# 5 Star General Patton EIC Status?



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

Does anyone know his EIC status?


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

Contact his owner


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Check http://www.offa.org/display.html?appnum=1335923#animal


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

Anyone know if Wind Rivers Chloe EIC status?

Or, if a dog is a carrier does that mean that the offspring will also be a carrier?


----------



## Boondux (Feb 10, 2006)

Clear to carrier will produce approximately 50% clear & 50% carrier


----------



## Boondux (Feb 10, 2006)

http://www.xtremeoutdoorgundogs.com for Chloe info.


----------



## Juli H (Aug 27, 2007)

YardleyLabs said:


> Check http://www.offa.org/display.html?appnum=1335923#animal


 
I guess that's one way to narrow down the possibilities.....

Juli


----------



## DSMITH1651 (Feb 23, 2008)

all i know for sure is my cousin has a affected sired by him.
Duane


----------



## Bailey and Cappy's Mom (Aug 17, 2009)

Yep, contact the owner..


----------



## Beverly Burns (Apr 20, 2006)

I'm having a problem with the EIC results and good old honest information. Why don't people just put it out there? I have an EIC carrier bitch and don't know where it came from. On gooddog info., there is a high powered (deceased) bitch who has produced affected offspring as seen on the OFA site yet is listed as CNM -EIC clear on the gooddog site! That just can't be. We had an EIC affected bitch a few years ago (and yes it was new then without much genetic info.) but when e-mailing the big-time stud dog owner,I never got an e-mail back or acknowledgment that he even got it. What's with all the secrets?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Beverly Burns said:


> I'm having a problem with the EIC results and good old honest information. Why don't people just put it out there? I have an EIC carrier bitch and don't know where it came from. On gooddog info., there is a high powered (deceased) bitch who has produced affected offspring as seen on the OFA site yet is listed as CNM -EIC clear on the gooddog site! That just can't be. We had an EIC affected bitch a few years ago (and yes it was new then without much genetic info.) but when e-mailing the big-time stud dog owner,I never got an e-mail back or acknowledgment that he even got it. What's with all the secrets?



The real reason, is that it reduces the overall number of bitches the dog should be bred to, effectively reducing the value of the dog as a stud.

The excuses that I have heard from breeders vary from, "They don't really know enough about the disease to have a viable test yet." to "EIC isn't even a real disease. If it was, all of the Vets would know about it."


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

BTW, Patton has thrown both affected AND clear pups. 

That means, he has to be a carrier, but not affected.

I have found at least one NFC/AFC that has thrown MANY affected/carrier pups, without a single "published" clear pup. I think, that dog MUST be affected.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Beverly Burns said:


> I'm having a problem with the EIC results and good old honest information. Why don't people just put it out there? I have an EIC carrier bitch and don't know where it came from. On gooddog info., there is a high powered (deceased) bitch who has produced affected offspring as seen on the OFA site yet is listed as CNM -EIC clear on the gooddog site! That just can't be. We had an EIC affected bitch a few years ago (and yes it was new then without much genetic info.) but when e-mailing the big-time stud dog owner,I never got an e-mail back or acknowledgment that he even got it. What's with all the secrets?



One more thing I want to say.

Some breeders/Stud owners, get so upset about this issue, that they will try to take people to court over releasing a EIC test result that is anything other than clear.

I understand WHY, they want to sue, but I don't see how they could ever WIN the case! 

The information, very well might cost the breeder customers, but if it is the truth, and the owner didn't sign a non-discloser agreement of some sort, it isn't slander, or defamation.

You can't win a lawsuit, just because you don't like something that was said, unless the statement is also FALSE or hearsay.

Anyway, this subject is so sensitive, that I doubt this thread will be around very long.


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

I'm pissed. If I would have known that both parents were carriers, I wouldn't have taken a pup out of this litter.


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

The one big issue is the test has only been around since July 2008. More and more breeders and stud dog owners are only now, one year later, testing their sires and dams. Prior to that it was just luck of the draw unless the dogs in question were part of the field studies prior to the availability of the commercial test that is now available to everyone. It is hard to blame someone for "not testing" prior to breeding when a test was not available. However, I am a firm believer in testing if there is that avenue available and would not buy a pup from anyone without all tests having been completed.

Linas


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

D. Province said:


> I'm pissed. If I would have known that both parents were carriers, I wouldn't have taken a pup out of this litter.



I would. But I would have required that the litter be tested first.


----------



## John Kelder (Mar 10, 2006)

I'll catch a mountain of grief over this , but this is why , IMO , only clear dogs should be bred . That is the only way to remove this from the breed .1 carrier, 1 affected ,vice versa , yada ,yada ,only half pups this or that is a bunch of hooey .
If you love the breed as much as you project yourself too , clear to clear . PERIOD.
This not directed at any poster to this thread BTW. 
And I feel terrible for those who sunk a lot of heart and $$$ into the dog , then find out you MAY have been misled at the time of purchase .Or the breeder was honest with you and you rolled the dice .
WE are the only ones who care enough about these dogs to remove it from the breed . And the easiest , simplest way is CLEAR to CLEAR .


