Glucosamine/Chondroitin supplements for puppies??

[dot me not]

I'm just looking for a little input here. I'm looking at this as possibly a little extra insurance against joint problems (hip displasia). I spoke with the breeder of my new pup and she routinely gives a glucosamine/chondroitin supplement to all her puppies... and actually I think I heard her say that she does it for the adult dogs as well. Anyway, I spoke with my vet who is also a good friend of mine and she really liked the idea.

So my question is, have any of you heard of doing this?? Does anyone know of any studies completed on the subject? (perhaps following littermates into adulthood on this supplement?)

It just appears to be a new idea and I don't want to jump on the bandwagon without doing a bit of homework ahead of time.

Thanks in advance for any ideas,

Lydia

[Guest PrairieFire]

Hey Lydia -

 

I haven't heard of anyone using these supplements - "just in case" - in my circles...

 

Doing that with 7 dogs would be rather spendy...adding up the Frontline, Interceptor, and then adding the G/C, I'd need another job, and I kinda like just this farmng stuff...

 

That said, I do I give my Craig the supplements - he has dislocated both front elbows at one time or the other - and I think using a good quality supplement helps him...I also give him an Ascriptin once in a while after a hard day...

 

Since CHD (as well as many diseases) are aggravated by a dog's being overweight, I would think that keeping a dog slim would be better "pre-treatment" than giving the supplements.

 

CHD can also be fairly easily observed through xrays - properly interpreted by someone who understands the breed - underline the above please, do your own research, but I think MOST of the "readers" of Border Collie xrays are WAY off base, and so do many of the orthopods I've talked with at the U of MN VTH...

 

No matter the xray and the "rating" the dog may still show no "symptoms" however - it depends much on the indvidual dog - but you would have something to help make decisions...

 

One thing, remember ALL supplements are synthetic additives - and no matter the study, we REALLY don't know long term effects on even things like multi-vitamins - and I know I could start quite an argument with this...

 

But it's very easy to, on purpose or accidently, have a very minor difference in formula that makes a synthetic useless or even dangerous.

 

Remember Tryptophan additives? The studies showed they were supposed to help you sleep. Then some folks died while using them and tryptophan (a natural substance, but created synthetically for sale), was banned and removed from the market. After investigation, it was found that it WASN'T the tryptophan, but a miniscule amount of something that was created in the process of manufacture that caused the problems.

 

While I'm not a screaming "naturalist", I am probably a hollering one...

 

------------------

Bill Gary

Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center

River Falls, WI

715.426.9877

www.kensmuir.com

 

 

[This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 06-03-2002).]

[Bill Fosher]

There's a school of thought (in human health) that chondroitin may be harmful in that it can cause overgrowth of cartiledge where it's not needed.

 

I'm not sure what the science is on that; the science on G&C is pretty hazy anyway. I have two older dogs on it, and it seems to have helped them both.

 

However, G&C is *very* expensive. I wouldn't provide it unless I thought the dog was getting a direct benefit from it. For the most part, these supplements are passed out in the urine if they're not needed; I simply see no need make my dog's pee valuable.

 

 

 

------------------

Bill Fosher

Surry, NH

[2 Devils]

As far as I know there has not been a study on it for K9's or Humans.....my ortho does not recommend it but says he does not think it would hurt me to take it...

 

With that said, my vet recommended putting my acd on human Pain-Free which has the mixture of the different drugs...she also gave me the dosage for my dogs weight. Of course, I never started the Pain-free but I keep thinking about it....I am sure most on the board know that my dogs play flyball and since that can be very rough on the joints, I really should be giving supplements...

 

But, unless you see a possible problem I would not recommend using supplements just because...you never know what can happen and until studies/trials are done I would not give it...

[dot me not]

Thanks Y'all for the input...

