https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/non-clinical-questions/3784/how-do-we-deal-with-genetic-weakness May have put this one in the wrong section... &quot;The propagation of deleterious genes through intervening to help the genetically disadvantaged of any population is a price worth paying in order to live in an enlightened society.&quot; Discuss. en-USTelligent Community 10https://www.vetsurgeon.org/thread/9880?ContentTypeID=1Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:10:19 GMT146601cc-3922-4be7-9974-7e1d4e45a66b:a5df7fd2-9cc5-4ff4-80f8-469fa0162f18Mike Martin<p>Not sure I understand the quote, but in response to the <em>title</em> of your post....</p> <p>I got involved in the Boxer breed scheme from the very beginning (1992 <em>ish</em>) with Virginia Luis Fuentes, to try to breed out aortic stenosis from the breed. Many others got involved since. It meant a lot of Sunday&#39;s spent at shows. Whilst there was good enthusiam with the breeders and cardiologists (first 5-10 years) it did work....in so much as......it seemed to reduced the frequency of seeing the bad cases. But I don&#39;t think it can actually breed out the problem completely, without allowing another condition to appear. In the last 5 years or so, since the scheme has lost its momentum, I&#39;m now seeing bad aortic stenosis cases again. </p> <p>So despite what has been said in other threads, there have been vets working very hard with breeders to try to breed out problems, not only heart disease, but also HD and ocular disease for example. </p> <p>However,&nbsp;I&#39;m skeptical that a breed scheme would completely work. Which means we&#39;re stuck with all those breed related problems. Maybe the brachycepahilic problem could be improved by change the breed conformation at KC level. Hmmm.... its a frustrating problem for genuine breeders too. </p><div style="clear:both;"></div>