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Did you ask?


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

I agree with you and that's what I did with my pup. But you can only test for those diseases for which commercially available tests exist. In the above case what were the circumstances? Was a test available at the time of breeding?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

D. Province said:


> I'm pissed. If I would have known that both parents were carriers, I wouldn't have taken a pup out of this litter.



It hasn't exactly been a secret, that Patton threw some affected pups. He is a high enough profile Stud, that you could have easily found out, if you did a little bit of homework.


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

Test wasn't available, but I should have looked into it further.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

D. Province said:


> Test wasn't available, but I should have looked into it further.


I hadn't thought about that possibility.

How old is your dog?

Is it affected?

If so, is it symptomatic?


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

D. Province...check your PMs.


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2009)

John Kelder said:


> I'll catch a mountain of grief over this , but this is why , IMO , only clear dogs should be bred .


This deserves as well of a thought out response as the statement itself.

That's so dumb.


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

Melanie Foster said:


> This deserves as well of a thought out response as the statement itself.
> 
> That's so dumb.


I'm with you on that one. It would have been a very boring year in 2008 for me If I used that logic. But he probably would not wanted a dog like Pink I guess


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

copterdoc said:


> The real reason, is that it reduces the overall number of bitches the dog should be bred to, effectively reducing the value of the dog as a stud.
> 
> *The excuses that I have heard from breeders vary from, "They don't really know enough about the disease to have a viable test yet." to "EIC isn't even a real disease. If it was, all of the Vets would know about it*."


This is a cop out...they know that they have a dog that is either a carrier or affected and what better way to legitamize their dog than to say the test is faulty, etc...

If you don't want to use the tests that are available, you are just making it a harder to get a healthy pup...however, I would not agree than only clear dogs should be breed. 
We are supposed to be smart (as human race) and if you can't figure out produces affected after having animals tested, then you should not be breeding at all...it is only one of many genetic issues and most, we have no test for...

And by the way, I rarely see OFA for elbows (just as important as hips in my opinion since the dog's drive is in his front end) or PRA (even tho I have heard of two field litters with affecteds) and one well known FC that apparently is a PRA carrier.


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

It's my buddy's dog that was going to be our stud dog. He's been symptomatic once, the first day at the pro (yesterday). We're having them both tested now. I know Maxx is a carrier. As far as only testing cleared dogs....that's not the answer. Responsible breeding is which is clear to clear or clear to carrier. Over time that will kill the gene.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

copterdoc said:


> It hasn't exactly been a secret, that Patton threw some affected pups. He is a high enough profile Stud, that you could have easily found out, if you did a little bit of homework.


I'm not sure I buy that. I bought my affected Patton pup in September 2007 and heard no suggestions that Patton was a carrier. As far as I know, my pup was the first affected pup tested for which the results were made public. I received a lot of correspondence from knowledgeable people who were shocked -- to the extent that I ran DNA tests to confirm parentage. I received no comments from anyone who indicated prior knowledge that he was a carrier. I'm not saying no one knew, but it was far from common knowledge. I have had no reason to question the breeder of my affected pup. I truly believe he was at least as surprised as I was by what happened, both by the fact that Patton was a carrier and the fact that his female was a carrier. I happen to know where the gene came from for his female, but have never heard any suggestion from anyone suggesting that dog was a carrier either. 

The EIC gene has turned up in lots of places where it was not expected. That is why it is so important that all breeding stock be tested and that people publish the results. My absolute assumption is that is any dog that is being bred and is not demonstrated to be EIC Clear is a carrier or affected. It would be crazy to assume anything else.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Ya know, its really hard when a dog you love has a problem. You can purchase a pup with all the right clearances, and sitll have trouble. I am fairly educated on the different disorders. I got a pup from one of the best breeders I could find. I love this dog, his talent is obvious, but he will probably never run a trial. Sometimes, **** Happens.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

YardleyLabs said:


> I'm not sure I buy that. I bought my affected Patton pup in September 2007 and heard no suggestions that Patton was a carrier.


Well, that was a full year before there was an official test available. I assumed this thread was about a younger dog.

I do a lot of internet research. The very first dog, I found to be throwing affected pups was Patton. In fact, I am pretty sure, that I have read a few accusations, that he himself was affected. I think those false accusations, were posted before I knew about the DNA test being offered by the University of Minn.

I can't remember what forum/s I read that on, and I am sure most of those posts have been deleted by now.


----------



## Guest (Aug 19, 2009)

D. Province said:


> Over time that will kill the gene.


It may prevent Affected pups from being produced, but the gene will not "be killed."

Responsible, experienced breeders understand this and will manage their breeding programs as they have in the past...breeding with knowledge of all good and bad in their lines and knowing faults are never truly extinguished.


----------



## D Osborn (Jul 19, 2004)

Melanie Foster said:


> This deserves as well of a thought out response as the statement itself.
> 
> That's so dumb.


I am so amazed by people who
belive that carriers should not be bred. In Collies,(both border and rough) labs, PWD, goldens and quite frankly most breeds,we would narrow the gene pool to a point that we would have no where to go. We have a test, use it.