 

I just have mixed emotions about the supplement. On the one hand I (like everyone else that gives a whit about their pup(s)) want to be sure to do all I can to increase the odds of a healthy set of hips. Both parents of this pup have good hips and I have no reason to suspect a problem at this time. There's another side of me that whispers about the possibility of covering up a low level problem with a supplement that could make her "feel" better but still have a defect there.... And, like all of you, I do wonder what the very long term use of these products COULD do, ESPECIALLY if given during the critical growth phase.

 

I do give Red (also my puppy's sire)a g/c supplement, only because he gets just a very tiny bit "off" every now and then when he works extra hard. But he's 9 1/2 years old and has worked his whole life. His hips are OFA'd "Good", but age catches us all, eventually.

 

So, I've decided to hold off on the g/c supplement, at least until I find some strong evidence to support its use in youngsters.

 

Thanks again for your thoughts,

Lydia

[nancy]

My chiropractor recommends that I take glucosamine sulfate. My +50-year-old joints need the help. But he said to forget about the chondroitin; says the only real good it does is to boost the earnings of the sellers. Seems that the body has to convert it back to glucosamine sulfate for it to do any good anyhow.

[P. Sherwood]

Over the couse of the years--a lot of years--I've ripped up various joints. I find glucosamine keeps me walking (groin injury), swimming (shoulder injury), and smiling. Adding chrondoitin also about doubles the price. No need for that!

[workindogs]

I have young dog who the vets suspected had OCD at 6mo. I got a 2nd opinion from a highly respected Orthopedic vet (inconclusive diagnosis for OCD), and asked if glucosamine supplements might be advisable on a young dog. He thought that given my pup's discomfort, a moderate dosage "couldn't hurt" however he didn't recommend it as a matter of course preventative for young dogs. I didn't ask why. I gave a light supplement to my pup for 5 months and limited his exercise. It appears that he has fully recovered.

 

Elizabeth

[diane allen]

I'd sure like to hear from someone who actually KNOWS the answer to this question (not to knock any replies....just looking for the science behind it all). I had heard (you know, the group sitting around talking about their dog's health...) at one point that there was no preventative benefit to glucosamine. Then I heard that a study had said there was.

 

So - what's the scoop?!?

 

Denise, you out there? Anyone else with facts?

 

diane

[Guest Suelee Robbe]

Diane,

 

I am no expert and I don't treat dogs. My own dogs have their vet.

 

That said, this has not been researched in vet med, but human medicine it has. The highest level of evidence is a systematic review which evaulates all the quality research done on the subject. below is an abstrat from the ACP journal. http://www.acpjc.org/Content/133/2/ISSUE/A...0-133-2-058.htm

 

 

Review: Glucosamine and chondroitin improve outcomes in osteoarthritis, but the magnitude of effect is unclear

 

ACP Journal Club. 2000 Sept-Oct;133:58.

McAlindon TE, LaValley MP, Gulin JP, Felson DT. Glucosamine and chondroitin for treatment of osteoarthritis: a systematic quality assessment and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2000 Mar 15;283:1469-75. [PubMed ID: 10732937]

 

Question

 

In patients with osteoarthritis (OA), are glucosamine and chondroitin effective for relieving symptoms and improving function?

 

Data sources

 

Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (1966 to June 1999) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and reviewing bibliographies of reviews and manuscripts. Meeting abstracts published in supplements of Arthritis and Rheumatism, the British Journal of Rheumatology, and Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (1978 to 1998) were hand searched. Authors, content experts, and drug manufacturers were contacted.

 

Study selection

 

Studies in any language were selected if they were randomized, double-blind, controlled trials that compared oral or parenteral glucosamine sulfate, glucosamine hydrochloride, or chondroitin sulfate with placebo for 4 weeks in patients with OA of the knee or hip. Studies also had to include 1 outcome measure from a list compiled by the reviewers.

 

Data extraction

 

2 reviewers assessed the quality of studies (14-item quality scale) and resolved disagreements by discussion. Data were extracted on patients, route of administration, joint with OA, outcomes, funding, allocation concealment, use of intention-to-treat analysis, and effect sizes.

