.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

I have heard that sickle cell carriers don't get malaria
And Cistic fibrocis carriers don't get dicentary 

Just thinking outloud here

Pete


----------



## David McLendon (Jan 5, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> You need to be careful with the idea that only a limited number of affected dogs go down. Dogs have different triggers. Some go down from just having someone twirl a bumper (an extreme), other do not go down at all when training or running trials or HTs. And it is with this observation that many folks get the idea that a dog won't go down or that the concern is over blown. But I have now seen several that do not go down at all training or trialing but will go down hunting. Others go down playing chase with the grandchildren. I've seen one that never went down training, trialing or running HTs but saw the dog go down within seconds of jumping some deer while pheasant hunting in 37 deg temps just after being released to hunt.
> 
> From those observations & others that have been related to me, I believe most affected dogs will go down and should be watched closely to avoid high risk behavior that might trigger an event in circumstances where the dog could not be restrained quickly & removed from the trigger environment.


 I agree David, we have an EIC dog and his triggers are not so much physical as mental. You could run him wide open forever on land throwing dead ducks or pheasants, but the first shot flyer that he sees, he is down. Fun bumpers on land all day, fun bumper in the water especially with another dog out and you better have your water wings on. I found this out at your place one day and had to take a little early season dip. He doesn't do much water anymore, Ted has even gone down from the excitement of getting in the pool here at home. If he is not where I can get my hands on him quickly, then he doesn't get wet. 

There is by the way no Lean Mac in his pedigree anywhere, he is a yellow dog from a prominent line of yellows that have no relation to LM, so it is quite widespread.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

For those that believe only clears should be bred, because there are enough of them. What about carrier bitches? That are themselves really talented, or have produced good pups.

Exception made for them? How many FC/AFC bitches are there, that are bred , any given year? Not too many, I don't think....

If exceptions are made, then we aren't getting rid of EIC gene totally. If they aren't, too bad to lose what these great females contribute. To me, the Mom is far more important, when choosing a breeding. Carrier status wouldn't matter at all, if I liked the female. All 4 generations that we own, come from one female, that I now know was a CNM carrier. Would have missed out on a lot, if we never bred FC/AFC Southwind's Molly Rose.


----------



## rboudet (Jun 29, 2004)

surfgeoD300 said:


> did the relentless pursuit of FT robots create it, or is it also inherent or latent in bench lines?


Where can I find one of these FT robots? That sure would save a lot of time and money in training/



Jay Dufour said:


> and yes the little carrier may be the next phenom,and that is great for someone else.


Jay, let me know when you get one of the carrier phenom's, I will gladly take it off your hands. I aint scared.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

cakaiser said:


> For those that believe only clears should be bred, because there are enough of them. What about carrier bitches? That are themselves really talented, or have produced good pups.
> 
> Exception made for them? How many FC/AFC bitches are there, that are bred , any given year? Not too many, I don't think....
> 
> If exceptions are made, then we aren't getting rid of EIC gene totally. If they aren't, too bad to lose what these great females contribute. To me, the Mom is far more important, when choosing a breeding. Carrier status wouldn't matter at all, if I liked the female. All 4 generations that we own, come from one female, that I now know was a CMN carrier. Would have missed out on a lot, if we never bred FC/AFC Southwind's Molly Rose.


Zealotry comes easily on the internet, where the practical implications of difficult decisions are easily dismissed.

As for me, I am glad that the purity police are not in control of breedings.

I purchased a puppy from a fabulous FC/AFC x FC/AFC breeding. The bitch was a carrier.

I had CERF and hips done before placing her in training. If she turns out to be a big league hitter, and if I decide to breed her, then I will test her for EIC (she is clear by parentage for CNM). But, I am not going to worry about that until she proves she is a big league hitter.

I am more interested in finding a big league hitter, than I am in finding the next model specimen for the purity police.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

kimsmith said:


> I'm an uneducated barefooted red neck from TN and I can't understand how we can say that all carriers should be fixed and not bred. I'm sorry but the numbers tell my little mind that we would cause all kinds of problems down the line.


I agree with you completely. However, I also know that because of my interest in breeding that I would not buy a pup unless I knew it was EIC clear and I believe that most competition types feel the same. Most pet families, by contrast, don't care since they have no interest in breeding. It is unfortunate, but probably true, that a person breeding a litter with carriers will be forced to incur significant testing costs for each puppy and will end up selling carriers at reduced prices. That's a tough pill to swallow when you are contemplating breeding a litter.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

YardleyLabs said:


> I would not buy a pup unless I knew it was EIC clear and I believe that most competition types feel the same.
> .


This is not my experience.

I know of many FT competitors who care about performance first, and have demonstrated their preferences by the puppies that they choose to purchase, raise, and train.


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

It doesn't happen often....BUT, I agree with Ted 100%!


----------



## Buck Mann (Apr 16, 2003)

YardleyLabs said:


> I believe that most competition types feel the same.


Like Ted, this has not been my experience either. Most of the competitors I'm around feel like I do, in that there is no difference between a clear and a carrier. It only becomes important when breeding and picking which dog to breed to.

Buck


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

I went back and checked the poll that was done on this a while ago. In fac, only 37% said they would not take a pup that might be a carrier (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=34162&highlight=poll+eic.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

YardleyLabs said:


> I went back and checked the poll that was done on this a while ago. In fac, only 37% said they would not take a pup that might be a carrier (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=34162&highlight=poll+eic.


 
Question 1: How do you define "competitor"?
Question 2: How many of the people who answered on the poll are "competitors" as you define it?

As for me, a "competitor" is someone who competes with an All Age FT Dog and has placed in an All Age Stake.

Ted


Yes, but how many are "competitors"?


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Ted Shih said:


> Question 1: How do you define "competitor"?
> Question 2: How many of the people who answered on the poll are "competitors" as you define it?
> 
> As for me, a "competitor" is someone who competes with an All Age FT Dog and has placed in an All Age Stake.
> ...


I was actually using the term more broadly to include all those competing in FT at any level as well as those running tests. I would agree that the more seriously an individual is focused on competition, the more they will accept to get a dog capable of the highest level of performance.


----------



## metalone67 (Apr 3, 2009)

Hello I'm new on here. Just a little info there is a great article in this months Delta Waterfowl magazine explaining this disease.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> I had CERF and hips done before placing her in training. If she turns out to be a big league hitter, and if I decide to breed her, then I will test her for EIC (she is clear by parentage for CNM). But, I am not going to worry about that until she proves she is a big league hitter.
> 
> I am more interested in finding a big league hitter, than I am in finding the next model specimen for the purity police.


Exactly what we did with our two 17 month olds. Prelims, hips/elbows, eyes. 

They are now in training, and I don't give a hoot if they are carriers. Worry about that when, and IF, they prove worthy of breeding. And, if it turned out, for any reason, they should not be bred, don't care. Always looking for that dog, that is consistently there at the end.

As has been said many times, those kind are rare. I could only hope that all might experience what it's like to own a bitch that is the quality of the one Ted's pup is out of. You might change your mind about carrier stuff.


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

YardleyLabs said:


> I went back and checked the poll that was done on this a while ago. In fac, only 37% said they would not take a pup that might be a carrier (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=34162&highlight=poll+eic.


One would need to look at the 37 percent that voted. Not all people are looking for the next NFC OR AFC but for those of us that are all factors must be considered. There have been some very talented EIC clear young dogs that have come from clear to carrier breedings. While there are plenty of EIC and CNM clear studs out there I will be the first to put them on the top of my list when I see them as a finalist at the national and with several offspring that obtain there FC/AFC.
________
Pissing Teen


----------



## Sissi (Dec 27, 2007)

Very interesting discussion
For all those people not wanting to breed to a carrier.
I would like to ask a question. Do you think there is a difference between an:
EIC clear pup from a clear to clear breeding 
and an EIC clear pup from a clear to carrier breeding?


----------



## Sissi (Dec 27, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> As for me, I am glad that the purity police are not in control of breedings.


Interesting statement. And you all are lucky to live in the USA. In Germany we need to obtain a breeding permission to get the resulting pups registered and until some weeks ago there was a sentence in the rules which excluded cnm carriers from breeding.


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

Sissi said:


> Very interesting discussion
> For all those people not wanting to breed to a carrier.
> I would like to ask a question. Do you think there is a difference between an:
> EIC clear pup from a clear to clear breeding
> and an EIC clear pup from a clear to carrier breeding?


It took ten pages for someone to finally put it together...
Well said Sissi.

Carrier Regards


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Cedarswamp said:


> Lean Mac has an EIC affected offspring listed on OFA which makes him a carrier. Gates and Banner also have affected offspring listed.


Thank you!


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> They are now in training, and I don't give a hoot if they are carriers. Worry about that when, and IF, they prove worthy of breeding. And, if it turned out, for any reason, they should not be bred, don't care. Always looking for that dog, that is consistently there at the end.


I bred a pup from frozen semen I have-I could care less if he was a carrier. I had people contact me and ask if I was going to test the frozen semen because they wanted an EIC clear dog. That was more important to them than the bloodline. I have 1 1/2 breedings left. The day that I would use a straw or two for the EIC test. I haven't done the test on him and he is at the trainers and feel the same way as you-I could care less.


----------



## Brent McDowell (Jul 2, 2008)

Folks, I just want to point something out. We should not remove carriers from the gene pool as a general statement IMO. How many FC/AFC, MH, GRHRCH dogs are out there that were sired by Lean Mac, Ford, etc? Some of the absolute highest-performing and best-producing sires *EVER* were carriers of this mutation, yet the performance of the breed is largely improved because of them. While they passed the mutation along, they also passed along some unmistakeably good performance traits. If we could have gone back 20 years and removed Lean Mac and all of his progeny from the gene pool, where would we be today? No one knows for sure, but all of us with super dogs sired by these studs would have missed out on some excellent dog work that's for sure. At the end of the day, we should work toward a goal of breeding the best performance dogs we can with a parallel goal of elminating EIC *affected* dogs in the process. Again, by maintaining clears and carriers in the gene pool, we will maintain 93-95% of all dogs in the pool. Knowledge is power. Test first, then breed.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Sissi said:


> Very interesting discussion
> For all those people not wanting to breed to a carrier.
> I would like to ask a question. Do you think there is a difference between an:
> EIC clear pup from a clear to clear breeding
> and an EIC clear pup from a clear to carrier breeding?


No those pups are equally clear, but that ignores the others in the litter that aren't clear. They are carriers. Who could go on to perpetuate the disease. I know there are some who have a great deal of time and money tied up in their dogs and if your dog is EIC or CNM positive it's understandable you are concern with it's breeding future. But breeding a dog with degenerative eyes disease, Hip Dysplasia, CNM or EIC may not be in the best interest of the breed.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Brent McDowell said:


> How many FC/AFC, MH, GRHRCH dogs are out there that were sired by Lean Mac, Ford, etc?


