Journal Article on early spay/neuter and sarcoma (rottweiler, vet, science)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thank you for posting this article. As someone who has had to fight and argue with many people in order to justify that my female GSD has never been spayed, I wholeheartedly appreciate any and all literature that supports what many of us have known for years.
I thank God every single day that I decided not to spay my GSD and that I just happened to choose a vet that owned rotties and was always sympathetic and supportive of my decision. I know that the article deals specifically with premature/early spay and neuter but I also wonder about the safety of spay/neuter at any age for large dogs.
BTW, both of my GSD's sisters were spayed and died early from hemangiosarcoma.
I know that the article deals specifically with premature/early spay and neuter but I also wonder about the safety of spay/neuter at any age for large dogs.
BTW, both of my GSD's sisters were spayed and died early from hemangiosarcoma.
honestly, from my experience I don't think the age of spay/neuter has anything to do with hemangio....it occurred in dogs we bred who were spayed early, and others of our own who were spayed later in life...there seems to be no relationship to the onset of hemangiosarcoma, sadly.
honestly, from my experience I don't think the age of spay/neuter has anything to do with hemangio....it occurred in dogs we bred who were spayed early, and others of our own who were spayed later in life...there seems to be no relationship to the onset of hemangiosarcoma, sadly.
I do question the role that age plays. However, I believe that the spaying of large[r] dogs in general leads to many sarcomas b/c spaying supposedly negatively affects a female dog's immune system.
And it goes without saying, just as it is important to know the health facts (from all sides and this has been discussed a lot in other threads) - it is important to know how to responsibly live with an intact animal. I posted because it was a new article [to me, I now see it is from 2002] on the topic.
And it goes without saying, just as it is important to know the health facts (from all sides and this has been discussed a lot in other threads) - it is important to know how to responsibly live with an intact animal. I posted because it was a new article [to me, I now see it is from 2002] on the topic.
Did you happen to read the study, including the footnotes?
You do realize don't you, that the study is actually about osteosarcoma that affects children and adolescents and makes no determinations regarding canine cancer rates?
This study IS NOT ABOUT DOGS and makes none of the claims you are stating here. A specific breed of dog was used for a human child and adolecent study. Also, this study only had a potential sample size of 1,500. Of that only 597 actual subjects were studied and its acknowledged by the authors that responses were more likely to be received from dog owners with dogs that suffered from appendicular bone sarcoma. In addition, it also acknowledges that Rottweilers, the only breed used in the study, already have a high instance of this particular form of cancer - thats why they were used.
It is an interesting article regarding osteosarcoma in children and adolecents but gives no insight on cancer rates over a general canine population. You can't pull bits and pieces out of a medical study without looking at it as a whole and give it meaning that isn't there!
Twice as likely to get osteosarcoma (bone cancer);
Increased risk of hemangiosarcoma (blood vessel and spleen cancer);
Increased aggression in altered females;
Increased occurrence of urinary calculi;
Increased difficulty passing urinary calculi;
Increased likelihood of vulvar pyoderma (urine scald);
Increased likelihood of urinary incontinence;
Increased likelihood of adverse reaction to vaccinations (27-38%);
Notable decrease of activity/drive. (this is important to those whose animals aren't just pets but are trained to do work too);
Increased chance of "perpetual puppy syndrome" undesirable urination;
Inhibited social adjustment if spayed prior to complete cognitive development (if you are going to spay wait until AFTER sexual maturity);
Substantial likelihood of appreciable demeanor change after spay;
Increased likelihood of cognitive disorders if spayed before sexual maturity;
Increased likelihood of, or speeded progress of, degenerative osteological disorders;
Notable decrease in muscle mass (again, not all dogs are lawn ornaments or carpet speedbumps);
Generally live 20-25% shorter than unaltered littermates in controlled studies.
Altered males:
Four times more likely to get prostrate cancer;
Twice as likely to get osteosarcoma (bone cancer);
Increased risk of hemangiosarcoma (blood vessel and spleen cancer);
Increased occurrence of urinary calculi;
Increased difficulty passing urinary calculi;
Increased chance of urinary obstruction;
Increased likelihood of urinary incontinence;
Increased likelihood of adverse reaction to vaccinations (27-38%);
Notable decrease in activity/drive. (same as above in female list)
Increased chance of "perpetual puppy syndrome" undesirable urination;
Inhibited social adjustment if castrated prior to sexual maturity;
Substantial likelihood of appreciable demeanor change after castration (same concept as above in female list... reproductive hormones affect more than just reproduction);
Increased likelihood of cognitive disorders if castrated before complete cognitive development (usually a good time AFTER sexual maturity);
Notable decrease in muscle mass (yep, same as above)
Generally live 20-25% shorter than unaltered littermates in controlled studies.
Thank you for posting this article. As someone who has had to fight and argue with many people in order to justify that my female GSD has never been spayed, I wholeheartedly appreciate any and all literature that supports what many of us have known for years.
I thank God every single day that I decided not to spay my GSD and that I just happened to choose a vet that owned rotties and was always sympathetic and supportive of my decision. I know that the article deals specifically with premature/early spay and neuter but I also wonder about the safety of spay/neuter at any age for large dogs.
BTW, both of my GSD's sisters were spayed and died early from hemangiosarcoma.
My last two females also died from hemangiosarcoma. Both were spayed after they were fully mature. I currently have a spayed female (spayed at age 2) and an intact male. Since my male is a mastiff, which already has a short lifespan (10 years if he is lucky), I chose to leave him intact and not shorten his lifespan by another 2+ years.
Whether people choose to spay or neuter their dog is entirely up to them, but everyone should make an informed decision. Spaying and neutering is not the panacea some make it out to be. There are serious risks involved.
Did you happen to read the study, including the footnotes?
You do realize don't you, that the study is actually about osteosarcoma that affects children and adolescents and makes no determinations regarding canine cancer rates?
This study IS NOT ABOUT DOGS and makes none of the claims you are stating here. A specific breed of dog was used for a human child and adolecent study. Also, this study only had a potential sample size of 1,500. Of that only 597 actual subjects were studied and its acknowledged by the authors that responses were more likely to be received from dog owners with dogs that suffered from appendicular bone sarcoma. In addition, it also acknowledges that Rottweilers, the only breed used in the study, already have a high instance of this particular form of cancer - thats why they were used.
It is an interesting article regarding osteosarcoma in children and adolecents but gives no insight on cancer rates over a general canine population. You can't pull bits and pieces out of a medical study without looking at it as a whole and give it meaning that isn't there!
Yes I did read the study - it was a retrospecitive review of osteosarcoma in ROTTWEILER DOGS wtih applicability to children. It has been widelry reported that nuetering of males of many breeds leads to an increase in bone cancer rates.
Yes I did read the study - it was a retrospecitive review of osteosarcoma in ROTTWEILER DOGS wtih applicability to children. It has been widelry reported that nuetering of males of many breeds leads to an increase in bone cancer rates.
Regardless of how someone feels about the spay/neuter issue, I would at least hope that he/she would be able to recognize the merits of such study and research. In fact, it is b/c of of those of us who have taken a chance and chosen not to spay or neuter (which resulted in postive yet baffling results) that these studies started being conducted and are able to be applied now not only to dogs but also to humans. Thanks again for posting it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