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

Well we'll see how things turn out. If the dog is affected, getting the breeder to make good I think is going to be a burden.

How long does it take to get the results?


----------



## Juli H (Aug 27, 2007)

2tall said:


> Ya know, its really hard when a dog you love has a problem. You can purchase a pup with all the right clearances, and sitll have trouble. I am fairly educated on the different disorders. I got a pup from one of the best breeders I could find. I love this dog, his talent is obvious, but he will probably never run a trial. Sometimes, **** Happens.


 
AMEN to that! These dogs ARE NOT PERFECT, They will NEVER BE PERFECT. Anyone who thinks they have a perfect dog, I have a bridge for sale in Ketchikan Alaska.....

If breeders do their best, then that is all that can be done...After that, it is in God's hands (unless the owner is an idiot...LOL!)....


Juli


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

When breeding for or against a single trait, lots of unintended changes can happen:

http://www.floridalupine.org/publications/PDF/trut-fox-study.pdf


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

I think we've had this conversation before. Personaly I don't give a rip one way or another what anyone chooses to divulge or not divulge *EXCEPT *as it affects a decicision I make regarding the purchase or breeding of a particular dog. The test is available and affordable. Anyone in the business of breeding these dogs that dosen't have it done either dosen't want to know or suspects but dosen't want to admit it to the buyers.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

D. Province said:


> Well we'll see how things turn out. If the dog is affected, getting the breeder to make good I think is going to be a burden.
> 
> How long does it take to get the results?


they are pretty quick these days... < 2 weeks the last my vet stated...


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

D. Province said:


> Well we'll see how things turn out. If the dog is affected, getting the breeder to make good I think is going to be a burden.
> 
> How long does it take to get the results?


Firstly, do you have a guarantee for EIC? If not, why would you expect one now?

If you got the dog before the test was available, how can you hold a breeder responsible for something they could not possibly have known when the breeding took place?

I purchased sisters last spring that both turned out to be affected. Wasn't in the guarantee. Did not ask for it to be guaranteed. Its real bad luck for both breeder and buyer.

WRL


----------



## M&K's Retrievers (May 31, 2009)

D. Province said:


> Well we'll see how things turn out. If the dog is affected, getting the breeder to make good I think is going to be a burden.
> 
> How long does it take to get the results?


I've had two dogs tested last month. It took 6 days to get the results - one clear and one carrier (Patton Grandson).


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

Per his website it's covered.


----------



## Richard Halstead (Apr 20, 2005)

For litters I reccomed or others I always say, CAVEAT EMPTOR, let the buyer beware. The idea that buyers take responsibility for the claims made of the items they purchase and should examine them before purchase.


----------



## John Kelder (Mar 10, 2006)

Melanie Foster said:


> This deserves as well of a thought out response as the statement itself.
> 
> That's so dumb.





scott spalding said:


> I'm with you on that one. It would have been a very boring year in 2008 for me If I used that logic. But he probably would not wanted a dog like Pink I guess


Sticks and stones may break my bones , but what you say won't hurt me . Or my dogs .
Would I enjoy running a dog like Pink?? Yes . 
Breed either a known carrier/ affected ?? Nope .


----------



## Mark G M (Sep 18, 2008)

I am not a professional but I do own an expensive dog that had all the clearances except OCD in hocks. I checked everything but OCD is hard to predict, so they say, or perhaps did not disclose (??). As good as this dog is, and as disappointed I am that he will never be a stud dog, I realize I have a responsibility to never breed this dog. To do so would give someone else the disappointment and huge vet bills I have encountered. If they could not afford the vet bills then the dog suffers in pain all their life.

So with EIC, I too agree only clear to clear should be breed. I would rather have less of a pool of dogs to breed with then to continue to affect the pool to the point that the disease (or whatever it is categorized) grows. Eventually the pool of healthy dogs will grow again.

This appears to be an issue driven by money and desire to not have to stop the dream of having the stud dog a person wants. 

Dogs are not perfect but we do have a responsibility to stop the spread of something that affects the bread.


----------



## windycanyon (Dec 21, 2007)

Mark G M said:


> I am not a professional but I do own an expensive dog that had all the clearances except OCD in hocks. I checked everything but OCD is hard to predict, so they say, or perhaps did not disclose (??). As good as this dog is, and as disappointed I am that he will never be a stud dog, I realize I have a responsibility to never breed this dog. To do so would give someone else the disappointment and huge vet bills I have encountered. If they could not afford the vet bills then the dog suffers in pain all their life.
> 
> So with EIC, I too agree only clear to clear should be breed. I would rather have less of a pool of dogs to breed with then to continue to affect the pool to the point that the disease (or whatever it is categorized) grows. Eventually the pool of healthy dogs will grow again.
> 
> ...