Ford is clear of both EIC and CNM and is the top living sire of FT titled dogs. I had the opportunity of scratching his head two weeks ago.

People should do what they are comfortable with!


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I also noticed that Lean Mac is mentioned all the time when it comes to EIC, but he isn't the only dog out there throwing EIC carriers or affected. Just because he breed a lot doesn't mean he is the cause.

Brent you are right on que.

Booty are you talking about Fordlands Bored out Ford. If you are you have no idea what you are talking about. Before testing was availably I had an affected dog out of Ford and another female. Don't get me wrong I would have a Ford pup anyday of the week but I know now the female needs to be clear. So you must not do your homework as good as you think you do. By the way you must have taking it for granted that this great producer which I will agree has been tested for everything. I guess we should take this great dog out of the gene pool.


----------



## metalone67 (Apr 3, 2009)

Rick_C said:


> Thank you!


Was a test done on Lean to prove that he is the carrier and not the bitch?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Ford is clear of both EIC


I don't think so, he has produced an affected on the sticky also.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> I don't think so, he has produced an affected on the sticky also.


 Then, I stand corected.

When I was researching studs, I placed him on my short list becasue I had read somewhere that he was clear. He is not listed as clear on his website so, sorry for the misinformation!


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

metalone67 said:


> Was a test done on Lean to prove that he is the carrier and not the bitch?


To produce an affected, both parents must be at least carriers, neither can be clear. There's an EIC sticky at the top of the main forum with a link to the U of M website, the real science is there as well as what combos produce what.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> This is not my experience.
> 
> I know of many FT competitors who care about performance first, and have demonstrated their preferences by the puppies that they choose to purchase, raise, and train.


Yeah, what he said. It's far more difficult to find a legit great dog than it is an EIC clear one.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Metalone, I'm sure there has never been a test on Lean Mac but with the numbers we can't deny that Lean Mac was a carrier, but you can also show that a lot of other dogs without Lean Mac were either affected or carriers. I'm sure if you go back far enough you could probably find the source.

What the most disappointing thing that I've heard and witness about EIC dogs is they are great specimens of what we want in a Labrador. Most people will tell you they have great muscle mass and are ready to go full speed. So it seems that we created this great dog but with some problems to go with it. Have you noticed at HT/FT that the dogs are getting better, is that because of the great breedings or because handlers are getting better. I think it's both.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

metalone67 said:


> Was a test done on Lean to prove that he is the carrier and not the bitch?


Based on having sired affected dogs as reportedhere and in the OFA database. See http://www.offa.org/display.html?appnum=808053#animal


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Ford is clear of both EIC and CNM and is the top living sire of FT titled dogs. I had the opportunity of scratching his head two weeks ago.
> 
> People should do what they are comfortable with!


Is this FC AFC Fordlands Bored Out Ford?


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> Is this FC AFC Fordlands Bored Out Ford?


Yes, Read post above.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> What the most disappointing thing that I've heard and witness about EIC dogs is they are great specimens of what we want in a Labrador. Most people will tell you they have great muscle mass and are ready to go full speed. So it seems that we created this great dog but with some problems to go with it. Have you noticed at HT/FT that the dogs are getting better, is that because of the great breedings or because handlers are getting better. I think it's both.


 
I don't think we should glamorize the EIC dog. I have seen some very nice dogs that were carriers of EIC. I have seen some very common dogs that were carriers of EIC.

I don't think all dogs should be bred.
I don't think all dogs that carry EIC dogs should be bred.
I think special dogs - whether they carry EIC or not - should be bred ... if that is what their owners want to do


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

My post came over wrong by making out like all EIC dogs are great. After I read the post it didn't come out the way I meant for it to. Sorry just meant that some of the people I've talked to had high hopes for there dog just to find out it had EIC.


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Tell me how bad you would feel with a NFC that was a carrier. I could come to terms with it just me though.
________
Toyota k engine


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

I would rather have a competitive all-age dog (one that wins, places, and qualifies for nationals each year) that is a carrier than a "genetically clean" dog that can't compete.

I, like Angie, believe there is much more to unfold about the testing and genetic markers and specific genes before it can be used as the absolute to rule out breedings.

I don't want a stupid dog or one that can't competitively participate at the advanced FT levels, in favor of just having clean genetics. 

Puppies always have been and always will be a crap shoot insofar as being the ideal for what you want. 

I disagree that there are lots of sires out there that have all the "clean" genetics along with the talent and produce record to meet my competitive needs. There may be lots of FCs, AFCs, or FC-AFCs but not all are created equal. Some are much more prolific than others, and some are much more consistent than others. There are plenty of titled dogs that only have the bare minimum points required to title. Some of those dogs will not earn many more points than that minimum amount. When you look at the produce record of a dog that has produced lots of titled dogs (FT titles) out of a variety of females vs. those dogs that have all the genetics and have produced many titled dogs (again FT titles) out of a variety of females, the list of choices becomes pretty short.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Vicki Worthington said:


> I would rather have a competitive all-age dog (one that wins, places, and qualifies for nationals each year) that is a carrier than a "genetically clean" dog that can't compete..


Me too.

I have two FC/AFC males (Ace and Zowie) both retired, both went to multiple Nationals and were each bred a couple of times

I have two FC/AFC females (Buffy and Mootsie) both active, both have been to multiple Nationals, and both are spayed and have never been bred.

I have raised more puppies than I care to remember, invested months of training in those puppies, before ultimately washing them out. 

I am searching for another big time hitter, not a big time breeder.

Breeding my dogs is the least of my concerns.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Vicki you are right on and Ted I agree but it takes breedings to get that big time hitter.

Scott what do you mean with your post. Would I love to have an NFC Male that was a carrier. Heck yes bring them on. If anyone is giving them a way let me know. They would have a home at my house.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

scott spalding said:


> Tell me how bad you would feel with a NFC that was a carrier. I could come to terms with it just me though.


I'm sure I could figure a way to manage, too <sigh> Oh to have that "problem!"


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Fom we can always dream about it.


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

Yes, it does. It's just that with Ted & I, breeding is secondary to competing. There always seems to be a plethora of folks who want to raise puppies, so I think we will be okay in the breeding department. I've raised my share & after my current litter is gone, it will be a long time before I do any more litters.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Fom we can always dream about it.


If you are going to dream, dream big or don't bother! :grin:

For now though, I'm just shooting for my first FC/AFC dog....we can tackle the issue of a "carrier" with National titles next week


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Yea but ya'll are big time, I'm happen when I get my next MH title. So a NFC would be like going from little league to Pro for me. For y'all its like going from High School to Pro, so I'm really dreaming big.

I will also take any EIC affected NFC titled dogs if you are giving them away. Man my hunting buddy's would die seeing me run a 500 yard blind through 3 countys.


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

I have bought three nice puppies from carrier litters,so Im not the genetics police.I just choose the clear ones.


----------



## Julie R. (Jan 13, 2003)

Interesting thread, we have a similar disagreement going on in the Chesapeake world with DM. As it turns out, well over half and maybe as many as 2/3 of all of them that have been tested with the brand new (as of July) test, have one or both genes that have been identified and associated with DM. Several prominent dogs that were bred a lot had both genes and died of DM, since it is a late-in-life disease. But, all those smug people who bragged up their dogs as not having any of the culprits as ancestors are finding the DM gene cuts a wide swath and no line is 'immune'. Dogs that test as A/A or having 2 copies of the gene are described as 'at risk' although it's not known what percentage of A/A dogs will actually be stricken with DM; the genetic test is too new. 


Some wouldn't consider breeding a carrier. Some are OK with carrier x clear breedings. Some would risk carrier x carrier, etc. Remember CBRs have a much smaller gene pool. So it's easier to imagine a scenario where the breeding of virtually any dog that is carrier or at-risk, even to clear dogs, isn't done so very few remain in the gene pool. Now imagine that, with all the genetic advances, some other genetic horror is discovered and the only dogs that arent' carriers or at risk for this new horror are the A/A or carrier DM dogs? What then? Do we keep halving our gene pool every time a new genetic test comes up?

I tend to agree with Ted Shih and Vicki Worthington even though I'm only a FT player in my dreams ;-) But I understand the heartbreak of those that have had a DM dog or washed hot prospects and want to avoid certain things. That's OK if you remember the day is fast approaching when we may NOT be able to avoid every genetic ailment.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I was wondering why with this thread having over 4000 views, why haven't any of the experts that have posted about EIC chimed in.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

scott spalding said:


> Tell me how bad you would feel with a NFC that was a carrier. I could come to terms with it just me though.


Maybe it's time for the Nationals to require health clearances in the sometime in the near future. It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

Losthwy said:


> Maybe it's time for the Nationals to require health clearances in the sometime in the near future. It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


I don't run Field Trials, so with me it has nothing to do with competition. It has to do with the gene pool of the dogs. If every time a new disease comes up, we decide to eliminate all dogs that carry the gene, but aren't affected, somewhere down the road our gene pool for these dogs will be tiny. In this particular instance, we would eliminate 37% of it! That would be assinine!


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Losthwy said:


> Maybe it's time for the Nationals to require health clearances in the sometime in the near future. It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


I differ

If you have looked at any of the threads on the subject, you will see that there are real hazards in trying to "purify" a breed. If you read the information from the CNM site or the EIC site, they will tell you that they do not recommend eliminating "carriers" (as opposed to "affecteds") from the gene pool.

If competition trumped the breed, I would never have spayed my FC/AFC Buffy. Many people have asked me when I was going to breed her. I had her spayed because she had two TPLO surgeries and there is evidence that TPLO is genetically related. The risk was not worth the benefit.

So, I would be careful before I made sweeping statements about this subject.


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Losthwy said:


> Maybe it's time for the Nationals to require health clearances in the sometime in the near future. It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


What clearances should they require. They could start with hips have to be good not fair. Eyes clear and elbows normal. Eic clear and CNN clear no torn ccl and need to meet breed standards. We do the best we can for our dogs they live in our houses when they are home and eat the best foods. They are like are children. One again I will ask did you use this same criteria in you're own reproduction or just with you're dogs.
________
Depakote class action lawsuit


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Losthwy said:


> Maybe it's time for the Nationals to require health clearances in the sometime in the near future. It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


Unbloodyreal. Some people's kids. The last time I checked, The Nationals are about The Best Dogs that have qualified for it. Obviously The Nationals are about the dogs and not your irrate rationale.

The Internet. Where widespread hypocrisy comes to life.


----------



## Guest (Apr 4, 2009)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> The Internet. Where widespread hypocrisy comes to life.


