Pearse
Registered Users-
Posts
1,031 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Pearse
-
what supplements do you use to prevent injuries/arthritis?
Pearse replied to Katilea's topic in Health and Genetics
Below are the abstracts from four studies reported in the literature. Three report significant improvement in the symptoms of osteoarthritis in dogs fed a diet supplemented with salmon oil high in omega three fatty acids. The fourth reports no significant changes. I have not read or evaluated all four articles so I can't comment on the quality of the science. I do know that speaking with several veterinarians at a university veterinary medical center, the one thing they all agreed on with respect to managing dogs with osteoarthritis is that fish oil has beneficial effects in reducing inflammation. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2010 Jan 1;236(1):67-73. doi: 10.2460/javma.236.1.67. Evaluation of the effects of dietary supplementation with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids on weight bearing in dogswith osteoarthritis. Roush JK1, Cross AR, Renberg WC, Dodd CE, Sixby KA, Fritsch DA, Allen TA, Jewell DE, Richardson DC, Leventhal PS, Hahn KA. Author information Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a food supplemented with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids on weight bearing in dogs with osteoarthritis. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, controlled clinical trial. ANIMALS: 38 client-owned dogs with osteoarthritis examined at 2 university veterinary clinics. PROCEDURES: Dogs were randomly assigned to receive a typical commercial food (n = 16) or a test food (22) containing 3.5% fish oil omega-3 fatty acids. On day 0 (before the trial began) and days 45 and 90 after the trial began, investigators conducted orthopedic evaluations and force-plate analyses of the most severely affected limb of each dog, and owners completed questionnaires to characterize their dogs' arthritis signs. RESULTS: The change in mean peak vertical force between days 90 and 0 was significant for the test-food group (5.6%) but not for the control-food group (0.4%). Improvement in peak vertical force values was evident in 82% of the dogs in the test-food group, compared with 38% of the dogs in the control-food group. In addition, according to investigators' subjective evaluations, dogs fed the test food had significant improvements in lameness and weight bearing on day 90, compared with measurements obtained on day 0. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: At least in the short term, dietary supplementation with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids resulted in an improvement in weight bearing in dogs with osteoarthritis. ----- J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2010 Mar 1;236(5):535-9. doi: 10.2460/javma.236.5.535. A multicenter study of the effect of dietary supplementation with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids on carprofen dosage in dogs with osteoarthritis. Fritsch DA1, Allen TA, Dodd CE, Jewell DE, Sixby KA, Leventhal PS, Brejda J, Hahn KA. Author information Abstract OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of feeding a diet supplemented with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids on carprofen dosage in dogs with osteoarthritis. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, multisite clinical trial. ANIMALS: 131 client-owned dogs with stable chronic osteoarthritis examined at 33 privately owned veterinary hospitals in the United States. PROCEDURES: In all dogs, the dosage of carprofen was standardized over a 3-week period to approximately 4.4 mg/kg/d (2 mg/lb/d), PO. Dogswere then randomly assigned to receive a food supplemented with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids or a control food with low omega-3 fatty acid content, and 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks later, investigators made decisions regarding increasing or decreasing the carprofen dosage on the basis of investigator assessments of 5 clinical signs and owner assessments of 15 signs. RESULTS: Linear regression analysis indicated that over the 12-week study period, carprofen dosage decreased significantly faster among dogs fed the supplemented diet than among dogs fed the control diet. The distribution of changes in carprofen dosage for dogs in the control group was significantly different from the distribution of changes in carprofen dosage for dogs in the test group. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that in dogs with chronic osteoarthritis receiving carprofen because of signs of pain, feeding a diet supplemented with fish oil omega-3 fatty acids may allow for a reduction in carprofen dosage. ------ J Vet Intern Med. 2010 Sep-Oct;24(5):1020-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2010.0572.x. Epub 2010 Aug 12. Dose-titration effects of fish oil in osteoarthritic dogs. Fritsch D1, Allen TA, Dodd CE, Jewell DE, Sixby KA, Leventhal PS, Hahn KA. Author information Erratum inJ Vet Intern Med. 2011 Jan-Feb;25(1):167. Abstract BACKGROUND: Food supplemented with fish oil improves clinical signs and weight bearing in dogs with osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: Determine whether increasing the amount of fish oil in food provides additional symptomatic improvements in OA. ANIMALS: One hundred and seventy-seven client-owned dogs with stable chronic OA of the hip or stifle. METHODS: Prospective, randomized clinical trial using pet dogs. Dogs were randomly assigned to receive the baseline therapeutic food (0.8% eicosopentanoic acid [EPA] + docosahexaenoic acid [DHA]) or experimental foods containing approximately 2- and 3-fold higher EPA+DHA concentrations. Both veterinarians and owners were blinded as to which food the dog received. On days 0, 21, 45, and 90, serum fatty acid concentrations were measured and veterinarians assessed the severity of 5 clinical signs of OA. At the end of the study (day 90), veterinarians scored overall arthritic condition and progression of arthritis based on their clinical signs and an owner interview. RESULTS: Serum concentrations of EPA and DHA rose in parallel with food concentrations. For 2 of 5 clinical signs (lameness and weight bearing) and for overall arthritic condition and progression of arthritis, there was a significant improvement between the baseline and 3X EPA+DHA foods (P=.04, .03, .001, .0008, respectively) but not between the baseline and the 2X EPA+DHA foods. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Increasing the amount of fish oil beyond that in the baseline food results in dose-dependent increases in serum EPA and DHA concentrations and modest improvements in the clinical signs of OA in pet dogs. Copyright © 2010 by the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine. ---- BMC Vet Res. 2012 Sep 6;8:157. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-8-157. An un-commissioned randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind study to test the effect of deep sea fish oil as a pain reliever for dogs suffering from canine OA. Hielm-Björkman A1, Roine J, Elo K, Lappalainen A, Junnila J, Laitinen-Vapaavuori O. Author information Abstract BACKGROUND: An un-commissioned randomized, double-blinded, placebo controlled clinical study was planned using a deep sea fish oil product for pets. Seventy-seven client-owned dogs with osteoarthritis were randomly assigned to supplement the food with either the fish oil product or corn (=placebo) oil. Our main outcome variables were force platform variables peak vertical force (PVF) and impulse, the validated Helsinki Chronic Pain Index (HCPI) and the use of rescue NSAIDs. Secondary outcome variables were a locomotion visual analog scale (VAS), a Quality of life VAS, a comparative questionnaire, a veterinary assessment, owners' final assessment of outcome and guessing the product given. RESULTS: When comparing the two test groups at the end of the trial (16 weeks) there was no significant difference in any of the main outcome variables but owners of dogs that had taken fish oil were significantly happier with the treatment at the end visit and did significantly better at guessing what group their dogs had been in, compared to the placebo group. When comparing variables within the fish oil group as change from baseline to trial end, there were significant positive changes in PVF, HCPI, NSAID use, Quality of life VAS, as well as in all three scores in the comparative questionnaire (locomotion, every-day situations, and skin & coat). There were similar positive trends in force platform impulse and in the veterinary assessment variables, although they did not reach significance. Within the placebo group there were significant positive changes only in the HCPI and a significant deterioration according to veterinary assessment. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to placebo, there was not a major statistically significant benefit in using deep sea fish oil as a pain reliever in our study population of dogs suffering from osteoarthritis. However, the fish oil treated patients improved significantly in many of the variables, when comparing baseline values to the study-end values within the group, indicating a true but small relief in symptoms. Deep sea fish oil supplementation could be considered a part of the multimodal pain relieving approach currently recommended for dogs suffering from OA, especially for individuals that do not tolerate anti-inflammatory drugs. -
too high in protein. It's been shown than diets lower in protein lower IGF-1 levels, slow growth, and reduce cancer incidence (in lab animals). Rats and mice fed a low protein, calorie restricted diet, lived much longer lives. There's some epidemiological data to show the same is true in humans.
