What's new
Mastiff Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Welcome back!

    We decided to spruce things up and fix some things under the hood. If you notice any issues, feel free to contact us as we're sure there are a few things here or there that we might have missed in our upgrade.

About de-sexing...

marke

Well-Known Member
in reading the first article , as with most of these , "your vet is just in it for the money and doesn't care about your dogs health" anti-neuter anti-spay articles .... they are not based on scientific studies , they are based on the interpretation of 2nd hand information ........ information on dogs who are treated at the vets , that in itself biased the results .....even for this kind of study this is absolutely a ridiculously , at minimum , twisted bit of misinformation ..... i can't even imagine where they would have actually found a statistic like this to twist ...... for me personally , i'd have needed to have had 500 dogs to fall into this 1% risk category ....... i honestly cannot take something so out of wack with my experience as true , and anyone using such obviously flawed info is either very ill informed , or very inexperienced ....
Overall, neutering reduces the (1%) risk of pyrometa (serious uterine infection)
this would even be a low estimate from my experience , but the author does list ddb as an over represented breed ...... i can actually take them seriously .........
Prevalence/incidence An accurate incidence of pyometra within the at-risk un-neutered female dog population is difficult to attain due to the large proportion of neutered dogs within the pet population. Egenvall and others (2001) reported an overall annual pyometra incidence of 2 per cent from a study of approximately 200,000 predominantly un-neutered Swedish dogs, with around 24 per cent of dogs having experienced pyometra by 10 years of age. A retrospective study of 3536 dogs in the UK reported an upper limit for pyometra incidence of 2 per cent per year within the at-risk population (Whitehead 2008), whereas, a study of 165 colony-reared beagles reported a prevalence of 15.2 per cent over the dogs' lives (Fukuda 2001).
http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/173/16/396.long
 

Boxergirl

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I don't care for that first article. If you're trying to sway someone's opinion on an important topic, it's vital to get the words right. It's pyometra. Not pyrometra. I'm a stickler for getting the words right. I left my daughters' new endocrinologist's office when she said HcA1b instead of HbA1c. If I'm trusting you with something I care about, you should get the important terms correct.

Also that first article seemed to imply that spaying your female will cause recessed vulvas, which isn't true at all. Dogs are born with a recessed vulva and spaying too early can mean that the vulva never swells and may remain recessed, but spaying doesn't cause a recessed vulva. Ella has a severely recessed vulva. Usually one or two heats will "pop" things out and the issue is resolved. Unfortunately that wasn't the case for us and I will likely have an episioplasty done when I have her altered.

I will have Ella spayed. She cycles quickly which increases her chances of pyo when she's older. She also had a mild false pregnancy with her last heat. Seems like spaying might be best for her and then we can get that vulva fixed too so she stops having vaginitis so often.