Can you give us further insight as to why you made this statement?

edit: OK, if you're talking about Bud from Alaska that said Carriers should not be bred until he found out his bitch was one and then changed his mind, I get it. Just wondering if you have something else to which you are referring.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Jacob Hawkes*  
_The Internet. Where widespread hypocrisy comes to life._

Can you give us further insight as to why you made this statement?

edit: OK, if you're talking about Bud from Alaska that said Carriers should not be bred until he found out his bitch was one and then changed his mind, I get it. Just wondering if you have something else to which you are referring.
__________________


He lost me on that as well. Some people's kids, irrate, hypocrisy... time to switch channels.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Melanie Foster said:


> Can you give us further insight as to why you made this statement?
> 
> edit: OK, if you're talking about Bud from Alaska that said Carriers should not be bred until he found out his bitch was one and then changed his mind, I get it. Just wondering if you have something else to which you are referring.


ROFLMAO!!! Good one, Melanie.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> Maybe it's time for the Nationals to require health clearances in the sometime in the near future. It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


I think we need every clearance you can have on our dogs before they compete at the National Level. Also only dogs I own can compete. Sounds good to me, for some reason I can't believe you would say that. 


If I had a one eyed, 3 legged, Silver (had to add that one) lab that was the best in 10 series I should win no matter what was wrong with the dog.


----------



## Purpledawg (Jul 16, 2006)

must tell you all this thread sure helped me pass the time this morning waiting to have some blood drawn in a waiting room need deep of people. Educational, exciting and pleasantly civil. 

I've been in labs for a very long time. Back in the day when HD was the big evil, we held the similar discussions. 
How guys were fixin his hips and breeding the dogs, and winning all the awards and how awlful it was for the breed, folks justify their behaviors and opinions to suit their own sanity. After HD came PRA, and then epilepsy with its own carrier/affected genotypes. Now a zillion years later its cmn, and eic. 
The sad part of all of this is those dogs that end up in homes where their only purpose is to be family pets, and the broken hearts of kids seeing their bff hurting. 



kimsmith said:


> I think we need every clearance you can have on our dogs before they compete at the National Level. Also only dogs I own can compete. Sounds good to me, for some reason I can't believe you would say that.
> 
> If I had a one eyed, 3 legged, Silver (had to add that one) lab that was the best in 10 series I should win no matter what was wrong with the dog.



In Sweden they control the issuance of Champion status by requiring dogs have met certain health, performance certification. That would not be American. Though some States NV, CA have horrid bills pending to require all dogs be spayed and/or neutered. 

BTW unfortunately your silver presences at a National wouldn't occur, not a recognized lab color. and whats so bad about a silver? if its CMN and EIC clear, OFA excellent, CERF... and able to be the last dog standing after the 10th series? 

Being the top breed for the last 15 yrs, in number of litters born. The Labrador breed with survive there will be winners and losers and new undiscovered heartaches. Its up to those doing the breeding to be the best stewards they can for the next generations.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> BTW unfortunately your silver presences at a National wouldn't occur, not a recognized lab color. and whats so bad about a silver?


Silver (had to add that one) speaks for itself. Maybe we should only let Silver, White, Fox Red or Blond dogs compete. Wait blonds couldn't compete, just kidding so blonds don't throw me under the bus.

Wait I'm getting off track about EIC I need my Ritalin. Do you think one day we will know why there is such a wide range in affected dogs?


----------



## Cedarswamp (Apr 29, 2008)

kimsmith said:


> Wait I'm getting off track about EIC I need my Ritalin. Do you think one day we will know why there is such a wide range in affected dogs?


I called and talked to the lab after Hickory tested affected. They are continuing studies. They send out follow up questioneers to those with affected dogs to see if they have episodes later. All blood samples are being kept to look at as more info is gathered. Some of the 15% or so that have not collapsed include litters that have not started training, conformation dogs that generally have a more laid back personality or have not had the "extreme" reached yet. 

They also said that affected offspring of non collapsing affected dogs varied as well among full siblings--some severe in their symptoms.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Do you think one day we will know why there is such a wide range in affected dogs?


Maybe and maybe it's just variance in the disease like so many other human conditions, there are mild and severe cases. I can tell you U of M requested brain tissue for further studies on one who died in the field.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Losthwy said:


> It's suppose to be about the dogs, but I'm seeing it's not. Competition trumps the breed instead.


I couldn't agree more!


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> Its about the dogs


 
Inquiring minds would like to know what that means. Is that a politically correct statement. Kind of like we should tell our kids when they are playing sports it's not about winning or losing. How many people want to be losers?

Do you really think it's about the dog putting them through some of the things we put them through that isn't natural, like running around the bank to get something that would have been a lot faster than swimming.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Playing sports is about sportsmenship and learning to work/play with others. Winning is the goal but the lessons learned striving for that goal are what is most important. 

Training dogs is just that...training. Some trainers are abusive and some are not.

What's your point?


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> Playing sports is about sportsmenship and learning to work/play with others. Winning is the goal but the lessons learned striving for that goal are what is most important.


Dang Franco, since when did you become politically correct. You know we play to *WIN*.

Loosing is for well, ... uh, loosers.

Vince Lombardi regards,


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Howard, you are too funny! I play to win too.

I was out training your grandson this morning, I think you are going to be happy with him.

You need to come on back down, I'll get you set up on some spectacular training grounds!


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

My point is you are saying that running FT/NFT isn't about the dogs, but about winning. Why wouldn't it be about winning, If I didn't think I could win I wouldn't go. Also what difference does it matter what is wrong with the dog just as long as they were the best. EIC dogs can't play the game, man it went from we need to take them out of the gene pool to not letting them run. Maybe I'm reading to much into your post.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Maybe I'm reading to much into your post.


Yes, you are reading too much into it. I have no problem with any dog competing.

My point is that I personally don't beleive that any specialty game justifies compromising the integrity of the breed. That goes for EIC, CNM, HD etc. Labs were never intended nor did they originate to run Field Trials or Bench Shows. They were intended to be gun dogs, the games came later. One doesn't need a successful FT dog to have a great hunting companion. In fact, many FT breedings produce dogs too hot for hunting. So, what is more important; breed integrity or competing in FT's? No different than Show breeders breeding dogs with HD because they get a dog they think can win with. 

I like Field Trials because they represent the highest level of training and watching a naturally talented dogs is a joy. But, at some point one has to draw the line and my personal choice is that I want to compete with a dog that has those clearences. Just looking at the RFTN that I received today, there doesn't look to be a shortage of dogs with the health clearences I desire.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Thanks Booty, I thought you couldn't believe we should take these dogs out of the game.

By the way since you have the RFTN, could you post some of the clear FC/AFC dogs so people can see how many there are. Also if you know dogs they produced that would help. Thanks


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

EIC & CNM claer, there is;

FC AFC Ranger (frozen semen)
FC AFC Zoom
FC AFC Land Ahoy
FC FTCH Magic MH 
FC AFC Wood River’s Franchise
FC AFC Grady
FC AFC Close Haul to Windward
FC AFC Field of Dreams
FC AFC Badger
FC Low Country Drake
NFC Willie (he was on my short list of studs)
FC AFC Crow Rivers Max
NFC AFC Chopper

That list from just one issue of RFTN. I’m not going to look through older issues, you can do that research.
I mentinoned FC AFC Blue earlier in this thread.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

Mr Booty said:


> EIC & CNM claer, there is;
> 
> FC AFC Ranger (frozen semen)
> FC AFC Zoom
> ...


Since you're being so diligent, I'm sure you verified all these dogs have all of the "other" clearances one would expect?


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

Franco, double check Chopper. He didn't have elbows last I checked.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

He's not the only one on that list.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> Since you're being so diligent, I'm sure you verified all these dogs have all of the "other" clearances one would expect?


Picky, picky, picky;-)
Zoom, Land Ahoy and Chopper do not show elbow clearences. I'm not saying they don't have them, you can check that on the OFA site. I'm just going by what is in RFTN.

Remember, this is just from one issue and I know there are no perfect dogs!


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Howard N said:


> Franco, double check Chopper. He didn't have elbows last I checked.


Howard, Kim was asking about EIC clear. Melanie asked me about the other issues.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

Booty, did you not say this:

"Just looking at the RFTN that I received today, *there doesn't look to be a shortage of dogs with the health clearences I desire*."

Front end soundness is not a concern of yours?

BTW, the coupla dogs you just noted are not the only ones on your short list without elbow clearances.

Just sayin.'


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I have a dog Freeridin Whiskey River Don't Run Dry

- Hips Excellent
- Elbows Normal
- CERF
- CNM Clear
- EIC Clear

Please call me if you want to breed to this fine specimen

One small issue - no AA points yet


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I have a dog Freeridin Whiskey River Don't Run Dry
> 
> - Hips Excellent
> - Elbows Normal
> ...


I'm sure it won't take you long to get those points and titles, especially if he is on Rorum's truck.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Dogs are on my truck at the moment. No pros running them.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> Booty, did you not say this:
> 
> "Just looking at the RFTN that I received today, *there doesn't look to be a shortage of dogs with the health clearences I desire*."
> 
> ...


I don't think there is a shortage remember, this is just one issue of RFTN and not all studs advertise.
PM me which ones because I went through the magazine after you asked and those were the only two without elbow clearences according to the ads. Yes, I think skelital issues are the biggest problem. Five of my last six dogs have had bad hips! I'm keeping my fingers crossed on my pup. And, like I mentioned earlier I would verify through the OFA site.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

No elbows vs Eic carrier-that's a no brainer.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

At least with some EIC dogs and all carriers they can still run. It will be hard to run without the front end or back end so that would be more important to me than EIC. I'm sure the dogs listed have other problems or traits that we wouldn't like. Also are they producers of Big Time Hitters as Ted and Vicki mentioned. I'll take my chances with dogs that produce and if when they finally figure out how a dog that has EIC can still compete each weekend, not to mention the training that it took to get them there then I'll change my mind. 

When people have a lot of money invested in these FC/AFC studs, how many are upfront about problems they have other than EIC.

By the way thinks for listing these dogs, this will help when people including me are looking for Clear Studs. Always nice when someone else does the homework.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

kimsmith said:


> By the way thinks for listing these dogs, this will help when people including me are looking for Clear Studs. Always nice when someone else does the homework.


Just remember to double check the homework.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> No elbows vs EIC carrier-that's a no brainier.


Heck an EIC affected that has never gone down or very few time versus bad hips or elbows to me is a no brainier. I've heard that most stop having symptoms after 5 anyway, what can you do with a dog that can't walk.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

One or some of the local club members set up a deal with a vet to come out and get an awsome price on eic testing.
Pretty cool. It only took a few minutes and we got a nice group deal. Oh it was done at the hunt test

Go Chaz

Pete


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I understand checking the homework like someone saying this dog or this dog is clear of everything, not knowing for sure and that is the problem. I don't know of many stud owners that are going to say man I wouldn't breed to my dog because he throws pups that like to play in there crap, don't breed because he throws vocal pups, etc, etc. All we can do is try to make the right choices and always live with the choices we make. That is why living in America is so great, we have a right to make choices.


