Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Lucy Fleming — Mon, 01 Feb 2016 11:06:07 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"] I don't reckon that exercise matters one jot when it comes to production of podgy pets.[/quote]

You're quite probably correct - increasingly the evidence on the human side is that physical activity has little effect on weight/ overweight (though it seems to be by no means clear, from a quick Google Scholar search), and it's thought to be the same for pets. My favourite recent quote "Abs are made in the kitchen, not in the gym" (which is disappointing from the point of view of my McDonalds-on-the-way-home-from-Derby-training habit).

Cardiovascular fitness would be a different matter.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Anthony Todd — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 14:36:50 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]The orthopods would be able to discuss it in far more detail than me....but I see the latter far more commonly.[/quote]

Yes, you're quite right..

Most commonly CrCLD is caused by a combination of many factors, including aging of the ligament (degeneration), obesity, poor physical condition, genetics, conformation (skeletal shape and configuration), and breed. With CrCLD, ligament rupture is a result of subtle, slow degeneration that has been taking place over a few months or even years rather than the result of acute (sudden) trauma to an otherwise healthy ligament (which is very rare). This difference between people and dogs explains two important features of canine CrCLD:

from:

https://www.acvs.org/small-animal/cranial-cruciate-ligament-disease

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Rob Loxley — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 14:01:51 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Surely cruciate rupture is a traumatic injury[/quote]

rarely a primary trauma in dogs I'd suggest, hence why so many dogs go onto develop contralateral disease

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]so wouldn't be seen in animals, or people, who only walk?[/quote]

so you don't think guide dogs get off-lead exercise??

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Gillian Mostyn — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 13:14:50 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Surely cruciate rupture is a traumatic injury so wouldn't be seen in animals, or people, who only walk?[/quote]

Cruciate disease can be both due to acute traumatic rupture and chronic degeneration. The orthopods would be able to discuss it in far more detail than me....but I see the latter far more commonly.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

George Cooper — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 13:07:38 GMT

Ive been reflecting upon this convoluted thread as I try to survive this dismal weather that threatens to blow my little white Dawg away, and soaks her to the skin even if it is only for the 30 seconds it takes her to nip out and wee and nip in again. For over a month we have had no walks, imposed by a deep dislike of the wet the cold and the dirt. She's the same weight now as a couple of months ago.

Some posters have talked of weight issues in the neutered, and have made the link with "exercise". I don't reckon that exercise matters one jot when it comes to production of podgy pets. I have a reason! For 25 years I was in practice in the home town of those magnificent men who could be posted to any or all of the world's trouble spots at a moment's notice, and as a result of having maybe half of our clientele in "The Regiment" I made two observations.

The first was that these hardy souls would run maybe 30 miles every day before breakfast, with backpacks, and take their dogs with them for company. It was a regular sight to see fit blokes powering round the lanes, accompanied by role-poly huffing-puffing pets who were probably getting on for 50% overweight. No - to me the critical thing in any weight issue is that fat dogs are having more food down their necks than they need (and NOT what they would LIKE). And that led to interesting discussions with owners about actual quantities - that made then squirm (the owners) because it seemed such a small amount, and because "he's always hungry" = trying to survive, by instinct.

The second observation was that, quite often I could tell when the man o' the house had been posted abroad, because about 5-10 days later the wife would fetch the dog in scratching ferociously, presumably "stress" induced. As ever - all anecdotal, but Oh!, such fun!

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Anthony Todd — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 12:23:06 GMT

[quote user="Julie Innes"]Interestingly, all the guide dogs for the blind are neutered. Their weight is kept steady, and despite lots of walking/ working, I can't think of ever seeing one (and we see a lot, as we are close to a centre) with cruciate issues.[/quote]

Surely cruciate rupture is a traumatic injury so wouldn't be seen in animals, or people, who only walk?

[A close relative of mine ruptured his cruciate ligament sliding down the up elevator at Waterloo....] [the station, not the battle]

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 16:45:17 GMT

That's also the case in France. They insist on annual rabies vaccination

Wynne

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Nhombokisheni — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 16:21:23 GMT

[quote user="Iain Richards"]

The question of "who benefits more" is irrelevant. Pet ownership is for the benefit of the owner. What is done to that animal is therfore only ever for the benefit or convenience of the owner. Our personal or societal morals and ethics then determine the scale of what can be done.

[/quote]

The practice of Veterinary medicine takes issue with your use of the word "ONLY" .......is this the absolute irrevocable pursuit of our vocation?.......

Personal and societal morals and ethics........what about the proven scientific pool of knowledge that your were certified as having, not only assimilated it, but demonstrated ability to apply it on the stage of life.......