-
there is a small blip in incidence in young dogs but most are 7-8 years old (it probably takes that long to accumulate the mutations necessary to go from normal cell to cancer cell, the young dogs are likely born with one or more mutations already - not necessarily inherited but possibly). There's a really good, up to date summary at Mike Modiano's lab page at the University of Minnesota for anyone who is interested. http://www.modianolab.org/cancer/cancer_osteosarcoma.shtml
-
Liz, I didn't look at that specifically and there was nothing in the literature that suggested it was a specific contributing factor. However, I would speculate and say that almost all of the dogs in the various epidemiological studies were likely pet dogs not working dogs. That said, I would (again speculation) say that it is extremely likely that any chronic inflammatory condition will result in conditions favorable to cancer cells. This seems to be an emerging common theme in many kinds of cancer. The inflammatory cytokines (chemicals produced by cells in response to injury which signal other cells to come to the site and deal with dead and dying cells or foreign material/organisms) are frequently cancer promoters. It's unlikely that inflammation causes osteosarcoma per se, but once the cells are there it could help them survive. Like I said, in humans we see this disease a lot in teenaged athletes, but whether athletics is a contributing factor, or whether it's just that basketball players tend to be taller, early developing, teenaged boys and taller, early developing teenaged boys are at greatest risk is not clear. The other thing is that growth plates at the end of long bones, and the sites of screws, plates, etc are sites of bone remodeling activity. Osteoblasts and osteoclasts are actively dividing there so those cells are more likely to accrue DNA damage, plus all of the growth promoters are present at those active remodelling sites, and those growth promoters help cancer cells survive. One interesting thing is what makes big dogs (and humans) big. The levels of growth hormone in small dogs and large dogs is roughly the same. The levels of IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor) scale almost linearly with size. IGF-1 (or its receptor) has been implicated as a cancer promoter, and is being looked at for its role in aging (*total wild speculation* which may explain why large dogs don't live as long). It's certainly not a simple relationship and it's probably not something we can do much about. Pearse
-
I did my graduate work on osteosarcoma starting in dogs and later in humans. The incidence goes up exponentially with size. Small dogs rarely get it, it's common in giant breeds. I have some hypotheses why but never did get the chance to follow up on that research. Basically, I think that what makes big dogs big is a potent growth promoter for osteosarcoma. There are probably other breed-associated contributing factors (possibly genetic). The same pattern is true in humans. It's most commonly seen in adolescent males of taller than average height. Better prognosis in humans because it's usually diagnosed earlier. One of the more famous human patients was Canadian Terry Fox who was diagnosed in 1977 and in 1980 started a cross-country run across Canada to raise awareness. He was forced to stop in Thunder Bay ON when he discovered the cancer had spread to his lungs and died in 1981. Liz is correct. Usually by the time it is diagnosed in a dog, it has metastasized. Amputation can give local pain relief but with no other treatment, life expectancy post-surgery is 3-9 months. There are a few centers (Colorado State is one, U of WI is another) that were doing limb-sparing surgery using treated bone allografts as scaffolding for new bone growth (often impregnated with chemo drugs) in combination with various chemotherapy regimens and they have had some success. I'm not up to date on the most current literature. The project I was working on used monoclonal antibodies directed against a tumor-specific antigen attached to either radionuclides or a pokeweed-derived toxin to kill cells. It showed promise in cell culture and mouse studies but technical difficulties and toxicity issues made its use in humans or dogs impractical. Pearse
-
The skinny on salmon poisoning disease from Washington State U Vet School. https://www.vetmed.wsu.edu/cliented/salmon.aspx
-
Looking for breeder in Michigan or surrounding states
Pearse replied to jad614's topic in General Border Collie Discussion
Three good handlers in the Upper Peninsula who occasionally have pups. Rose Anderson, Lori Perry, or Ronnie Bingham. You can contact me through messaging and I can give you their emails. Pearse -
I used to train with someone and we would use radios when holding sheep for one another. The radios would make a specific beep before the person on the other end spoke. The person at the other end would radio up when they had the sheep set. The dogs started to key on the beep as the signal to start their outrun, because the command usually followed right after. One day, I was at a trial setting sheep. After setting a packet, I was walking back up the field when the course director called on the radio. As we were talking he said to me "what's your dog doing?". I turned around and my dog was half way down the trial field doing a beautiful outrun to pick up the sheep we had just set which were nicely turning the post. The handler on course probably didn't appreciate me blowing a hard stop and recall. We had to spend the next few weeks untraining the association. Border collies learn, whether we want them to or not.