----------



## 3blackdogs (Aug 23, 2004)

kimsmith said:


> I've heard that most stop having symptoms after 5 anyway


Really? Please provide the details on that. Thanks.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

3blackdogs, the way I understand it and I could be wrong so don't take this as written in stone. They loose some of the excitement latter in life that would trigger the episodes. I'm also talking about the dogs that don't have a lot of episodes. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

April/May Edition of Retriever Journal has an article on EIC

Dr. Susan Taylor is quoted in pertinent part as saying

"Eliminating all EIC carriers from the breeding pool would, in my opinion, be a mistake, throwing away some excellent genetic traits together with the bad mutation."

Suggest everyone read the article before issuing opinions without factual foundation.


----------



## Doug Shade (Jan 10, 2006)

Preview 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before anyone had a term like E.I.C. I used to see dogs that displayed all the symptons. Some were boarding dogs, others were training dogs. Boarding dogs might be triggered by a simple walk or sexual excitement. Training dogs fell in the clasical back pile with stimulus collapse. The interesting thing is that I haven't witnessed a collapse in several years and yet I see more dogs coming through the kennel than we did when I used to see collapses on a regaural basis. Considering that 25 plus percent of labs are carriers how can this be so?


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

53 percent are carriers.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Here are some of the quotes from the article.



> Affected dogs are usually described as being extremely fit, muscular, prime athletic specimens of their breed with an excitable temperament and lots of drive.





> Many dogs will seem to "get better" as they age and slow down their activity and their excitement level.


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> 53 percent are carriers.


You're mistaken, 53% are clear per Katie Minor's stats.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Doug Shade said:


> Preview
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Before anyone had a term like E.I.C. I used to see dogs that displayed all the symptons. Some were boarding dogs, others were training dogs. Boarding dogs might be triggered by a simple walk or sexual excitement. Training dogs fell in the clasical back pile with stimulus collapse. The interesting thing is that I haven't witnessed a collapse in several years and yet I see more dogs coming through the kennel than we did when I used to see collapses on a regaural basis. Considering that 25 plus percent of labs are carriers how can this be so?


It's hard to say why you saw it more then than now, but even with that percentage of carriers, only 25% of carrier to carrier breeding will produce an affected, and then there is a percentage of affected dogs that never go down. One trigger is stress, so maybe you changed training methods or boarding methods but most likely it is just related to your normal population.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Sorry mistyped 53 % clear.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I just got a PM and a call from someone I trust in the Labrador world. He read this thread and had to call. He told me that a lawsuit could be in the near future over EIC testing. They have documents showing that a clear dog was breed to a carrier and they had affected pups. They also have documents showing that they had an affected dog breed to a carrier and had 3 clear pups. Man this will cause problems with breeding going by these test if this is correct and I wouldn't doubt it. I'm sure they have the test correct but I think its going to be hard to predict what will be produced. Man wouldn't it be bad if 2 clear dogs produced an affected.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

I'm not sure what a lawsuit would be about. Ultimately any such test is a matter of on-going research. A test that shows the existence of a mutation doesn't explain how the mutation was created originally. For all we know it is spontaneous and could arise again without regard to inheritance. However, if such contrary results are found they will hopefully be published to further the research.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

Aaah, but the folks who are doing the testing are also quoting percentages of dogs who will test affected/carrier/clear as a result of certain combinations of tested parents. Is that not inferring inheritance is a factor?

If it is, which I believe to be true, big name stud dogs that have been "labeled" as Carrier or Affected could be losing big bucks as a result of the testing facility's publishing mode of inheritance. No?


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

Does everyone know what hearsay means? Before we all get our panties in a knot it would be good to get some direct report of any supposed lawsuit. JMOH...... IF any of this happened, I'm sure there'll be lots of genetics testing going on.....


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

Melanie Foster said:


> Aaah, but the folks who are doing the testing are also quoting percentages of dogs who will test affected/carrier/clear as a result of certain combinations of tested parents. Is that not inferring inheritance is a factor?
> 
> If it is, which I believe to be true, big name stud dogs that have been "labeled" as Carrier or Affected could be losing big bucks as a result of the testing facility's publishing mode of inheritance. No?


Not sure I understand you... Inheritance IS a factor in EIC.... never been suggested otherwise by the U MN researchers.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Notice I said could be in the near future and also I trust this guys word, but don't have facts myself. He said they have documented proof this happened, so take it for what it's worth.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

Mike Tome said:


> Not sure I understand you... Inheritance IS a factor in EIC.... never been suggested otherwise by the U MN researchers.


If you look at kimsmith's examples of yet to be disclosed dogs/breedings, inheritance the researchers have claimed to be true may not a predictable factor.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I would think before there would be any accusations the tests would have to be repeated and DNA parentage done on all involved. 
A source of contamination could be not cleaning the instrument used between dewclaw removal on pups, there could be clerical errors before the specimen reached the lab, and there could even be a case of a dog thought to have been bred by one dog and bred by another or two dogs so be very careful placing blame before the facts come out.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I also got a PM from someone that know what she is talking about when it comes to CNM. She said there has never been a dog tested as a carrier of CNM that when retested come back clear. They had 1 out of 4000 that had problems because the blood was contaminated. CNM is kind of clear cut isn't it? Can a dog affected with CNM never show signs of being affected? I wonder if there are any cases were 2 affected CNM dogs, 1 clear and 1 carrier or 2 carriers producing a clear pup?


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

ErinsEdge said:


> I would think before there would be any accusations the tests would have to be repeated and DNA parentage done on all involved.


Absolutely. That was going to be my next question/comment.


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2009)

kimsmith said:


> I also got a PM from someone that know what she is talking about when it comes to CNM.


Kim,

You need to slow down quoting all these stats from "people who know what they are talking about." They just don't mean jack at this point.

Melanie


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Like I mentioned in an earlier post the only way in my mind you could be 100% correct by testing is to do DNA parentage testing in the first place. You could have blood mixed up, people being dishonest, and a lot of others things that could go wrong. What if I sent in 10 dogs from my kennel and got a couple of them mixed up?


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Melanie, this come from the main person with CNM just didn't want to post names.


----------



## Jason E. (Sep 9, 2004)

kimsmith said:


> I just got a PM and a call from someone I trust in the Labrador world. He read this thread and had to call. He told me that a lawsuit could be in the near future over EIC testing. They have documents showing that a clear dog was breed to a carrier and they had affected pups. They also have documents showing that they had an affected dog breed to a carrier and had 3 clear pups. Man this will cause problems with breeding going by these test if this is correct and I wouldn't doubt it. I'm sure they have the test correct but I think its going to be hard to predict what will be produced. Man wouldn't it be bad if 2 clear dogs produced an affected.


I have heard the same thing going around at the trial this weekend, but rumors are rumors. Who knows what the truth is.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I could be wrong and don't quote me on this but I think the way the phone call went this guy is involved with the dogs. I'm sure before anything happens there will be retest and parental DNA testing.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

I think the point is that the UMinn people and the UMinn web information on the test are pretty clear. They believe with a high degree of confidence that the identified gene mutation is directly related to dogs that are affected with EIC as genetically defined, and that their analysis of the sample population appears to indicate that the condition is inherited in an recessive manner. The conclusion is directly linked to the data they have analyzed to date and the data are continuing to be studied to evaluate both their original conclusions and to obtain a better understanding of factors that might affect the prototypical evidence of problems. If there are contrary results, that would probably improve our understanding of both inheritance and symptom exhibition. In the process we might also end up getting a better understanding of some of the other conditions that can result in similar collapses.

In terms of results so far, I suspect that the testing procedures in place now as compared with those used during some parts of the research phase may indicate questions that the researchers have about the reliability of data gathered during research using less rigorous procedures. 

The report that I received states:

"Since available data points to EIC being inherited in a recessive fashion, it almost always requires that both parents be either carriers (E/N) or affected (E/E) to produce a puppy with EIC."

Personally, I would hope that as more data are collected that we will understand the condition better. Along the way, we may also have to modify our thinking in terms of the breeding implications of the test or come up with additional tests that may tell us more. That would not be evidence of wrong doing by those involved in the research, it would be evidence that the research process is working as it should.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

In our records we report dogs as:

EE- affected

EN- carrier

NN- clear

From a genetic standpoint the chances are basically 0 (1 in ~2.4 billion) that a clear dog (NN) could produce an affected dog (EE) or vice versa.

If there is a report of this happening, the parties involved should notify us immediately to identify the problem.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Thanks Katie hope this is a mistake and I'll PM them to let them know you posted. Do you think we will ever know why the range of affected dogs vary from dog to dog?


----------



## Kris Hunt (Feb 25, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> I just got a PM and a call from someone I trust in the Labrador world. He read this thread and had to call. He told me that a lawsuit could be in the near future over EIC testing. They have documents showing that a clear dog was breed to a carrier and they had affected pups. They also have documents showing that they had an affected dog breed to a carrier and had 3 clear pups. Man this will cause problems with breeding going by these test if this is correct and I wouldn't doubt it. I'm sure they have the test correct but I think its going to be hard to predict what will be produced. Man wouldn't it be bad if 2 clear dogs produced an affected.


What possibly could be the premise??? The breeder knowingly bred an affected dog to a carrier? Hmmm.... Kind of throws out a premise of trying to produce healthy dogs.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Melanie Foster said:


> Aaah, but the folks who are doing the testing are also quoting percentages of dogs who will test affected/carrier/clear as a result of certain combinations of tested parents. Is that not inferring inheritance is a factor?
> 
> If it is, which I believe to be true, big name stud dogs that have been "labeled" as Carrier or Affected could be losing big bucks as a result of the testing facility's publishing mode of inheritance. No?


It depends how those statements are made and the basis on which they are formulated. Absent findings of gross negligence I'm not sure how such a liability could be assessed but I am not an attorney. It seems to me that it would be much easier to collect damages from a stud owner that had a reasonable basis for believing that a stud was a carrier but never disclosed that information or even misrepresented that information when discussing breeding with prospective clients, or from a breeder who failed to disclose the potential of affected pups in a litter.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> Thanks Katie hope this is a mistake and I'll PM them to let them know you posted. Do you think we will ever know why the range of affected dogs vary from dog to dog?


This is something we're still looking into, and it may be a combination of several factors both environmental and genetic.


----------



## Guest (Apr 7, 2009)

Kris Hunt said:


> What possibly could be the premise??? The breeder knowingly bred an affected dog to a carrier?


There is no indication the breeder knowingly did this. Perhaps they found out both of the parents' results after the fact and followed up with the puppy owners.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> I just got a PM and a call from someone I trust in the Labrador world. He read this thread and had to call. He told me that a lawsuit could be in the near future over EIC testing. They have documents showing that a clear dog was breed to a carrier and they had affected pups. They also have documents showing that they had an affected dog breed to a carrier and had 3 clear pups. Man this will cause problems with breeding going by these test if this is correct and I wouldn't doubt it. I'm sure they have the test correct but I think its going to be hard to predict what will be produced. Man wouldn't it be bad if 2 clear dogs produced an affected.