Ahhh, but what is the mode of inheritance for OCD? I doubt it's a simple recessive. And all we have for ortho issues is OFA type (phenotypical-- Clear or Affected based on what the xrays look like) tests, not genotypical (based on actual genetic info) tests. This is not a good comparison at all. And besides ortho issues, EIC, CNM, PRA, etc, we STILL are in for some rude awakenings if they ever come up w/ tests for epilepsy, allergies, and a number of other health issues. I'd love it to be so cut and dried but it isn't. We'll always have a few surprises, unfortunately that we'll just have to deal with... hopefully openly. Anne


----------



## Mark G M (Sep 18, 2008)

windycanyon said:


> Ahhh, but what is the mode of inheritance for OCD? I doubt it's a simple recessive. And all we have for ortho issues is OFA type (phenotypical-- Clear or Affected based on what the xrays look like) tests, not genotypical (based on actual genetic info) tests. This is not a good comparison at all. And besides ortho issues, EIC, CNM, PRA, etc, we STILL are in for some rude awakenings if they ever come up w/ tests for epilepsy, allergies, and a number of other health issues. I'd love it to be so cut and dried but it isn't. We'll always have a few surprises, unfortunately that we'll just have to deal with... hopefully openly. Anne


Thanks for the reply Anne. What I meant to say was that since EIC is so predictable by test, and OCD is not, it should be even easier to know what dog has EIC and thus should not be breed. I don't expect a backyard breeder to know about EIC and do the test but I do expect a professional breeder to do so. But, when the professional do not do the test, or stop the breeding, it spreads it even more.


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

John Kelder said:


> Sticks and stones may break my bones , but what you say won't hurt me . Or my dogs .
> Would I enjoy running a dog like Pink?? Yes .
> Breed either a known carrier/ affected ?? Nope .


So John, do you use OFA for elbows? Do you have all of breeding dogs tested for PRA, RD/OSD (genetic test for dwarfism/more definitive than CERF) and NARC? See the link below:

http://www.optigen.com/opt9_test.html
Labrador Retrievers - OptiGen® prcd-PRA & RD/OSD & NARC tests

If not, how can you be so definite on not breeding a carrier to a clear for EIC and ignor other known disease genetic markers??? How is it that one disease can be more or less important than the above genetic tests??? 

If I purchased a puppy than exhibited PRA at the age of 5 (blindness and occurs in both field and bench dogs), would I be as unhappy as if I had purchased a pup that was an EIC carrier (does not have the disease)?

Just trying to be logical...


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Being an EIC carrier does not mean a dog has a disease. Unlike PRA, etc. And, an EIC carrier can certainly carry home a blue ribbon. Certain things, like OCD can be influenced by human's... diet, weight, etc. and mode of inheritance has not been proven. Elimination of carriers in the gene pool will only cause us to have the proverbial 3 headed lab in the next generations..... and let's keep in mind that the makers of the tests ie: EIC and CNM do not recommend elimination from the gene pool overnite.... but to use these tests as smart tools for breeding.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

D. Province said:


> Per his website it's covered.


I believe that it says it's covered beginning in March 2009, meaning it's not covered prior to that. Obviously, the first question is whether or not your dog is affected. After that, it will be between you and the breeder. In my case I neither expected nor received anything from the breeder except sympathy. It was simply bad luck for both of us.


----------



## Alan Sandifer (Oct 17, 2007)

If you purchased your dog (BEFORE) the EIC test was available , how can you be upset with the breeder ?

Now that the test is available the buyer should KNOW what they are getting .

I talked on the phone with the Univ. of Minn. and this is what i was told about breeding . (IF) you own an effected dog (that) brings a lot to the table , for the breed . They do NOT recommend not breeding the dog , BUT only breed to a clear , which will produce ALL carriers , which in turn would be bred to clears . According to them this is the way to keep the traits we like and in several breedings REMOVE the EIC gene .

Everyone has an opinion but the status should be known BEFORE breeding . (JMO)


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

> I love this dog, his talent is obvious, but he will probably never run a trial. Sometimes, **** Happens.


Is this because the dog is affected with EIC or because he is out of control?


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Wrong dog Vicki. My chessie pup from good and excellent OFA hips has a very bad hip and has not been sound enough to train. My point was, that sometimes bad things happen and no breeder can guarantee health and soundness. My lab is EIC clear and sound as a dollar. (is that still a good comparison?)


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

Vicki Worthington said:


> Is this because the dog is affected with EIC or because he is out of control?


I assume she was talking about her Chesapeake with hip displaysia.

She's never mentioned health issues with Indy.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

My opinion regarding breeding carriers is that it should be greatly reduced, but not eliminated by using the test. For instance, if a breeder has a nice dog that they would otherwise breed, but they find it is a carrier of EIC or CNM then they should hold that dog to a much higher standard before they breed. IMO it should be a situation where it would be a crying shame NOT to breed the dog because of the truly outstanding attributes it possesses. In that event breed the dog to a clear one, test the litter and disclose everything to the buyers. I am not a breeder, but that is the way I would handle it.


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

I agree with Yardley Labs and Cophia Creek. You can not hold someone responsible for something they could not control at the time of breeding. 

You can guarantee hips and eyes as the Sire and Dam were CERF'd and hips checked. These are two separate issues. You can not say they are the same. The breeder does state that starting March 2009 EIC and CNM are guaranteed. In the case of D. Province, the pup was purchased before that guarantee.