-
Proposed FDA rules on antibiotic use in livestock
Pearse replied to Mark Billadeau's topic in Livestock Management
I don't think eliminating non-medicinal use of antibiotics will raise the prices significantly. I was referring to your suggestion that it would be better if animals raised for meat were raised on small family farms, or using strictly pasture raised cattle. I'm all in favor of banning the use of antibiotics in animal feed as growth promoters as, like you, I see it as a public health risk. Pearse -
Proposed FDA rules on antibiotic use in livestock
Pearse replied to Mark Billadeau's topic in Livestock Management
Can small family farms produce enough meat to meet demand? Can large scale ranching, finishing, and slaughtering be done humanely and without the use of antibiotics as growth promoters? I'm not sure about the first but the second could be done. It would increase the price of U.S. produced meat though, so unless you forced producers in other countries to do the same through strict import controls, the average consumer is just going to buy foreign produced meat and drive American producers out of business. The price of naturally raised, grass-fed beef in my grocery store is 30% - 50% higher per pound than regular beef I could probably do with eating 30% - 50% less beef and paying the higher price, but what percentage of the beef-buying public are willing to do that? If people didn't buy it, the market wouldn't produce it but, as with everything else, people want the greatest quantity at the lowest price. Quality don't enter into it for most folk. Pearse -
Proposed FDA rules on antibiotic use in livestock
Pearse replied to Mark Billadeau's topic in Livestock Management
Here's the problem with producers medicating even for illness. Most of them won't finish the course. They'll start the antibiotic, the animal improves, they stop the antibiotic, the bugs acquire resistance. The FDA regulations are meaningless. First of all, they're voluntary. Second, they do nothing to stop producers from mixing their own feed containing antibiotics. Third, it does nothing to stop a producer (especially in hog or chicken production) from claiming that they are using antibiotics prophylactically to prevent disease, and administering them by mixing them with feed. Perhaps in the long term they will bring in an outright ban on non-clinical use of antibiotics. They did it this way because they can bring in the new regulation quickly, and they have two of the largest feed manufacturers on board. It will take years to bring in legislation to mandate this and they did not feel with the current Congress that the producer lobby wouldn't kill it. Pearse -
Cold Weather - To Work or Not To Work
Pearse replied to Gloria Atwater's topic in Under the Handlers Tent
Footing, snow depth, and wind are the deciding factors. If it's too icy or the snow is too deep for dogs and sheep to move easily, training is over for the year or moved indoors. I worked dogs outdoors yesterday at 11F and had to take a layer off working a younger dog. It's 9F (-13C) this morning and we are gearing up for a run. Wool sheep around here don't really head into shelter with the temps well down in the -25F range unless it's really windy or it's hovering around freezing and wet. In full fleece, they're so well insulated that snow falling on their backs doesn't melt. My rule of thumb is -25C (-13F) with no wind is as cold as I'll go for a run. Below that, frostbite is a concern and hypothermia if I turn an ankle or something. Biggest impediment to dogs outside around here in cold weather is road salt. Pearse- 24 replies
-
- winter training
- cold weather
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
ABCA Meeting: Health & Genetics Summary
Pearse replied to Mark Billadeau's topic in Health and Genetics
You can think of Genome Wide Association Studies this way. Imagine you had reports of car stereos getting stolen out of different cars at different times on different days. So, you plot the locations of all the cars on a map of all city streets. You might find that the cars that got broken into were evenly distributed all over the city (epilepsy), or you might find that all of the cars that got broken into were in two neighborhoods, and within five blocks of each other (EOD). The second one doesn't give you the address of the stereo thieves, but it suggests two areas to start looking in for them. My guess is that GWAS data Pearse -