Kim,

Let's keep the rumors of lawsuits private for our phone and private conversations. RTF does not need be a medium for propogation of such rumors - especially when we're giving folks an open forum to responsibly post their results.

Some have wanted to burn me at a stake for not making genetic testing a requirement for classified ads. I'm personally not ready for that yet, for lots of reasons.

Chris


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Sorry Chris, I should have left the lawsuit out and just posted about the results. 

By the way how are things going, you need a vacation around the end of August so we will have openings at the finished level just for you to judge. Just kidding but would love to have you judge for us some day.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Sorry Chris, I should have left the lawsuit out and just posted about the results.
> 
> By the way how are things going, you need a vacation around the end of August so we will have openings at the finished level just for you to judge. Just kidding but would love to have you judge for us some day.


Kim, Thanks brother. I would love to get to come and be part of your home club's event sometime! I am headed to your beautiful state in a few days to judge an event that should be lots of fun over at Mr. Milner's place. 

I hope to meet a few RTF folks while out there.

Chris


----------



## Matt McKenzie (Oct 9, 2004)

Chris,
I know that for some reason anything to do with Mr. Milner tends to be controversial, but I would love to hear about the event from your perspective when you get back. It sounds pretty interesting.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Chris are the dates out let, would love to watch and learn. I'm not a fan because of many reason but maybe my mind could be changed. I know they will have a good time with you judging, maybe some duck calling lessons from the expert.


----------



## Tommy Wallace (Jun 13, 2008)

I sent off my blood to have the EIC testing done yesterday. God I hope it is clear. 
I have been reading some of this thread, but not got it all read yet. I was just wondering has anyone come up with what will be the STANDARD?

Mine may come back messed up, but I do like the clear to clear breedings if it only produces clear. Has anyone talked to the people @ the University to see if it is possible to get anything other than clears from breeding 2 clears?

I know that they are a few out there, but I don't think that a lot of breeders would be willing to nueter pups that are carriers or affected & lose thier money although that may be an answer.


----------



## Jason E. (Sep 9, 2004)

I dont understand .... Whats wrong with a carrier ?????


----------



## Tommy Wallace (Jun 13, 2008)

Jason E. said:


> I dont understand .... Whats wrong with a carrier ?????


I had just read some earlier posts about, why would you breed to a carrier when there were so many clear dogs to breed to.
Is it just an affected dog that goes down or do carriers go down too?


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Nikki Malarky said:


> I had just read some earlier posts about, why would you breed to a carrier when there were so many clear dogs to breed to.
> Is it just an affected dog that goes down or do carriers go down too?


Carriers do not go down and a huge percentage of Labs are carriers (30-40%). If you are a breeder owning females, having carriers can complicate your life. If you don't breed or only breed in the event that you have an extraordinary titled dog and a list of buyers, having a carrier is not a problem. You can always arrange a breeding that will not produce affected dogs.


----------



## Kris Hunt (Feb 25, 2005)

Melanie Foster said:


> There is no indication the breeder knowingly did this. Perhaps they found out both of the parents' results after the fact and followed up with the puppy owners.


Then why sue?


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Kris, I should have left that part out of the post. Sorry. 

If we are going to use a test for breeding purposes like CNM or EIC and we can't predict for 100% sure what the outcome would be then we would have problems. I hope this is a mistake and not true. It will only take one or two cases to cause trust issues with the test. 

Katie thinks for posting and we appreciate the hard work that has been put into EIC, I didn't want this post to start anything. Just curious as to why we have such a wide range and maybe one day we will have the answer.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

kimsmith said:


> Kris, I should have left that part out of the post. Sorry.
> If we are going to use a test for breeding purposes like CNM or EIC and we can't predict for 100% sure what the outcome would be then we would have problems. I hope this is a mistake and not true. It will only take one or two cases to cause trust issues with the test.
> 
> Katie thinks for posting and we appreciate the hard work that has been put into EIC, I didn't want this post to start anything. Just curious as to why we have such a wide range and maybe one day we will have the answer.


There are very few tests or diagnostic tools that are 100% accurate. Expecting something to be 100% accurate is unrealistic. Finding and investigating discrepancies over time is the way that we learn more. 

In most cases, for this type of test, discrepancies are more likely to be procedural rather than scientific. Most likely are things that result in misidentification of samples or misreporting of results. That's why, when you go in for medical testing and emerge with a surprising result, your doctor will normally respond by redoing the test. Many negative results promptly disappear.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

So are you saying if we send in our blood work and it comes back carrier or affected we should resend later just to make sure it was right. I know with human error it's going to be hard to be 100% correct. If the post above is true and I hope it isn't then wouldn't you see a problem, if we could get clear dogs from carriers to affected breedings. If that is true then we might be able to get affected dogs from clear to clear breedings. By the way this is all speculation and I hope if this is true we find out about it and it's not swept under the rug.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

If brought to our attention, any discrepancy in test results will be immediately dealt with.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

kimsmith said:


> So are you saying if we send in our blood work and it comes back carrier or affected we should resend later just to make sure it was right. I know with human error it's going to be hard to be 100% correct. If the post above is true and I hope it isn't then wouldn't you see a problem, if we could get clear dogs from carriers to affected breedings. If that is true then we might be able to get affected dogs from clear to clear breedings. By the way this is all speculation and I hope if this is true we find out about it and it's not swept under the rug.


I think their procedures are pretty carefully designed to avoid errors. However, it is still a human process and imperfect by definition. All things considered, I would probably be more likely to expect misidentification of the sample sent in by my vet if I submitted multiples at one time. I also suspect that that there were problems with some of the individual results done by buccal swab during the research phase. Many of these were collected by gathering samples from all dogs on a truck at one time while everyone was more focused on running their dogs. Having seen owners go to the line with the wrong dog, it is not hard to envision misidentification of a sample. 

My affected dog was tested twice: once during research and once when the test was commercially available. Given that she was also symptomatic, I didn't really expect that the results would change. However, she was also the first confirmed affected pup from one of the top national sires. I believed it was important to go overboard in verifying the results. 

If I had an FC stud where the results of the test surprised me based on pedigree or based on what I knew of puppies produced, I would probably retest. I might also be inclined to do what was done in testing High Tech CEO for CNM -- submit a blood sample and have identity be confirmed by DNA analysis so you know that the blood being tested is absolutely the dog identified. I would expect the number of problems that will be found over time with the commercial test will be very, very small. However, that is not the same as zero. When those problems do arise, I also suspect that the source of the error is more likely to be from the gathering, labeling and shipping of the sample than it is to come from the test itself.


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

Katie Minor said:


> If brought to our attention, any discrepancy in test results will be immediately dealt with.


One less significant health issue to worry about, thanks to you and yours wonderful DNA test.


----------



## Brent McDowell (Jul 2, 2008)

The story of two clear dogs producing carrier and/or affected pups has hit me twice in 48 hours from two different folks in the HT game. I think it's in the best interest of all of us here to get to the bottom of this rumor sooner rather than later. Before we can question the entire validity of the U of Minn study, we need to understand if this single incident is actually a flaw in the science or a flaw in the sample gathering/testing. The cynic in me says that if the science were flawed this badly, it would have been uncovered well before now in the 3,000+ dogs tested so far. Have the sire, dam, and the entire litter re-tested and let's see where this takes us before we question a lot of people's hard work researching this.


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

Wow.... guess what I heard the other day.....

rumor du jour.....


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I've never heard of a clear to clear breeding producing an affected, surely this couldn't happen.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> I've never heard of a clear to clear breeding producing an affected, surely this couldn't happen.


No it can't.


And, an affected cannot produce a clear.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

I'll bet the dogs in question aren't who they say they are. 

Bring on the DNA!


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

So these people making these claims need to get in touch with the testing center. 

Katie I guess some people with affected or carriers are starting these rumors. Katie, you should know by the database if a dog tested affected and then some of the pups tested clear or if a breeding of a carrier to a clear produced an affected. Do the rumors have any merit at all? I guess the ones spreading the rumor needs to come forth and prove the rumors they are spreading.

Booty, like I said before not everyone is trust worthy.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> So these people making these claims need to get in touch with the testing center.
> 
> Katie I guess some people with affected or carriers are starting these rumors. Katie, you should know by the database if a dog tested affected and then some of the pups tested clear or if a breeding of a carrier to a clear produced an affected. Do the rumors have any merit at all? I guess the ones spreading the rumor needs to come forth and prove the rumors they are spreading.
> 
> Booty, like I said before not everyone is trust worthy.


I don't have pedigree info on every dog, but I do for about 4000+. I can't find any of the situations that have been described. No affecteds producing a clear, no clears producing an affected. If these cases exist, we want to know so we can correct the results for the dogs in question.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> If these cases exist, we want to know so we can correct the results for the dogs in question.


Thanks for clearing up some of these rumors. The only thing, I'm not sure what you mean by correcting the results.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> Thanks for clearing up some of these rumors. The only thing, I'm not sure what you mean by correcting the results.


If there is a case of a clear producing an affected or vice versa, one of the dogs' results has to be incorrect, or the parentage is not what was thought.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Thank you, that was what I thought you meant. You know that is going to be bad if someone thought they got a dog from one breeding but come to find out they got one from another breeding.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I wouldn't believe any of the posted rumours about affecteds producing clears and vice versa unless some hard DNA evidence of parentage as well as retesting was provided. Someone sounds desperate to prove their dog isn't what it is or got a dog that isn't what it was supposed to be. On another note, there's another lab doing EIC testing with results not able to be posted on OFA, is it going to throw some more fuel on the fire since people can do their own buccal swabs, no vet needed kind of thing? I realize dewclaws can be submitted by the litter owner and some people do their own blood draws as well for the U of M test, but still, another test when the original one is so new, makes me wonder.


----------



## Jason E. (Sep 9, 2004)

Katie Minor said:


> If there is a case of a clear producing an affected or vice versa, one of the dogs' results has to be incorrect, or the parentage is not what was thought.


So there is a chance results can come back incorrect ?


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

Jason E. said:


> So there is a chance results can come back incorrect ?


There is always the small possibility for error with humans involved. We take every effort to minimize errors by running samples in duplicate with known controls and quality control requirements for a sample to pass. In over 5,000 tests, we have never had a sample not produce the same result in both tests. We also have result entry and reports verified by a second person. Still there is always the chance that there could have be an error either on the collection end by the owner/vet, or a sampling or clerical error. If brought to our attention, we will immediately work with all parties involved to determine where the error was made (if possible) and to make sure that the results for each dog are correct.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Katie out of the 5000 tests, from your knowledge how many mistakes have been discovered? This might be a hard question to answer. Mistakes I'm talking about are dogs that tested clear, carrier or affected that was change because of some kind of error.


