AMS in cockers.

[Teddy]

It doesn't add up and we need to learn a lot more before we start making statements of fact because all we have right now is rumour, misinformation and borderline hysteria[/quote]


We need to learn a lot more before we start making statements of fact etc....." This is correct. we agree, that is what we are trying to do in asking for people who have tested to add their results to KC and CSDB. Its the only factual information we can get access to. However, this just isnt happening. So, Simon have you a better idea?

[scot-ish]

i think your maths is off.

not got much time to check properly.

but if 10% are carriers, then you need to calculate the odds on having carrier/carrier.

1/10 x 1/10 - 1/100

thats 1 in every 100 litters being carrier to carrier.

4000 litters - 1 in every 100 being carrier to carrier

thats a total of 40 litters carrier to carrier.

5 pup average - so 200 pups born.

25% accross the whole figure will be affected.

25% of 200 is 50.

50 still wayyyy more than being recorded registers.

might be down to the "average" part not being retrospective.

for example boots, gun, grand etc may well cover over 100-150 of those bitches each year, and a lot of other wont cover at all.

[beechessam]

I don't disagree with publishing results I don't disagree with testing, however I strongly disagree with some of the things that are being said because quite simply the facts and figures do not substantiate them.

I also disagree with the way dogs and owners of carriers seem to be demonised, there seems to be a culture of bullying and emotional blackmail to force people into testing and if they disagree or choose not to they're simply blamed for the demise of the working cocker as a breed.

I do not believe the end is neigh, I do not believe that the issue is a big as many would have us believe and I do not believe that the current approach of those leading this campaign is working or justified. It's alienating people and polarising the two camps.

This needs a balanced level headed approach based on the facts as they are known, not speculation exaggeration and hype. Just read the many posts on this thread, people contradicting themselves. One minute we can nip it in the bud next it's an epidemic!

If a balanced supported argument is put forward without the hype, claims of hotspots epidemics etc etc I think you'll find many many more people will have an open mind on the subject. The moment any cause is fuelled by rumour hype hysteria with lack of any real evidence to support the claims, claims that the facts and figures cannot support it will without doubt fail to win.

All of the above of course is just my perception, though shared my many who contact me, directly and indirectly. And as we know perception is reality!

[beechessam]

i think your maths is off.

not got much time to check properly.

but if 10% are carriers, then you need to calculate the odds on having carrier/carrier.

1/10 x 1/10 - 1/100

thats 1 in every 100 litters being carrier to carrier.

4000 litters - 1 in every 100 being carrier to carrier

thats a total of 40 litters carrier to carrier.

5 pup average - so 200 pups born.

25% accross the whole figure will be affected.

25% of 200 is 50.

50 still wayyyy more than being recorded registers.

might be down to the "average" part not being retrospective.

for example boots, gun, grand etc may well cover over 100-150 of those bitches each year, and a lot of other wont cover at all.

As I said schoolboy maths, but 10% to me is 1 in 10 dogs not in 100, but I'm happy to accept the correct formula for calculations could be yours. Even so, 50 pups last year alone, but 8 recorded cases in 8 years. We should now see these pups as confirmed cases as they will all be in the critical 3-12 month old age group.

[scot-ish]

1/10 carriers, has to be mated to another carrier. Breed average at 10%
That means That in every 100 "random" selections you would get:
1 carrier/carrier
20 carrier/clear
79 clear / clear

I agree, 50 is way more than has surfaced- but that is down to the fact of prominent sires.

I wonder how many different sires are used in tht 4000 matings- as the 10% could be took from that- remove the "known" clears from that- and it would then give a better representation of the output with regards to affected numbers.

[beechessam]

Yet it's implied that prominent sires, with the exception of Boots could be the problem.

I'm not in disagreement there's an issue but 50 pups a year over 8 years is 400 pups. 8 recorded cases, to expect us to believe 392 have gone unrecorded or misdiagnosed is pushing boundaries too far.

This is exactly why I believe a much more balanced argument needs to be put forward, take away the emotion and deal in what we know, what's recorded, what's proven, not what could be not want we think people need to hear yo have an impact and certainly not hype!

[Teddy]

So, does anyone have any better way of obtaining facts? Can you think of how facts can be obtained other than by having details of the carriers found to date, their pedigrees and perhaps where in the country they, their parents and grandparents were born?

[beechessam]

You'll get far more support and understanding when people buy into a process and are not fearful of the consequences of a negative outcome than by bullying people into something then demonising them if they own/bred carriers.

I'm not saying there is a better way than testing, it's about how you manage the campaign not what the campaign is.

Hype rumour sensationalism do nothing for the cause.

[Teddy]

Who's bullying and demonising those with carriers?

[Bwana]

You'll get far more support and understanding when people buy into a process and are not fearful of the consequences of a negative outcome than by bullying people into something then demonising them if they own/bred carriers.

I'm not saying there is a better way than testing, it's about how you manage the campaign not what the campaign is.

Hype rumour sensationalism do nothing for the cause.

A more balanced argument is definitely called for.

If the situation is as is being claimed by some - where are these affected pups? I have spoken to seven vets in my area including the largest referral veterinary hospital, most had not heard of AMS and not one of them had encountered an affected cocker. I am sure every vet in the country knows of Alabama rot. Prompted by an OP’s post, I contacted a vet in Scotland for more information and they had one case 3 or 4 years ago and another with similar symptoms some 15 years ago.

It simply does not add up

Looking elsewhere on the internet: ‘The condition has been described in German Short-Haired Pointers, English Pointers, Border Collies, Springer spaniels, long-haired dachsunds, Jack Russells, Golden Retriever, French spaniels and whippets’.

We now know that it can also occur in working cocker spaniels, as there have been 8 AMS affected diagnosed.

AMS is a very rare genetic disorder

If you Google ‘Acral Mutilation Syndrome springer spaniel’ there are pages and pages of information. My point is – is the springer world in meltdown? Does the Kennel Club suggest that Springer Spaniels, GSP’s, English Pointers, Golden Retrievers etc be tested? Oddly not.

I am sure that all of us care deeply for the breed and for the health and welfare of working cocker spaniels, however we need less hysteria and division to secure the future. The campaign by some has damaged the reputation of wonderful dogs and excellent breeders. Dogs tested carriers or ‘suspected carriers’ have been demonised by the campaign. Surely a carrier FTch with proven ability, health and traits, has more to contribute to the breed than a tested clear mediocre dog with limited ability? The Kennel Club on their ‘Breeding for Health’ page states: When used responsibly, carriers are an important part of any breeding plan and should not be overlooked when making mating choices. By using carriers, you can keep good, healthy dogs in the breeding population.