To add to this equation...I bought from the same breeder in March 2009. Different Sire and Dam. I went in with the knowledge that the tests for CNM and EIC were available in 2009. It was discussed at length with the breeder. Tests were done and I have an EIC and CNM clear pup, CERF Normal. We love her to death. Breeder was fair and honest with me. That's all I can say and ask for.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Linas, that is all that matters in the end. The breeder backs up the gurantees offered. There will always be something unforseen.


----------



## Lpgar (Mar 31, 2005)

Tell Ya what Ya'll.....If you really want to buy clear clear and breed it...Great for You... But Ya still got to beat what is out there any given weekend. Might...and Probably is performace traits attached to that gene. Something to think about. Me...looking for what it take for the Big Blue.

Gar


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> Me...looking for what it take for the Big Blue.


Hmmmm, breeding for the talent gene.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Howard N said:


> Hmmmm, breeding for the talent gene.


what a unique concept.....


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Isn't breeding for ribbons the reason why we have so many health issues now to deal with among Field Trial Labs?

I have a Dental appointment in 30 minutes so, I will check in later.;-)


----------



## justaguy (Jul 14, 2009)

The UofM should publish guidelines for breeding the specific traits. They identified the smell, now the next step is to wash it off. They really should not leave it to lawyers, accountants, doctors, and other people to speculate. This is really all speculation and genetics is a science. I may be wrong but I don't see anyone here that knows how to breed to create offspring that are not affected. It sounds to me that EIC is the same as breeding for Chocolate labs. We have figured out how to breed for coat color, now apply those principles to EIC. 

The good breeders know what they are doing. It sounds that Affected, Carrier, and Clear are similar to this issue. Please correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## Lpgar (Mar 31, 2005)

Indeed...breeding only for perfomance without regards to health is wrong....But a dormant trait on a Carrier gene is in no way a health issue. As I said... Maybe and probably other possitive traits might be on the same "defective gene" as CMN and EIC.....might be why so many have chosen to breed to the "Super Dogs" that carried them before testing was even known about.

JMHO.

Gar


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

I looked for EIC and CNM Clear but did not overlook the qualities of the Sire and Dam in the breeding either.

http://www.offa.org/display.html?appnum=1379377#animal

The only thing that will hold this pup back is her trainer (me)! If I can perform to her potential she should turn out okay.

Linas


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

Thanks, Carol for clarifying that. I thought Indy was EIC clear, but since this started out as a thread about EIC, I was confused.

Sorry your Chessie has the hip issue....


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

justaguy said:


> The UofM should publish guidelines for breeding the specific traits. They identified the smell, now the next step is to wash it off. They really should not leave it to lawyers, accountants, doctors, and other people to speculate. This is really all speculation and genetics is a science. I may be wrong but I don't see anyone here that knows how to breed to create offspring that are not affected. It sounds to me that EIC is the same as breeding for Chocolate labs. We have figured out how to breed for coat color, now apply those principles to EIC.
> 
> The good breeders know what they are doing. It sounds that Affected, Carrier, and Clear are similar to this issue. Please correct me if I am wrong.


The UofM actually does include breeding guidelines on their web site and on each test report issued. They recommend breeding to avoid producing affecteds by making sure that at least one parent is EIC Clear. This by itself will reduce the incidence of carriers and elminate EIC as a medical problem. They do not recomend eliminating EIC Carriers from the breeding population. I could theoretically breed my EIC Affected pup to a dog that was clear to produce a litter of carriers. I will not only because her positive qualitied are not great enough to outweigh this negative.


----------



## John Kelder (Mar 10, 2006)

SueLab said:


> So John, do you use OFA for elbows? Do you have all of breeding dogs tested for PRA, RD/OSD (genetic test for dwarfism/more definitive than CERF) and NARC? See the link below:
> 
> http://www.optigen.com/opt9_test.html
> Labrador Retrievers - OptiGen® prcd-PRA & RD/OSD & NARC tests
> ...


I like your logic. Older dogs here not tested , new ones are . Science is faster than me , to be sure .
But my advantage is that new pup is 5th generation of my breeding .As a small operation , I am confident that if any pups I sold were affected with narco ,pra , or rd/osd , I would know about it . 
And I know I was lucky , as my first dogs were only tested for hips and eyes .Next generation I added elbows ,as research showed that was the right thing to do .And now Parker will get soup to nuts before he is ever studded .
Logical to me is crazy to others regards .........


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Lpgar said:


> Indeed...breeding only for perfomance without regards to health is wrong....But a dormant trait on a Carrier gene is in no way a health issue. As I said... *Maybe and probably other possitive traits might be on the same "defective gene" as CMN and EIC.....might be why so many have chosen to breed to the "Super Dogs" that carried them before testing was even known about.*
> 
> JMHO.
> 
> Gar


That makes 0 sense. If that were the case, all NFC/NAFC/FC/AFC dogs would be carriers or affected. We know that's not the case. Very simple bio here. 

The idea is to not produce 2 copies of the mutated gene. I'm not for all clear breedings.