----------



## okvet (Jun 20, 2006)

I know of one mistake--I have a client that purchased a lab for a pet (pup didn't cerf). The pup was out of two high powered field trial dogs. I don't know the EIC status of the sire but the dam was included in the original test study (I believe she was tested at a field trial) and the owner was given a clear EIC status. Before the test came out to the general population the pup in question had 2 episodes consistent with EIC. After the test came available the pup was tested and came back as being affected. I contacted U of M and notified them of the results. I know they were trying to get ahold of the owner of the dam to figure out what happened but never heard of the final status.

Since the test has come out I have tested a bunch of labs and have never got a result that wasn't consistent with the possibilities of the parents status--except the one in question.

todd


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> Katie out of the 5000 tests, from your knowledge how many mistakes have been discovered? This might be a hard question to answer. Mistakes I'm talking about are dogs that tested clear, carrier or affected that was change because of some kind of error.


Regarding official VDL tests, I know of 1. That is all I will say regarding the subject.

Most dog breeders/owners are vocal enough that I would hope that any others would be brought to our attention in short order.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Kim, why are you so concerned about EIC? Have you tested all your dogs? Given that your upcoming litter due is sired by a presumed EIC carrier (affected offspring)? Is that why you feel there might be some mistakes in the test or ??? Just curious why you started this thread and what was your motivation in the rumours you mentioned other than some pot stirring? Do you have any "science" to back up your questions/concerns on the test not being accurate? Do you understand EIC and the mode of inheritance? Your previous posts leave a lot of unanswered questions on your part while you appear to be expecting hard and fast answers from the developers of the test.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Thanks Kim and by the post above you know I'm not trying to take carriers out of the picture. Just have question about the science. I wanted to know why we have such a wide range of affected dogs. I'm not here to argue if the science is right or wrong. Like I PM you earlier science isn't 100% and if you would like to argue the big bang theory I'm all ears. By the way you should have called me by my new nick name you give me (FLATT EARTHIER). Again I'm sorry you got upset.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> Thanks Kim and by the post above you know I'm not trying to take carriers out of the picture. Just have question about the science. I wanted to know why we have such a wide range of affected dogs. I'm not here to argue if the science is right or wrong. Like I PM you earlier science isn't 100% and if you would like to argue the big bang theory I'm all ears. By the way you should have called me by my new nick name you give me (FLATT EARTHIER). Again I'm sorry you got upset.


I'm not upset, it's no skin off my back, I'm informed enough not to buy a pup from a litter that doesn't have a clear parent and risk heartache down the road. I'm just curious (and a little bored waiting for Idol), why you are questioning a scientific test you aren't even apparently using, so what difference does it make to you whether the test is accurate or not? You have a litter by two apparently untested dogs, one strongly suspected of being a carrier, but regardless, neither parent is tested and confirmed a clear, which to many in this time of having a test, would seem a bit odd. EIC is a condition with varying degrees, that's agreed. The mode of inheritance is a scientific principal and so far, there's been nothing to refute the accuracy of that. You have some outstanding dogs, like I told you, I've been to your site in the past looking at litters, but health clearances are a concern for me as much as titles and pedigree. So that was all, granting you that science isn't 100% and human error can happen, still, with 5,000 dogs tested and not one proven wrong result? It's just a tool to use for responsible breeding, why make it more or less than that?


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

When I started breeding to the Stud mentioned 5 years ago, we didn't have a clue what EIC was all about. I've had 7 breedings with this dog without one dog coming back testing as an affected dog. I've never had a dog come back with bad hips, bad eyes, CNM, EIC or any other defect. Can you say that about your breedings? Everyone that has kept in touch with me about their pups have been very satisfied and I get many calls about this breeding. So the science tell me that something is going right. I had 8 sold before the breeding with deposits but 2 have back out for financial reasons. I have nothing to hide and when I think everything is right with the EIC science then I'll have every dog checked. I also try to be as honest as I can but being human I make mistakes. CNM on the other hand is clear science. The only affected pup that I've been involved with was from a dog that I trained and loved. I wanted a breeding between her and another stud, this also was before EIC testing. We had 5 pups and one come back Affected. I've got one pup that I kept and if I think this dog is worth breeding then I'll have all the test done. This thread went in many different directions and had nothing to do with the science but why such a wide range. By the way if anyone has affected dog out of great pedigrees and don't want them, send them my way.


----------



## Guest (Apr 9, 2009)

kimsmith said:


> I have nothing to hide and when I think everything is right with the EIC science then I'll have every dog checked. I also try to be as honest as I can but being human I make mistakes. CNM on the other hand is clear science.


Can you tell us the difference between the two tests? One is clear science (whatever that means) and one is not? Why?

Melanie


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Maybe I'm wrong and most of time I am but do some dogs with CNM show no signs of being affected? If there is then my statement is wrong and I apologize.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Melanie Foster said:


> Can you tell us the difference between the two tests? One is clear science (whatever that means) and one is not? Why?
> 
> Melanie


There's no point debating with him, Melanie, he's got his head stuck in the sand and others will pay down the road for his breeding decisions, but that's not something he's worrying about. He's convinced his luck in breeding EIC carriers/affecteds is "science", so be it. He started this thread with EIC being overrated based on his experience with an affected dog that only has collapsed twice, and in subsequent posts has further stirred the pot by bringing up mysterious breedings and lawsuits. Therefore, I think, since he's asked for it, the ones with really collapsing dogs send them to him and let him manage them for life.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

You know this thread went for 237 post before going south, that must be a record. No one has posted anything negative on this thread or has got mad, other than me posting something that someone else didn't want to post. They ask me to post this because I started the thread. I made a mistake posting about breedings that I don't have any proof personally that this happened and I apologize for that. Kim since you decided to attack me on this forum, with your Pm's and your breedings are perfect maybe everyone needs to come to you when buying pups. I hope every pup you have, never has a problem and I truly mean that.

By the way does anyone know of dogs that are affected with CNM that don't show signs? I would like to apologize for that statement also if I'm wrong.

Kim sounds like some of this anger is coming from the idol thread.


----------



## MRC Dream (Mar 4, 2009)

kimsmith said:


> You know this thread went for 237 post before going south, that must be a record. No one has posted anything negative on this thread or has got mad, other than me posting something that someone else didn't want to post. They ask me to post this because I started the thread. I made a mistake posting about breedings that I don't have any proof personally that this happened and I apologize for that. Kim since you decided to attack me on this forum, with your Pm's and your breedings are perfect maybe everyone needs to come to you when buying pups. I hope every pup you have, never has a problem and I truly mean that.
> 
> By the way does anyone know of dogs that are affected with CNM that don't show signs? I would like to apologize for that statement also if I'm wrong.
> 
> Kim sounds like some of this anger is coming from the idol thread.


Easy now boy........check your pm's.......


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> Maybe I'm wrong and most of time I am but do some dogs with CNM show no signs of being affected? If there is then my statement is wrong and I apologize.


CNM and EIC are very different diseases; resulting from two different types of mutations in two different genes. To compare signs, symptoms, and expression between diseases is like comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Katie sorry for posting things I don't have personal proof about. All I can do is apologize, we all make mistakes and I'm sorry for that post. Also I know comparing EIC to CNM isn't the same, kind of like comparing a Common Cold to the Flu. This thread started out wanting to know why such a wide range in affected dogs, then went to getting rid of all carriers, then to breedings we have no proof of. I guess I'm the blame for this thread going south.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

The range in severity, is more than anything, really fascinating. I think its a combination of some physiology (such as body temp achieved during activity) and - how a dog thinks and what REALLY gets him going. And good luck try to figure that out!


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> CNM on the other hand is clear science.


It's very unfortunate that because you are confused about two very different conditions, you choose to blame the testing. Many genetic conditions show differences in severity but that doesn't mean the testing is incorrect; it just happens EIC appears to be more complex.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Katie could there be another gene that triggers the bad gene, this is something that I've heard others talk about. I'm just a so called FLATT EARTHER and like most Men like things that are black and white. 

Thanks and I hope one day Educated people like you will figure this out.

Nancy I guess you are reading something in my post that disagrees with the testing. I think they have the test correct and can show dogs that are clear, carriers and affected. I've never denied that, but in my uneducated mind I'm not 100% sure it's been out long enough to prove 100% of the time what will be produced. I hope I'm wrong and one day we will not have EIC to worry about.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

It's unlikely that there is another gene of major influence regarding EIC. We're about as sure as you can be that this mutation is fundamentally responsible for EIC. If you don't produce the affected genotype, then the genotype of any potential modifiers (which are EXTREMELY difficult to uncover) doesn't matter, because you aren't producing dogs with EIC.


----------



## Kris Hunt (Feb 25, 2005)

Interesting I don't see any EIC information on your website Kim. Just wondering, have you tested all your dogs?

Kris


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> I have nothing to hide and when I think everything is right with the EIC science then I'll have every dog checked.


Kris you can read this in the post above, Thanks


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

kimsmith said:


> When I started breeding to the Stud mentioned 5 years ago, we didn't have a clue what EIC was all about. I've had 7 breedings with this dog without one dog coming back testing as an affected dog. *I've never had a dog come back with bad hips, bad eyes, CNM, EIC or any other defect.* Can you say that about your breedings? Everyone that has kept in touch with me about their pups have been very satisfied and I get many calls about this breeding. So the science tell me that something is going right. I had 8 sold before the breeding with deposits but 2 have back out for financial reasons. I have nothing to hide and when I think everything is right with the EIC science then I'll have every dog checked. I also try to be as honest as I can but being human I make mistakes. CNM on the other hand is clear science. The only affected pup that I've been involved with was from a dog that I trained and loved. I wanted a breeding between her and another stud, this also was before EIC testing. We had 5 pups and one come back Affected. I've got one pup that I kept and if I think this dog is worth breeding then I'll have all the test done. This thread went in many different directions and had nothing to do with the science but why such a wide range. By the way if anyone has affected dog out of great pedigrees and don't want them, send them my way.


First, no one's blaming anyone for EIC before the test became available. Second, I said you had very nice dogs and have never knocked your breeding. Third, you have produced an EIC affected pup despite your statement above that you haven't had a pup come back for it, which is a matter of semantics. You chose not to repeat that breeding because of that, so you do believe and understand enough of the inheritance to avoid it after producing an affected, and in the process have no problem naming that stud as being a carrier while leaving out the fact that your bitch had to be at least a carrier too, or maybe that's where your disbelief comes in about the test, you just don't believe your bitch to also be a carrier and choose to only blame the stud. Fourth, making light of an affected dog and asking to have them be sent to you, when many have gone through emotional and financial distress because of an affected dog, is disgraceful and callous.