In an indirect way you have actually answered my question........how far are vets prepared to go to apply evidence based knowledge ahead of tradition and the owner................a case in mind regards rabies vaccination. Back in Africa we always had annual campaigns to vaccinate for rabies at government cost......and in between campaigns private practitioners have rabies annually........then things changed ....knowledge came that one vaccine was all the dog needed for life......up to now resistance to change the vaccination regime in some countries still persists. Check this post.....it's a bit long but demonstrates a worrying trend where resistance to new research evidence exists:

http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2013/11/one-and-done-approach-to-reabies-vaccination-is-misguided-and-dangerous/

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Nhombokisheni — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:18:10 GMT

[quote user="Iain Richards"]

To return to the original post, The question of "who benefits more" is irrelevant. Pet ownership is for the benefit of the owner. What is done to that animal is therfore only ever for the benefit or convenience of the owner. Our personal or societal morals and ethics then determine the scale of what can be done. As neutering can be done with minimal harm, has benefits (be they clinical, behavioural or convenience) it can and should be accepted.

Discuss....

[/quote]

Can I therefore infer that this is the vet's way of quoting the old saying "he who pays the piper calls the tune"

The oath was all about the patient.......the owner's convenience and benefit are secondary.......OR are they really.

Where does animal welfare come in if it's ever all about the owner?

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Julie Innes — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:55:43 GMT

I would say I'm pro-neutering. My dogs, bitches, cats and even rabbits have all been neutered. We DO see pyos, usually older dogs, lots of weeping and wailing owners, who "if they had known" ....Also lots of mammary tumours. Again, "no-one ever told me..." . So I make sure they are aware of the advantages and disadvantages of neutering, but I don't push. We have had 2 misalliances in the last week- the second of which decided to neuter as the cost of the alizin makes it better value to neuter! We have resected 2 mammary tumours this week, and had a third cancel due to lack of funds. We see many many litters of puppies (I guess we don't have all that many sensible owners around here..), and also all the complications that go along with ignorant owners who have no clue about whelping/ puppies/ breeding in general. Thanks to back yard breeding (aka "getting your money back" from your bitch), we have mounting numbers of atopic cases/ hernias/ crap conformation/ wildly luxating patellae/ 2 year-old dogs getting pts with crap hips... not to mention bitches that "drop dead" afterward/ get mastitis/ need emergency sections that people can't pay for.) If I could guarantee that people who kept their dogs entire weren't just doing it to make an easy tax-free buck (which sadly seems to be the most common reason round here), I would be less bothered about neutering.

Interestingly, all the guide dogs for the blind are neutered. Their weight is kept steady, and despite lots of walking/ working, I can't think of ever seeing one (and we see a lot, as we are close to a centre) with cruciate issues.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Wren — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:13:44 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"]

Biggest reason to me is that neutered pets extend their life expectancy - bitches by about 2 years and tomcats by doubling it from 7 to 14 years.

these stats from a survey by PFMA that looked at 77000 animals.

a no-brainer methinks.

[/quote]

I'm sure your statistics are unskewed, but I'm always careful with averages like this after being taught during a statistics lesson about the East African country with an average male life expectancy of 34. No-one (well, virtually no-one) actually died age 34, but lots died aged 6 or under, and if you survived childhood you generally made it to die in relative old age at 60+. The numbers though make it easy to picture a population who pop their clogs in their mid-30s.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

George Cooper — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:48:09 GMT

Biggest reason to me is that neutered pets extend their life expectancy - bitches by about 2 years and tomcats by doubling it from 7 to 14 years.

these stats from a survey by PFMA that looked at 77000 animals.

a no-brainer methinks.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Iain Richards — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:41:59 GMT

Discuss....

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 08:53:29 GMT

When I was a student, I often saw pyometria ops. Now, I haven't done one for years. Similarly, mammary strips (hideously painful post-op) were common. Again, it's years since I've done one. There's also the all-important factor of population control. Far too many owners are insufficiently responsible to prevent unwanted litters. I'm firmly in favour of neutering bitches. There are the osteosarcoma and weight issues, so I advise owners of lab+ bitches to allow them to have a season, but at the same time warn them that the protection against mammary tumours will be less, so to keep a good look out, and bring her in when she has a tiny lump. Weight control, less food.

Male dogs. Discuss with owners. Advantages for - no testicular and very low risk of prostatic tumours. Less urinary problems 2y to prostatic hyperplasia. In some (I emphasise some - before someone lynches me) over-sexed dogs, reduces the risk of them breaking out of the garden when they smell a bitch in season a few doors down - and getting involved in an RTA.

Disadvantages, osteosarcoma, fear aggression, and weight gain.

The over-riding reason for neutering as many bitches as possible is population control.

Cats, neuter as many as possible, for all the reasons Virginia has explained, Do the queens at 4.5 to 5 months, Do the males at 6 to 7 months.