 

Main results

 

17 studies met the inclusion criteria. 2 of these did not provide sufficient data for extraction and were excluded from the meta-analysis. The mean quality score was 36%. 1 study reported adequate allocation concealment, and 1 used intention-to-treat analysis. No studies reported independent funding from any governmental or nonprofit organization. 6 studies of glucosamine, which involved 911 patients, had quality scores ranging from 12% to 52%. Outcome measures were the Lequesne Index (a questionnaire-based disability score) (3 studies), global pain scores (2 studies), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score (1 study). Combined results showed a moderate benefit for glucosamine (effect size 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64).

 

9 studies of chondroitin, which involved 799 patients, had quality scores ranging from 14% to 55%. Outcome measures were the Lequesne Index score (2 studies), global pain scores (5 studies), mobility scores (1 study), and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (1 study). Chondroitin had a large benefit (effect size 0.96, CI 0.63 to 1.3), but studies were heterogeneous (P < 0.001). When the study with the largest effect size (4.56) was removed, heterogeneity was no longer significant (effect size 0.78, CI 0.60 to 0.95).

 

Conclusions

 

In patients with osteoarthritis, glucosamine and chondroitin are effective for improving outcomes. However, the magnitude of effect is unclear because of inconsistencies in study methods and dependence on industry support for study execution.

 

Source of funding: National Institutes of Health.

 

For correspondence: Dr. T.E. McAlindon, The Arthritis Center, Boston University School of Medicine, 715 Albany Street, A203, Boston, MA 02118, USA. FAX 617-638-5239.

 

Commentary

 

 

This systematic review by McAlindon and colleagues evaluated the effect of glucosamine and chondroitin as symptom-modifying drugs in OA. Although the authors conclude that these compounds may be useful for relieving pain and improving function in patients with OA, they suggest that the magnitude of the effect of glucosamine or chondroitin might have been overestimated because of study design flaws and dependence on study sponsors. A previous meta-analysis that estimated the symptomatic effect of chondroitin sulfate for OA reached similar conclusions (1).

 

The authors imply that the oldest studies tended to use poor methods. However, several trials have been presented or published in abstract form in recent months (2), and incorporating them into the meta-analysis might have reduced the heterogeneity of the results and given a better overview of the exact efficacy of chondroitin and glucosamine. Yet the message that more studies are needed before endorsing wide use of chondroitin and glucosamine in the treatment of patients with OA is well taken. It is particularly difficult to extrapolate the positive results obtained with pharmaceutical preparations to food supplements for which content, absorption, and metabolism are often doubtful.

 

Publication of the results from larger long-term, prospective studies in the coming months should clarify the optimal dose and regimen of the drugs. The fact that such studies may be sponsored by manufacturers of either substance should not necessarily hinder their quality, provided that the results have been validated in randomized, double-blind, controlled studies.

 

Jean-Yves Reginster, MD, PhD

 

University of Liege

 

Liege, Belgium

[Guest PrairieFire]

Thanks very much for the post, Suelee.

 

------------------

Bill Gary

Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center

River Falls, WI

715.426.9877

www.kensmuir.com

[Guest C Denise Wall]

Diane Allen wrote:

 

>I had heard (you know, the group sitting around talking about their dog's health...) at one point that there was no preventative benefit to glucosamine. Then I heard that a study had said there was.

So - what's the scoop?!?

 

Denise, you out there? Anyone else with facts?<

 

Probably, this below is the abstract from the study you heard about:

 

 

Am J Vet Res 1992 Oct;53(10):1836-43

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

 

 

Effects of intramuscular administration of glycosaminoglycan polysulfates on signs of incipient hip dysplasia in growing pups.

 

Lust G, Williams AJ, Burton-Wurster N, Beck KA, Rubin G.