"Nancy I guess you are reading something in my post that disagrees with the testing. I think they have the test correct and can show dogs that are clear, carriers and affected. I've never denied that, but in my uneducated mind I'm not 100% sure it's been out long enough to prove 100% of the time what will be produced. I hope I'm wrong and one day we will not have EIC to worry about"

The quote above makes ZERO sense, Kim. How can you agree they have the test correct but disagree that the results are correct? I simply don't get it. I simply don't get why someone who has the training and titles into the dogs you do would avoid a cheap test that would avoid producing an affected, or at the very least, breed to a confirmed clear stud if you don't want to test your own dogs. I'm not mad at you, Kim, for this or the Idol thread, I am genuinely dumbfounded and despite repeated questioning and exchanges with you, I continue to be dumbfounded. Sorry for calling you a flat earther if you feel that was too personal and an attack, but really, I was sooooo holding back and being quite civil.


----------



## Ken Archer (Aug 11, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Nancy I guess you are reading something in my post that disagrees with the testing. I think they have the test correct and can show dogs that are clear, carriers and affected. I've never denied that, but in my uneducated mind I'm not 100% sure it's been out long enough to prove 100% of the time what will be produced. I hope I'm wrong and one day we will not have EIC to worry about.


I think we will have EIC to worry about as long as we have people who aren't 100% sure it's been out long enough to prove 100% of the time what will be produced and use that as an excuse to not test their dogs.


----------



## JamesTannery (Jul 29, 2006)

Ken Archer said:


> I think we will have EIC to worry about as long as we have people who aren't 100% sure it's been out long enough to prove 100% of the time what will be produced and use that as an excuse to not test their dogs.


We will have EIC as we've always had. With Labs being the most popular breed in the states none of the backyard breeders are going to test for anything. You can bet there are a lot more of them(backyard breeders) than responsible ones.
________
find dispensary


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

kimsmith said:


> Nancy I guess you are reading something in my post that disagrees with the testing. I think they have the test correct and can show dogs that are clear, carriers and affected. I've never denied that, but in my uneducated mind I'm not 100% sure it's been out long enough to prove 100% of the time what will be produced. I hope I'm wrong and one day we will not have EIC to worry about.


Is it that you are having trouble understanding the Punnett square?
Think of it as each parent has two genes it can give so think of it as both parents have a poker chip with two sides. Throw them up and what lands right side up is the combination for that puppy from both parents. That is 100%, (except in the _very rare_ case there could be another mutation I suppose). An affected can only give a mutated gene. A carrier can give a mutated gene and a clear gene. A clear can only give a clear gene. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punnett_square

You are questioning why some dogs express the inherited genes in different ways. A lot of people are having problems with that and as Katie has stated, it comes down to how a dogs' body perceives a stress or a handles excitement. Look at it like you would look at collar conditioning. Some dogs react to a one as much as other dogs react to a 6. They can be full brothers. Some are just more sensitive and to some a correction is much more stressful. If a dog is laid back and isn't stressed in training, just goes through life like a happy guy he may never go down. Likewise, a dog who is high intensity and extremely focused, he may put extreme stress on himself when he can't come up with the bird.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Thanks Erin and I appreciate your kind post to help me understand, black and white. You will never help someone understand by trying to belittle or make yourself out to be self righteous. The statement I made above is not that I believe the test are wrong in any way. Just had question in my mind can we for sure predict the outcome of our breedings. When it comes to science no one know for 100% when breeding 2 dogs, what the outcome will be. The only reason I had those concerns about EIC is because of such a wide range of affected dogs. Thanks Erin and Katie for Educating this FLATT EARTHIER. 

By the way Kim you couldn't make me mad if you wanted to and I'm sure you are not trying. I live every day for that day, I don't live in the past and I for sure don't live in the future. So everyday is a good day and if you are having a bad day you can change your mind set to make it a good day.

Kim the breeding that produced a tested affected pup with no signs at the moment wasn't my breeding, but I did want a pup from that breeding so I recommended the Stud. The pup that I own out of that breeding, if she does well in training and turns out to be a super dog then I'll test her to make sure she isn't affected. Other dogs that I will breed in the future will be tested also. The only reason I haven't tested my 2 older dogs is because of 2 reason. I wanted to make sure the test was 100% correct with no problems and I haven't in 4 years of breeding to this stud produced 1 tested affected dog. I've had some clear and some carriers, but none that were affected. Also you mentioned the Stud I used 8 years ago was a none carrier and out of those breedings, Every dog that has been tested is clear. I'm using the numbers in my mind that gives me clues that my dog is clear also, but will not know until I do the test.


----------



## gsc (Oct 4, 2007)

JamesTannery said:


> You can bet there are a lot more of them(backyard breeders ) than responsible ones.


I'd guess this at about 100:1


----------



## Heather McCormack (Apr 4, 2003)

Question, 

I'm just refering to second hand information here-

I was told there is a litter where the dam is EIC-Clear, Sire-Has not been checked. Three pups that have been tested so far have come back, 1-Clear, 1-Affected and 1-Carrier. How is this possible? To get all three ratings in a litter wouldn't you have to breed a Carrier/Carrier? I know we don't know the status of the sire here but the Dam is clear? Am I missing something here or is there something wrong with this?

If this story is indeed true, I would want some answers.

Heather


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

The problem is this is second hand knowledge and if the ones that have the facts don't come forward then we that question the results look like idiots for asking. So unless you have proof that this has happened and have paper work to back it up, I wouldn't post anything about it. Let the ones that are spreading the rumors bring this to the surface. I don't think this is true but got slammed for asking.

GSC: it more than 1000:1


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> I was told there is a litter where the dam is EIC-Clear, Sire-Has not been checked. Three pups that have been tested so far have come back, 1-Clear, 1-Affected and 1-Carrier. How is this possible?


It shouldn't be possible, but then why aren't these people contacting U of M and getting to the bottom of it instead of spreading it around? 
I would first be asking for the proof that the dam was actually tested clear.


----------



## Heather McCormack (Apr 4, 2003)

ErinEdge, 

Thats how I feel too...I'll have to dig into this one a little deeper I guess.
I keep hearing all these stories and it sure makes you want to step back and think about it a bit. Why people would start rumors like this are beyond me???

Thanks, 
Heather


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

> It shouldn't be possible, but then why aren't these people contacting U of M and getting to the bottom of it instead of spreading it around?


Nancy that is what I don't understand but do you think we would know if they were contacted. I'm not saying that anyone is lying but this would be problems for everyone if this is true. After some of the post listed above I don't think this could happen. If the ones that are spreading the rumors can't man up and give proof then the rumors don't mean anything.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Heather M said:


> ErinEdge,
> 
> Thats how I feel too...I'll have to dig into this one a little deeper I guess.
> I keep hearing all these stories and it sure makes you want to step back and think about it a bit. Why people would start rumors like this are beyond me???
> ...


I can think of a couple of reasons. There are people who absolutely refuse to believe the test, or maybe the official test was not done.


----------



## JKL (Oct 19, 2007)

Heather M said:


> ErinEdge,
> 
> Thats how I feel too...I'll have to dig into this one a little deeper I guess.
> I keep hearing all these stories and it sure makes you want to step back and think about it a bit. Why people would start rumors like this are beyond me???
> ...


In my experience not everyone understands the clearances. A few folks I know think because their dog has not ever shown signs of EIC, he/she must be clear. And if he/she is a carrier, it must be affected. I find it best to ask for official test results of clearance before accepting such a declaration.
I dont think these persons are dishonest, just lacking the understanding.


----------



## stick5 (May 17, 2006)

Sorry about bouncing around but I have a one year old female that I just received the test results back and she is affected. She has been through basics ff cc t's and swimby. Started cold and pattern blinds today before I get the results.I have pushed her quite hard but it has not been over 75 degrees yet. Unless I change my mind I am going to keep pushing and hope the trigger can not be reached. Hopefully it wont be for not but she is a marking machine at all distances and cover. My question is there any early signs before the collapse like lack if concentration ect?????


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

stick5 said:


> Sorry about bouncing around but I have a one year old female that I just received the test results back and she is affected. She has been through basics ff cc t's and swimby. Started cold and pattern blinds today before I get the results.I have pushed her quite hard but it has not been over 75 degrees yet. Unless I change my mind I am going to keep pushing and hope the trigger can not be reached. Hopefully it wont be for not but she is a marking machine at all distances and cover. My question is there any early signs before the collapse like lack if concentration ect?????


Mine develops almost a honking sound in her breath as her excitement begins to go up, but I don't think that is a common sign. The first direct sign is likely to be a slight wobblyness in the hind legs. It may show up as a sloppy puppy sit with that quirky smile that says I'm just catching my breath. If that happens, stop. Her symptoms will get worse before they get better. I crate my girl immediately or she will continue trying to do whatever fun thing was bringing on the attack. The difference between catching it early and having it escalate to a possibly life threatening event may only be a couple of minutes. If I crate her early, she is normally fine within 15-20 minutes and can return to training. However, I make sure she then takes it easy.


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

I didn't read this whole thread, but i think EIC is just a hot topic at the moment and a lot of great dogs will not be bred because they are carriers and that is a shame. 

If you have a clear bitch, why would you breed to a lesser dog that is clear vs a carrier when you know you will not produce any dogs with EIC? I'm more concerned with who throws weak ACLs than i am EIC. 

I am glad there is a test and think we should all test our dogs, but the results should be used for making educated decisions about breeding, not to keep great dogs from being bred.

We, as a community, will continue to come up with things to reduce the breeding pool as more dogs try to enter it. I just wish they'd find the "great marking" gene.

SM


----------



## stick5 (May 17, 2006)

I don't know if it is going to be tough or easy to see early symptoms because she is extremely intense and ready to explode all the time and goes all out when she does go.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> I didn't read this whole thread, but i think EIC is just a hot topic at the moment and a lot of great dogs will not be bred because they are carriers and that is a shame.
> 
> If you have a clear bitch, why would you breed to a lesser dog that is clear vs a carrier when you know you will not produce any dogs with EIC? I'm more concerned with who throws weak ACLs than i am EIC.
> 
> ...


Actually, Shayne, this thread went the opposite direction. Many posting on it don't have a problem breeding clear to carrier and that really didn't become an issue on this thread, with agreement the intent is to not produce affected dogs, but the OP is questioning the validity of the science behind the EIC test because of the variance of levels of affecteds and isn't testing at all. Plus throw in some rumoured litters of affecteds from clears and vice versa, you've got a regular soap opera. There, saved you from reading endless posts of innuendo, hearsay and whatnot.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Stick5, your dog might not never go down, she may go down playing with kids, she may go down playing fun bumpers. You will have to find out what triggers your dogs episodes.



> We, as a community, will continue to come up with things to reduce the breeding pool as more dogs try to enter it. I just wish they'd find the "great marking" gene.


It might be the EIC gene.:razz:

Rain, I'm glad you know so much and I'm glad you are an expert in the field of EIC. We need people like you to make sure everyones breeding practices are up to par. Thanks and maybe one day I will not be a FLATT EARTHIER, by the way is the world round. I thought that was a myth.

Also Rain if you would look up a few post I apologized about posting about something that I had no proof at all about, what else would you want me to do.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

Okay, I'm going to stick my head out here and I'm ready to have it bit off.