----------



## Lpgar (Mar 31, 2005)

Jacob....if you pay attention to almost all of those NFC's NAFC's have the "Super Dogs" somewhere in their pedigree.....and some (like Karma's daddy) were lucky enough...and it may have been more luck than planning. How could they plan when the tests were not even invented.


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

Linas, I can't disagree with you more. When you buy a dog with a guaranty against genetic defects, and your dog ends up with EIC, then it certainly should be covered. Further more any respectable breeder would stand behind their guaranty. Using your concept, a guaranty wouldn't be necessary. Let me ask you, if the breeder bred good hips to good hip and a pup turned out bad, would it be covered? Of course it would. Regarding EIC, this probably wasn't a good breeding since now that I've looked into it both parents had EIC in their direct pedigrees.


----------



## D. Province (Feb 21, 2008)

What does everyone else think?
Should a pup purchased with a 24 month guaranty against health issues be covered for having EIC if the breeding occurred prior to EIC testing being available?


----------



## Guest (Aug 20, 2009)

D. Province said:


> What does everyone else think?
> Should a pup purchased with a 24 month guaranty against health issues be covered for having EIC if the breeding occurred prior to EIC testing being available?


It totally depends on the wording of the contract. I don't know of any breeder in their right mind who would feel responsible for all "health issues" for 24 months. That is nuts.

BTW, it's spelled _guarantee_.


----------



## Bailey and Cappy's Mom (Aug 17, 2009)

D. Province said:


> What does everyone else think?
> Should a pup purchased with a 24 month guaranty against health issues be covered for having EIC if the breeding occurred prior to EIC testing being available?



No, I don't think it should be covered prior to the test being released.. 

When you say "covered" in what regards do you want? Do you want a replacment pup?


----------



## Guest (Aug 20, 2009)

John Kelder said:


> Sticks and stones may break my bones , but what you say won't hurt me .


John, you don't have to be a tough guy here. We're all family.

I know you were crying when you wrote this.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Lpgar said:


> Jacob....if you pay attention to almost all of those NFC's NAFC's have the "Super Dogs" somewhere in their pedigree.....and some (like Karma's daddy) were lucky enough...and it may have been more luck than planning. How could they plan when the tests were not even invented.


Right. There are a ton of great dogs that come from lines that have EIC carriers/affecteds. That's why I said I don't believe in all clear breedings, atleast not for an amount of time that's wise. Imagine not having Maxx, Patton, Cosmo, Ford, Bubba, Drake, Jamie, Dusty, & etc. Yeah, not a pleasant thought.

I'm just saying it's the mutated copy/copies of a gene that makes a dog a carrier/affected. You can't just do away with a gene. You're just losing the mutation.


----------



## luvalab (Oct 10, 2003)

I really want to say something, and I've been struggling with how to say this in the fairest possible way, because I don't think anyone should have to feel defensive about it--it's just a reality I think people should try to be conscious of. So pardon the long post--I'm trying to be judicious.

Those urging caveat emptor are absolutely, positively right. Caveat emptor, and then let it go.

That said

--and I say this without wanting to cast aspersions on any person or dog in this thread, because I don't know nothing or nobody, I'm just making a general statement--

I think it's worth noting the dog world, _like the rest of the world_, probably has some "emptors" to whom the "caveats" are more forthcoming than others. 

Whether this is fair or unfair--well, it just is. There are pretty good reasons why good people keep their mouths shut about other peoples' business, even though someone might get hurt down the line for lack of knowledge. I'm not interested in judging them.

Nonetheless--I think people should remember that a person can do all his homework, but sometimes it's the politics of the lunchroom that make a difference.

To blame a consumer out of hand for not making the same decision as you would is as unfair as blaming a breeder out of hand for something he or she may not have had knowledge about or control over. That consumer may not have been privy to the same resources as you.

Before the test was out, I spent a good two years chasing internet rumors and doing punnet squares in my best attempt to try to avoid paying for and falling in love with a puppy that could be affected (in the meantime, I got a flat-coat!). I'm assuming that when I'm ready for a puppy in 6 or 7 years, I'll have something else to try to avoid--and I'll probably have punnet squares and pedigrees and rumors as my best resources, whereas others will have far more reliable information. 

I believe in caveat emptor--but if you're lucky enough (or been around long enough) to have an inside line on information, try to keep some respect for the "little guy" when you say that magic phrase.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

D. Province said:


> What does everyone else think?
> Should a pup purchased with a 24 month guaranty against health issues be covered for having EIC if the breeding occurred prior to EIC testing being available?


No. Why would they? Mine falls in that time frame. You know what? I was bummed for a lil while then got over it. No way the lil $1,850 puppy price would do anything for me, especially compared to how much I've got in him. I've got a dog that hasn't collapsed and 2 other littermates haven't either. Don't let a lil affected test result make you give up on a dog.


----------



## MRC Dream (Mar 4, 2009)

You were bothered at first? But not now? Tell me how you feel after the first collapse happens. Cause it will............sooner than later. 

Many people have spoken on the issue, but like real life, only those that have been affected by this really understand. Please don't tell me how to feel, or how to train, or how to breed my affected dog. You don't understand. And you never will unless you own one. 