I investigated this pretty carefully recently and found the same thing as the person above; no good studies showing objective improvement in a properly designed clinical trial. I also consulted with two surgeons at the U of MN and neither was convinced that it was effective in treating arthritis or other problems, particularly in the elbow joint. They did not thing that the environment in the elbow was favourable to stem cells developing appropriately. They weren't against it, and both had seen some anecdotal evidence of mild to moderate improvement, but not enough objective evidence for them to recommend it as a course of treatment for a patient. Pearse
-
No. We can absolutely know genotype with 100% certainty. We can sequence the genome. What we can't do, is look at the genotype and tell anything useful about what kind of a stockdog that dog will be. If we sequence enough genomes of enough dogs whose working ability is known, we would eventually be able to figure out which portions of the genotype were involved in working ability. Would that enable us to predict working ability in the offspring of two dogs whose genotype was known? It depends. It depends on how many genes are involved in producing working ability, how many alleles (variants) of each of those genes are present in the working dog population, how close those genes are to one another in the genome (the further apart, the greater the recombination rate), and whether their effects were completely expressed (100% penetrant) or diluted by the effects of other genes/alleles. In addition, we now know that certain regions of the genome can be activated or shut down by non-genetic (epigenetic) means, and that those changes can be heritable, so even if you have the genotype, you may not be able to predict phenotype based on that alone. And, even if you knew all of that, you'd still need to sequence the genome of all offspring. And, even if you knew all of that, you'd still need to make sure that the dog was exposed to the proper training at the proper time, raised in the correct environment, and correctly fed and exercised. So, for the forseeable future, the only way to pick a stockdog is the same way we've been doing it for centuries. Breed the good 'uns to good 'uns and hope for the best. Pearse
-
I wouldn't hold your breath on there being an epilepsy genetic test any time soon. All available evidence points at it being a multigenic condition.
-
this is almost surely not a "smart" gene. It's a gene which produces a protein which is associated with cell adhesion molecules, and appears to function to dissolve the connections between cells. During the development of the brain and eye (probably other organs), this aids in allowing cells to migrate to where they need to be. It does the same thing in cancer cells, and is overexpressed in prostate cancer, being associated with a higher probability of metastatic disease. Mutations in this gene are associated with congnitive impairment (in Cri du Chat syndrome for example) because the brain does not develop normally, but that's not the same as saying that the normal function of the gene makes people/other animals smarter. People will try to sell all kinds of tests, just because they can. Unless they are testing for a disease caused by a known mutation(s) in a single gene, most of those tests will be of little use. Intelligence is such a complex set of traits that we can't even define it yet, never mind measure it. And, if we ever do discover genetic tests for "intelligence", never mind the dogs, pity the humans that "fail" those tests. I think what others have said is correct. Forget the genetic tests and other short cuts. Breed for the whole dog; fit, smart, brave, sound, and willing.
-
I agree. I have seen quite a number of handlers who have come over from AKC herding trials to USBCHA style trials because someone talked them into running in N/N and they stuck around, watched some Open dogs and handlers and got the bug. Novice/Novice - the gateway drug.