If you are looking at a litter that is advertising EIC clear- check to see if the parents' results are actually listed on OFA. If they're not, at a minimum you should be asking for a copy of the dog's result report.

I hate to say it's true, but I've seen several adds listing one or both parents as clear and they have neither been tested.

While I'm at it, I would also like to encourage those with collapsing and tested affected dogs to post those results on OFA. It's free, and it provides a lot of information to other breeders/potential buyers. Kudos to those who already have!


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Katie Minor said:


> Okay, I'm going to stick my head out here and I'm ready to have it bit off.
> 
> If you are looking at a litter that is advertising EIC clear- check to see if the results are actually listed on OFA. If they're not, at a minimum you should be asking for a copy of the dog's result report.
> 
> ...


Katie,

Is there a way to get OFA to allow you to search just for affected EIC dogs? They allow that with some other DNA tests and it would make life much easier. The last time I checked there were still less than 20 affecteds listed. Hopefully that has grown but people seem more interested in listing their clears.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

You can't do a result specific search for EIC. But, if you do a search and click on the OFA # column, all the affecteds are on the top of the list.


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

Katie Minor said:


> Okay, I'm going to stick my head out here and I'm ready to have it bit off.
> 
> If you are looking at a litter that is advertising EIC clear- check to see if the parents' results are actually listed on OFA. If they're not, at a minimum you should be asking for a copy of the dog's result report.
> 
> ...


Yet another reason that EIC should have it's own data base. Not enough people are going to pay an extra $15 to list the EIC results on top of a $65+ test. Seeing a copy of a piece of paper that can be doctered to say what ever you want is no proof. Seriously a 8 grade computer geek could alter the paperwork from the U of MN.


----------



## Juli H (Aug 27, 2007)

I realize that there are unscrupulous breeders who will do or say just about anything to sell a litter, unfortunately........but, it is also possible that the sire and dam could be clear because their parents were tested as such, and therefore they are clear by parentage....

as always, it is the buyer's responsibility to check and double check the health records of the parents of a prospective pup....

Juli


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

We are still committed to the ideal that an Open Database that includes all result types is the best for all. 

Carriers should no be "black listed" but just bred to clears to avoid producing an affected genotype. Even an exceptional affected dog has its place in a breeding program. 

Also, OFA does have the ability to verify results with testing labs, so an altered document will be discovered.

I realize its an added expense and step, but ultimately the database created via OFA will be far greater than any we could possibly keep (for the breath and depth of information), and probably at the same added expense for server space and maintenance of the database.

On a final note, OFA is a non-profit organization. Listing fees help fund research that allows for the development of DNA tests among many other health issues.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

If we have both Stud and Bitch tested and they come back clear even though we know there are carriers or affected dog in there background do they automatic fall under clear by parentage. I know to some this is a stupid question, but some how this gene got started somewhere.

Also Katie I've been looking all over the OFA website and for some reason I can't find anything about EIC, I'm still looking and I'm sure I'll find it.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

For clear by parentage, you need to DNA profile sire, dam, and pup. 

http://www.offa.org/dnacbp.html

The odds that this same mutation could occur again randomly in the population is 1 in ~2.4 billion (which is the size of the dog genome).


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

http://www.offa.org/search.html

Go to the second scrollable column of the section labeled "Report Type," scroll down below the DNA subheading and click on Exercise Induced Collapse. Then click the "begin search" button at the bottom of the table.


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

Kim, if you test both your male and female dog and they both come back clear, then they are clear by virture of their own test. If those two dogs are bred and have pups, then those pups would be considered clear by parentage since two clears can only produce clear pups. If someone wanted PROOF that the pups were indeed clear by parentage, then the pups would need to either be tested for EIC or the DNA samples of each pup and parent would need to be verified to prove that they are indeed the parents of said litter. Easier to just test the litter for EIC! 

Katie, I saw that an Australian Shepard has been tested for EIC. Are there other breeds that seem to come down with it other than the retriever breeds? I ask because my vet swears that his red heeler had it.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

So far we only know of Labs, Curlies, and Chessies. 

We haven't had the chance to test any heelers though, so maybe...

Border collies and Aussies seem to have something else going on, but I've seen it referred to as EIC.


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

Thanks! And by the way, your avatar is much nicer! The other one really creeped me out everytime I saw it. Sorry if it was a much beloved pet.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

firehouselabs said:


> Thanks! And by the way, your avatar is much nicer! The other one really creeped me out everytime I saw it. Sorry if it was a much beloved pet.


He is! Poor Fozzie!

But I'm sure Riley would agree he is the prettier of the two.


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

Katie Minor said:


> We are still committed to the ideal that an Open Database that includes all result types is the best for all.
> 
> Carriers should no be "black listed" but just bred to clears to avoid producing an affected genotype. Even an exceptional affected dog has its place in a breeding program.
> 
> ...


OFA may be able to detect a altered document, although I am not sure that is true. It is emailed as a PDF and PDF's can be manipulated. Your reasons for not having a serperate data base are not very strong. The U of MN has a computer science department that could use some projects! While I was a student there I did a couple projects simular to the data base that both OFA and CNM use, so the expence would be low for the University. Granted this was over 10 years ago but still plausible. People can also sign off to have carriers and affected dogs be listed just like OFA does for bad results on hips and elbows. 

Until it is a standard that people send in EIC results to OFA we will have rumors and bad information unless the U of MN sets up there own data base.

What percent of EIC results are turned into OFA?


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

For me it's nice to do "one stop shopping" on the OFA website. If I can find the majority of the info there then it saves me time. If I need to go to another site(s) to check on results it takes loads more time waiting on the computer, finding the sites, making sure that I have the dog's name spelled right, having to record fifty different numbers for different tests with the chance of transposing numbers..... Keep up the good work Katie.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

I've got one that sleeps with me every night. She doesn't put up with my labs and she let them know it. Its funny watching a 5 pound dog take on a 70 pound lab. They love to make her mad and then use their paws to keep her from biting them.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Your reasons for not having a separate data base are not very strong.


Look at this thread-people threatening, rumors, and the University says they will not be keepers of a database, and I certainly can see why.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

firehouselabs said:


> For me it's nice to do "one stop shopping" on the OFA website. If I can find the majority of the info there then it saves me time. If I need to go to another site(s) to check on results it takes loads more time waiting on the computer, finding the sites, making sure that I have the dog's name spelled right, having to record fifty different numbers for different tests with the chance of transposing numbers..... Keep up the good work Katie.


That's to beauty of the web site. It has all health clearance as an option to list in one place. And you can see info about the sire and dam, sibs and offspring. 

It's looks like about 25% of clear dogs that are registered with the AKC or CKC and aren't still very young pups are on there.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

ErinsEdge said:


> Look at this thread-people threatening, rumors, and the University says they will not be keepers of a database, and I certainly can see why.


Worse, the University doesn't hold the rights to the test. That would be us four patent holders taking liability for the database. Quite frankly, the thought is terrifying.


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

Katie Minor said:


> Worse, the University doesn't hold the rights to the test. That would be us four patent holders taking liability for the database. Quite frankly, the thought is terrifying.


How does CNM and OFA do it without it being as you said "terrifying"? 

Until the people at EIC recognize that the only documents sent out are suspect to alteration there will always be a hint of uncertainty.


----------



## kimsmith (Mar 30, 2003)

Y'all must be looking at something I'm not and I work on computers for a living. Thank you for posting the link and I went to the database. I sorted by EIC# and only a few come up affected, so I guess most elected not to post there results if they had affected pups. If someone with no computer skills at all was trying to search the EIC database on EIC they would get lost. I would have figured it out, but you made it easier for me. It would be nice to have a database with the affected, carriers and clear dogs but I guess there would be legal issues. 

Man what kind of legal issues would there be if someone did send in altered forms. Like someone said above that would be crazy.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Until the people at EIC recognize that the only documents sent out are suspect to alteration there will always be a hint of uncertainty.


Read...post #273


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Katie Minor said:


> We are still committed to the ideal that an Open Database that includes all result types is the best for all....


I will say first I am thrilled there is a test & congratulations to those responsible. You have done a great service for the Labrador Retriever. 

Unfortunately selecting OFA is about as far as you might get from an open database and still have any public availability of results (i.e., a near opposite for open database). At best you might see 10-15% of clear results on the OFA website with virtually none otherwise. You doomed the idea of public results by using OFA which requires the dog owner to pay to list results. And BTW, none of the fee to list results will go directly to any DNA research, it goes for "administration".



Katie Minor said:


> ...I realize its an added expense and step, but ultimately the database created via OFA will be far greater than any we could possibly keep (for the breath and depth of information), and probably at the same added expense for server space and maintenance of the database.
> 
> On a final note, OFA is a non-profit organization. Listing fees help fund research that allows for the development of DNA tests among many other health issues.


Using OFA, in this instance will not add breath & depth when it concerns EIC data because most who test their dogs won't pay to list results. And in regards to your later post about liability, surely your attorneys have told you there is no way using OFA can remove you as a target of litigation. Even with guarantees to be responsible, OFA could only guarantee monetary damages against you (& only those to the extent of being able to pay), any other liabilities that might be associated with the test will always be yours - as long as you offer the test & represent its results as valid. Much like environmental law, it is near impossible to completely eliminate the potential for liability with a test of this type - and using OFA to post results certainly won't do that.

Why not give us real access to results, a *complete* white list that lists all clear dogs as a minimum so that the testing will benefit the Labrador retriever as it could? BTW, I would guess there are more EIC test results listed here on RTF than on the OFA site......just an observation.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

I knew I would get flack for bring OFA up. But, felt it was worth bring up one more time. Especially in regard to posting of affected results.

Please know that are decision regarding listing test results was not arrived at lightly or without much discussion.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Katie Minor said:


> ...Please know that are decision regarding listing test results was not arrived at lightly or without much discussion.


Even much consideration & discussion does not always guarantee the proper decision - in this case, for the breed. That said, your decision likely seemed in the best interest of the 4 test owners when it was made. With the lack of reporting to & by OFA, maybe you might reconsider your decision in the future - for the benefit of the Labrador Retriever breed. If, in fact, OFA might actually use the EIC testing data, great - provide it to them. But if you want to help the Labrador Retriever breeders, pup buyers and those who might potentially be in one of those categories - publish a white list of all dogs testing clear (at least until you can manage an open database which I too would like to see).


----------



## Cedarswamp (Apr 29, 2008)

A whitelist like CNM would be nice. What would be really sweet would be a upload like CERF does with OFA where all clear dogs with entries with OFA could be automatically uploaded, with the carrier and affected being owner's option to send in like CERF offers. It's not a perfect solution, but we could at least see the clears either way.


----------



## Katie Minor (Sep 19, 2005)

Since this thread is getting so many hits, I thought I would mention here as well that the VDL is now able to accept cheek swabs due to some technology upgrades.

http://www.vdl.umn.edu/vdl/ourservices/canineneuromuscular/home.html


----------