Peace


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

D. Province,

You have every right to disagree. We are all entitled to our opinions and as Bill Parcells used to state when coaching football and discussing issues with the media he would respond that every pancake has two sides. You might like one side that is golden brown but might not like the other that is burned.

However, it appears that you do not know the status of your dog and have begun to drag a person through the hot burning coals in a public forum without having all the answers. Why don't you wait to see how the test results turn out and then discuss the options with the breeder in private and see how he responds before yelling fire in a theater?

Best regards and good luck,

Linas


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Not all affected dogs show signs. Stop talking about what you know not. 3 out of 7 known affected pups from Mav's litter haven't showed signs. 14 1/2 months old would make ya believe it's not gonna happen either. 

I don't know how it is to drop several $K on a dog to find out it's affected. Funny.


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> Not all affected dogs show signs.


And not all affected dogs have the same triggers for episodes because dogs are affected differently..mild to severe.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> Right. There are a ton of great dogs that come from lines that have EIC carriers/affecteds. That's why I said I don't believe in all clear breedings, atleast not for an amount of time that's wise. Imagine not having Maxx, Patton, Cosmo, Ford, Bubba, Drake, Jamie, Dusty, & etc. Yeah, not a pleasant thought.
> 
> I'm just saying it's the mutated copy/copies of a gene that makes a dog a carrier/affected. You can't just do away with a gene. You're just losing the mutation.


Let's be careful with your list.... not all those dogs were tested..... and I know a litter out of one of the sires you named that there was not a carrier in the bunch..... there are many causes for dogs collapsing besides EIC.


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> Not all affected dogs show signs. Stop talking about what you know not. 3 out of 7 known affected pups from Mav's litter haven't showed signs. 14 1/2 months old would make ya believe it's not gonna happen either.
> 
> I don't know how it is to drop several $K on a dog to find out it's affected. Funny.


Jake, 14.5 months episode free proves very little. If the affected pups haven't had episodes at 44.5 months then I'd say there's a chance they won't. The only one I saw had very few episodes in his life and they started at about 2.5 years of age.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Howard N said:


> Jake, 14.5 months episode free proves very little. If the affected pups haven't had episodes at 44.5 months then I'd say there's a chance they won't. The only one I saw had very few episodes in his life and they *started at about 2.5 years of age*.


I agree, started after the dog's Derby career, well into being a nice Qual dog and then to AA level.....oh well, loves to hunt geese all day! Pheasants, too.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Yes sir. Thanks for that story. Just trying to be positive. The ones that have showed signs (I know there are different triggers/degrees of signs/collapses.) were from pheasant hunting & I know he'll never see a pheasant field. For all I *know* he could show signs while duck or goose hunting. I *don't know* how he will react to cripples, but I do know he isn't easily excited (Which is a good thing considering the EIC thing.). 

Being that said, that's my dog & the amount of joy as well as frustration I get from him makes it impossible to ever think about letting him go. He's very much a different dog, even if he can't mark and doesn't run fast.


----------



## prairiewind (Feb 17, 2009)

Question, does affected and carrier have the same ramifications?


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

HuntinDawg said:


> My opinion regarding breeding carriers is that it should be greatly reduced, but not eliminated by using the test. For instance, if a breeder has a nice dog that they would otherwise breed, but they find it is a carrier of EIC or CNM then they should hold that dog to a much higher standard before they breed. IMO it should be a situation where it would be a crying shame NOT to breed the dog because of the truly outstanding attributes it possesses. In that event breed the dog to a clear one, test the litter and disclose everything to the buyers. I am not a breeder, but that is the way I would handle it.


Your comments really hit home with me. Let me give you a first hand account from a stud owner point of view whose stud is a carrier. 

Don’t loose any sleep worrying whether or not carriers will be bred sparingly. Their breedings, regardless of progeny track records, will be (are being) very limited. My dog is the sire of this year’s likely National Derby Champion that will probably top the 100-point mark. Roux, is also an EIC carrier which I disclosed as soon as test results were received. Ammo is by far the best known of his pups, but he has others that have demonstrated the ability to perform at a high level. Common themes that I am hearing from owners indicate the pups are highly intelligent, have great drive, and are tractable. In summary, he has thrown a high percentage of pups that have the potential to be what most of us want in a dog including the ability to perform. 

Those of you who say absolutely no breeding to carriers, is this the type of animal that you want to exclude from the gene pool? Should breeding to eliminate future carrier pups trump breeding for performance?

Frank


----------



## Guest (Aug 20, 2009)

I have seen two dogs affected with EIC one collapse one after a very short run while exercising he was 2 the other after two marks about 75 yards each, (4 years old) this one also was running in his backyard when he collapsed and fell in their pool luckily the owner jumped in after him.


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

Jacob Hawkes said:


> No. Why would they? Mine falls in that time frame. You know what? I was bummed for a lil while then got over it. No way the lil $1,850 puppy price would do anything for me, especially compared to how much I've got in him. I've got a dog that hasn't collapsed and 2 other littermates haven't either. Don't let a lil affected test result make you give up on a dog.


Jacob,

We own an affected dog...He had only 3 collapses in his competitive life and he is now 10. He did everything that we aspired to do. 