Why do you think the charities, (Dogs Trust and Cats Protection) spend so much of their money on neutering campaigns? It's because they're the ones who have to deal with the heart-breaking consequences of not neutering.

Wynne

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Kate Richardson — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 08:44:50 GMT

Spread of FIV may be one concern, but the flu viruses are also rife. Yes, you need vaccination protocols in place too, so it's not one hammer to fix everything. FIV infected cats can live a perfectly normal life. Cats with chronic flu/rhinitis don't. Am personally not in favour of neutering feral FIV positive male cats and rehoming to indoor only homes as I don't think it's fair to change their lifestyle so dramatically but there may be some positive experiences out there. Does anyone see FIV related illnesses- I don't see a lot of FIV cats, and the level of FeLV infection is very low to non existent in my area now.

A 4month old male cat may never have been in a fight but wait till his hormones kick in. Nothing to do with being homed, loved and looked after. Assuming he will have access to outdoors. If he remains an indoor cat then that may be a diferent story.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Virginia Campbell — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:12:14 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]But domestic, ie homed, loved, looked after, 4 months old. and never been in a fight in their lives nor likely to be, not so clear-cut??[/quote]

I think they like them done before they leave the shelter to avoid the scenario where new owners promise to get it done then don't bother getting round to it at all. There's a really dense cat population round here- high incidence of stress induced cystitis sparked by being stared at by strange cats through the patio doors, or having a strange cat get in through the cat flap; quite a lot of cat bite abscesses even in owned neutered animals. I don't think I've ever seen an adult entire male that didn't have at least a little chunk out of an ear. The population is so high that if there were lots of adult entire males (feral and owned) roaming about, it would be an FIV ridden, pus dripping disaster. Especially since the owned population is unstable - people keep moving house, going on holiday and putting the cats in a cattery or sending them to mum's for 2 weeks, so more turf wars result.

I like to hold the client owned males indoors for a bit longer and neuter a bit later and our clients are happy to do that and anxious to do the very best for their darlings and could tell you exactly how many weeks old they are. The charities are targeting base level - people who bung bowls of crusting pouches out for a dozen "he's not mine I just feed him, I have no money" cats; people who present a half grown kitten saying, "he's not from the litter she just had, he's one of the ones she had in the summer"; people who buy an "8 week old" flu 'n' flea infested kitten on gumtree and are surprised when you tell them it's 5 weeks or 5 months old and the opposite sex to what they thought and have enough for a £5 green voucher Cats Protection neuter, but not enough to treat a bite abscess. The charities are promoting herd medicine in this case and it's mostly a good thing.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Anthony Todd — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 23:01:05 GMT

[quote user="Virginia Campbell"]Most of the FIV positive feral TNR (trap neuter release) cats we see are entire males with fight scarred ears and legs. [/quote]

Well they would be positive, and I don't think anyone disagrees with castrating those for their own benefit, let alone FIV spread.

But domestic, ie homed, loved, looked after, 4 months old. and never been in a fight in their lives nor likely to be, not so clear-cut??

Castration of male cats, and usually when immature, is a sort of embedded ritual, based, as I said, on the belief that it will control population yet females seem often to be already pregnant before the penny drops.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Eilidh Corr — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 22:44:33 GMT

[quote user="Lucy Fleming"]there's about as much evidence for the benefit of testosterone with regards to fearful behaviour as there is anything else around neutering (i.e. not a lot). Behavioural modification is the key.[/quote]

This is very true - although there's quite hefty anecdote from many behaviourists and trainers to suggest that this area warrants some more attention, and since you can't replace testes once they're removed I think it's wise to exercise caution. I would suggest that for non urgent castrations such as in the case of an undescended testis it's prudent to spend time on the behaviour modification first rather than diving in with surgery, if only to try and minimise worsening of the aggression by subjecting an unprepared dog to a distressing procedure.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Lucy Fleming — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 21:56:13 GMT

[quote user="Virginia Campbell"] I explain the benefits of testosterone to the owners of shy little wilting flower males who are already asking about neuter at the second vax.[/quote]

I spoke to a behaviourist (a proper veterinary behaviourist at a University referral service) about this a while back - in reference to a 'fear aggressive' (actually just really really really aggressive) GSD with an abdominally retained testicle - and there's about as much evidence for the benefit of testosterone with regards to fearful behaviour as there is anything else around neutering (i.e. not a lot). Behavioural modification is the key.

Largely, I agree with most of the other comments on here - depends largely on the type of owners you are dealing with. My first job, there were a large number of roaming intact dogs having litters which were given away at four weeks old and subsequently acquired parvo. We'd spay anything, at any age, and damn near any stage of the heat cycle. Nowadays, I'm pretty relaxed about when/ if males are done, bitches I've seen enough pyometras to push for spay in anything not intended for breeding, and I find the surgery vastly easier in a slim pre-pubertal bitch than in anything that's had a heat cycle!