-
Lay him down, walk level with him, tell him to look back. When he turns and looks back, walk with him until you find the sheep, send him to gather them. Don't send him back for sheep that you suspect are in the barn. No good can come of it. You need to set it up so that you know absolutely that there are sheep there, and in a place he can easily fetch them from, and where you can see him fetching them, until he's rock solid. That's how you build the trust. The dog needs to know for absolute sure, that every time you turn him back for sheep, there are sheep there to be got. If he's unsure, walk him back to where he can see them, and then send him. You need to be able to see him do it to be sure he's working correctly and not developing bad habits out of your sight. When he's solid and confident, then you can begin to introduce blind outruns and fetches. At least, that's my thinking on it.. Pearse
-
I feed NutriSource. Made in Minnesota. Dogs all do well on it. I usually feed the "Super Performance" formulation (32% Protein, 20% fat 529 kcal/cup) at 2 cups per day when they are in work, and 1.5 cups per day in winter when they are doing less (they're indoors and don't need the extra calories to stay warm). 40lb bag is $50 and is 145 cups which is $0.69/dog/day They also have their "PureVita" and "Natural Planet Organics" lines but I haven't tried either of them
-
I think Mark understands that there is potential benefit to handlers of ETS dogs if someone can figure out why these dogs don't jump optimally. In fact, I believe that is his main point; that the only benefit of solving the ETS riddle is to the handlers of ETS dogs. Solving ETS will have no benefit to Border Collies as a breed. No doubt that some people will continue to investigate the issue. I doubt there'll be any real science done on it because it's almost impossible to get funding to do real science on actual health issues in Border Collies. so getting money to study a performance issue in a small subset of Agility dogs will not be easy, but that may be irrelevant since this is likely a training or psychological issue and not a physiological issue, so it may not need real scientific studies, just the right trainer with the right insight.
-
I think that is true for the part of competition that has to do with recognition, prizes, awards, praise from one's peers. However, there is another reason to participate in competition. It's to measure oneself against the best in the field and thereby improve. So, if my goal is to produce the best working stockdogs I can, how do I know if I'm accomplishing it? I can stay at home and delude myself that my dogs are better than everyone else's and I'm a better trainer than everyone else, or I could compete and compare myself and my training techniques to the best of the best and, by observing the best of the best working their dogs, improve my training and my understanding of what makes a good stockdog. I could do that by going to clinics and lessons too, but there's a lot to be learned watching 40 or 50 dogs work the same group of sheep over the same course and watching how the strengths and weaknesses of each dog come into play, and how good handlers use the strengths and handle around the weaknesses. I'm not sure that is quite as applicable to Agility or Flyball, but if the motivation on the part of the handler is to excel rather than simply to seek attention from and validation by others, then I don't see a qualitative difference. The problem is that most of us are easily seduced by the attention and validation and lose sight of the "pursuit of excellence" ideal, and that's where all of the shenanigans begin. Pearse
-
And, there's still no hard evidence that it is anything other than a training issue. What Mecklenburg has done is to publish a hypothesis that (paraphrasing) says: "We have observed this trait. We have been unable to correct it using currently available training techniques in a subset of affected dogs. We hypothesize that it is due to some phyisical/physiological/psychological defect in some dogs" That's an acceptable hypothesis as far as it goes. So far, there have been no studies published where experiments have been performed with normal controls and affected dogs to test the hypothesis. Therefore, there are no data to support, or refute, the hypothesis. It's NOT the same as saying: "We've observed this trait. We've been unable to correct it in some dogs using available training techniques. Therefore, it MUST be due to some physical/physiological/psychological defect". It's light years away from a point where you can say: "this is due to a heritable defect. You should breed away from it". [edited to add] and "published" in Clear Run magazine is not the same as published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association (i.e. not peer reviewed, and more editorial than scholarship) So, why are we wasting time arguing about the effect of breeding to genetic tests for a condition that may not be biologically based at all, for which no decent research has ever been done, and which is of no consequence to the long term health of the breed? Pearse
-
How would one know that any "random" trait is (un)related to any other trait if you don't know the genetic basis for both traits (assuming they are genetically determined at al) and their relative positions in the genome? One would have no way, a priori, of knowing that the "exclusions and inflations have nothing to do with stock work" They may be neutral, positive, or negative. That doesn't negate the argument that the only way right now to select for good stock dogs is to breed only good stock dogs to good stock dogs and pick the best of the offspring to produce the next generation of good stock dogs and given the slow pace of genetic research on selection of complex behavioral traits, will likely remain that way for the next 20 years at least. Genetic testing for anything other than monogenic diseases (think CEA) is pretty much a waste of time right now. Pearse