If your dog is affected, I would have to agree that a collapse will happen sometime. When (if) it does, make good notes on what the conditions were...ie: frustration, humidity, temp, situation, etc. In our case, first dove hunt, training with a new group and a bitch in season, and lastly, more repeats and more pressure than what he was used to having.

Unfortunately, I was a breeder of two EIC carriers (before the test and before the stud threw any affecteds). A pup ended up being affected (tested in the initial stage of the test). With that knowledge, the owner (a FTler) found a nice pet home. The first collapse occurred the first weekend she was with the potential pet owners - it involved keep away with a ball. She has had no more episodes because her owners know what NOT to do...and they love her. A nice ending to a potentially sad affair...

Good luck with your pup...


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Bayou Magic said:


> Your comments really hit home with me. Let me give you a first hand account from a stud owner point of view whose stud is a carrier.
> 
> Don’t loose any sleep worrying whether or not carriers will be bred sparingly. Their breedings, regardless of progeny track records, will be (are being) very limited. My dog is the sire of this year’s likely National Derby Champion that will probably top the 100-point mark. Roux, is also an EIC carrier which I disclosed as soon as test results were received. Ammo is by far the best known of his pups, but he has others that have demonstrated the ability to perform at a high level. Common themes that I am hearing from owners indicate the pups are highly intelligent, have great drive, and are tractable. In summary, he has thrown a high percentage of pups that have the potential to be what most of us want in a dog including the ability to perform.
> 
> ...


No, and I really feel for the owners of nice studs that are getting hammered solely for EIC carrier status. Sure, most of my females are carrier so I've got to go with clear studs but wouldn't discount a carrier stud if the right match for a clear bitch, but overall, I know many won't breed to a carrier male regardless of what else he brings to the table. Generally, my buyers don't care as long as they won't get an affected, if they want a "mixed" litter tested to get a clear pup, I no longer offer to do it. But the carrier studs sure are taking an unfair beating when it is such an easy thing to breed around, black and white genetic test, 1 clear parent= no affecteds. I don't get it.


----------



## Linas Danilevicius (Jan 2, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> No, and I really feel for the owners of nice studs that are getting hammered solely for EIC carrier status. Sure, most of my females are carrier so I've got to go with clear studs but wouldn't discount a carrier stud if the right match for a clear bitch, but overall, I know many won't breed to a carrier male regardless of what else he brings to the table. Generally, my buyers don't care as long as they won't get an affected, if they want a "mixed" litter tested to get a clear pup, I no longer offer to do it. But the carrier studs sure are taking an unfair beating when it is such an easy thing to breed around, black and white genetic test, 1 clear parent= no affecteds. I don't get it.


Kim,

I agree with you one hundred percent. Folks are taking a beating here fair or not. Take a look at my comments to D.J. Province on his poll that he started subsequent to this thread. There are far too many critical comments and never any apologies once the facts are gathered.

Linas


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

I agree with Bayou Magic also...

Most who buy pups and are serious competitors are not planning on breeding. They are planning on winning! A carrier does not have a disease, are capable of competing and could be bred IF the human population would use the intelligence they were born with.

People who buy pups with the intent of breeding are missing some elements - intelligence, trainability (even as a pet dog) and suitability for whatever purpose. Certifications are not the end all...


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Linas Danilevicius said:


> Kim,
> 
> I agree with you one hundred percent. Folks are taking a beating here fair or not. Take a look at my comments to D.J. Province on his poll that he started subsequent to this thread. There are far too many critical comments and never any apologies once the facts are gathered.
> 
> Linas


I know, but I get sucked into EIC debates and it's been done to death on this forum alone, people will breed as they choose and others will blame breeders and stud owners regardless of fact or science. I don't care if anyone wants only clears for themselves, that's their choice, do the research and don't buy anything you don't want, but if you don't ask the basic questions, don't go back and blame the breeder/stud owner later. Witch hunts are why disclosure doesn't always happen.


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

D. Province said:


> Linas, I can't disagree with you more. When you buy a dog with a guaranty against genetic defects, and your dog ends up with EIC, then it certainly should be covered. Further more any respectable breeder would stand behind their guaranty. Using your concept, a guaranty wouldn't be necessary. Let me ask you, if the breeder bred good hips to good hip and a pup turned out bad, would it be covered? Of course it would. Regarding EIC, this probably wasn't a good breeding since now that I've looked into it both parents had EIC in their direct pedigrees.


The problem with your thinking is that 2 EIC carriers could concievably produce ALL clear dogs (or all affected dogs or a mixed bag)...for this reason informing everyone of your results on the EIC test means NOTHING unless your dog is AFFECTED. So if there was EIC in the pedigree, many of the offspring in the pedigree could be clear and without a test , you just didn't know!

A breeder who did not have a test for EIC and (prior to the current test) could only avoid dogs that had already thrown  EIC affected pups, had a difficult problem. There was even speculation on whether a dog had EIC...so how on earth could anyone breed at all???


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

I'm no longer comfortable leaving this thread going.

It's had its play.

Thanks,

Chris


----------