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Virginia Campbell — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 21:29:58 GMT

[quote user="Nhombokisheni"]where there is evidence that neutering is actually a risk factor for some conditions, and where some views of the post are not supported by retrospective/meta analyses, particularly in some breeds....how forthcoming are vets to owners. [/quote]

I do talk a lot about cruciate disease and explain that cruciate surgery is one of our most common ortho procedures and explain that while neutering later rather than sooner and keeping a hawk eye on the dog's weight will mitigate the risk somewhat, it does not wholly abolish the increase in risk from neutering.

I always talk about urinary incontinence with the owners of any bitch bigger than a cocker.

I don't routinely discuss haemangiosarcoma and lymphoma with most owners- I saw a lot more mammary neoplasia and pyos in various states of misery in my first job where there were a lot of entire bitches than I do HSA or lymphoma in my current job. I did have a brief discussion about these with the owner of a young Golden bitch recently but we will probably go ahead and spay in a year or so anyway. I gently steer undecided owners of non fighting, non sex pest male dogs towards leaving entire but I don't think I'd threaten them with cancer if they really wanted to neuter. I push quite hard for owners of 6 month old male labs, GSDs to wait another good few months if they really want to neuter and would only book them in if the owner was lobbying hard to get the balls off ASAP.

I always refute the "it'll calm him down" argument put forward by the owners of unruly adolescents and hand them a list of good training classes to go to instead. I explain the benefits of testosterone to the owners of shy little wilting flower males who are already asking about neuter at the second vax.

I touch on perineal hernia with the owners of skinny little Yorkies and Boxers; prostatic hypertrophy and anal adenoma with all; testicular cancer is swiftly dealt with (rare, visible, usually resectable!)

Our client base is pretty good though and conscientious about vaccines and preventative healthcare, and paying for any problems which might arise later. If I thought that they were going to escape into the wilds after the "puppy jabs" and only resurface years later with a bitch with dystocia after mismating, horribly septic with a pyo or two rows of mammary masses hanging off her; or a male that had been cultivating a prize winning perineal hernia or testicular mass the size of an orange for months, I'd probably want to capture as many as possible when young and get chopping.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Virginia Campbell — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 20:50:12 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]The argument, pushed by the charities, is that, by castrating male cats you will control population[/quote]

I think the charities are more concerned with FIV transmission risk in entire males. Most of the FIV positive feral TNR (trap neuter release) cats we see are entire males with fight scarred ears and legs. These get euthanased rather than neutered and released, if they are proper wildies or obviously systemically ill. The odd ones which are in decent nick and are friendly big beasties who act as if they wouldn't mind an indoor-only life get neutered and go to the shelter for rehoming (there is a surprisingly big market for F +ve shelter cats - usually to really dedicated cat owners who already have an F +ve cat at home).

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Nhombokisheni — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:56:29 GMT

[quote user="villagevet"]

I would rather be treating a tail injury from an un-docked tail than metastatic mammary tumours of a septicaemic pyometra any day. I would have difficulty telling an owner there was 'nothing could have been done' to prevent a significant pyometra

[/quote]

This article supports your view...http://www.2ndchance.info/cruciatelongtermneuter.htm

Not so long back we had a thread on homeopathy and its unscientific basis and how it really was about treating owners (pardon my rouge summation)......my question is.......where there is evidence that neutering is actually a risk factor for some conditions, and where some views of the post are not supported by retrospective/meta analyses, particularly in some breeds....how forthcoming are vets to owners.

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Lindsey Edwards — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:37:03 GMT

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Julian Earl — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 17:33:04 GMT

I don't think it can be denied that we do it largely for human benefit. Okay there is the evidence that it prevents most mammary tumours if done young enough, but that is not justification in itself \ that has no more value in logic than tail-docking. Or de-clawing cats to reduce cat-fight injuries.

Where's David Coffey when you need him to stir up this argument??Too busy all being well?

RE: Canine neutering----the effect on the animal

Anthony Dennison — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:57:31 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

The argument, pushed by the charities, is that, by castrating male cats you will control population is nonsense for the reasons I stated ie that one male, uncastrated, can impregnate all the oestral females in a wide area in one night, and even more silly when they advocate castrating at an immature age.

This dilutes the message that it is the females which are the population source and efforts should be concentrated on spaying them before maturity if the population is to be controlled.

Glad to see that, at last, they have got the age of sexual maturity in queens right in some areas.

[/quote]

The neutering clinics in India often only spay bitches and castrate young male pups. All the adult males are kept entire, as it keeps territories stable. Neutered females can't reproduce, entire male stops new dogs with potentially novel diseases into the area.