 

James A. Baker Institute for Animal Health College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

 

We tested the hypothesis that treatment of growing, susceptible (to hip dysplasia) pups by IM administration of glycosaminoglycan polysulfates would mitigate the signs of incipient hip dysplasia. In 1 experiment, 7 pups, selected at random from 2 litters, were administered glycosaminoglycan polysulfates (2.5 mg/kg of body weight, IM) twice weekly, and 7 control pups from the same litters were given sterile buffered 0.9% saline solution from the age of 6 weeks to 8 months. Hip joints were examined by radiography, with pups in the standard, limbs-extended position. At 8 months of age, all pups in this experiment did not manifest femoral head subluxation radiographically. The Norberg angle, a measure of coxofemoral congruity, improved from a mean +/- SEM value of 102 degrees +/- 1 degrees in controls to 106 degrees +/- 1 degrees in treated pups (P = 0.008). Pups were not subjected to necropsy. In the second experiment, 8 pups were selected at random from 2 litters and were administered 5 mg of glycosaminoglycan polysulfates/kg, IM, twice weekly from 6 weeks to 8 months of age. Similarly, 8 control pups were administered saline solution. At 8 months of age, hip joints were examined by radiography with pups in the standard position; at necropsy, intra-articular tissues were evaluated macroscopically and biochemically. Of 8 treated pups, none had subluxation radiographically, whereas 4 of 8 control dogs had femoral head subluxation. Mean Norberg angle on the radiographs was 109.7 degrees +/- 1.6 degrees for the treated group and was 101.5 degrees +/- 1.6 degrees for controls, representing a mean improvement in coxofemoral congruity of 8.2 degrees in the treated pups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

 

******************

 

Translation - it appeared to help HD susceptable pups in one of the small sample groups studied.

 

Denise

[Pam Wolf]

Lydia--If it ain't broke, Don't fix it! I remember back in the dark ages when breeders told folks to dose the dogs with large amounts oc calcium to prevent CHD< OCD etc, then a few years later science showed that that was pne definite way to induce those ailments (imbalance the CA/P ratio) During that thime there was an increase in CHD among many breeds. Then there was the time the breeders said to dose the dog with large quantities of Vit C-- turns out it does some good, but the large doses often given caused a to acidic urine and problems associated with that! As for G/CS, I have always heard it used after the injury was there to help rebuild cartilage and ease joint pain. But the one thing I do know has been associated with prevention of CHD is management--avoid slippery surfaces to prevent damage, but more importantly, keep the pup thin. Too many breeders (usually show types) think fit is spelled with an "A"

 

Pam

[ArmyDoc]

You guys have wandered into a seriously complex discussion here! As a medical person, maybe I have something worthwhile to contribute to the thread (but not necessarily).

 

The conventional wisdom as handed down in my college of medicine is that while G/C supplements are not proven to help with joint conditions, neither do they appear to worsen the condition or interfere with other concurrent treatments. (Unlike St. John's Wort, which can be dangerous when taking other prescription drugs) The evidence for their efficacy seems to be entirely anecdotal at this point.

 

That being said, I submit that few things are as complex and difficult to interpret as clinical trials which produce inconclusive data. I bet I'm not the only one who found the above abstracts somewhat bewildering! The ambiguity surrounding the issue suggests to me that any benefit, if present, is marginal. A marginal benefit may be due to placebo effect (there I said it!) rather any chemical interaction on the part of the drug. Sorting out all the confounders of a study is a difficult matter, which is why so many studies appear to reach frustratingly contradictory conclusions.

 

In trying to understand clinical trials data, the question is not simply "is this drug good", but "is this drug good for _____". The interpretation depends entirely on the context of what disease is being investigated for the drug. One of the above studies mentions G/C for osteoarthritis, another for congenital hip dysplasia in pups. It's conceivable that a given drug under investigation might be good for one but not the other, or good in one species but not the other. Or really, really good for something not being studied. (There are many examples of drugs serendipitously discovered, beginning with penicillin) It tends to be a real mess trying to sort through the statistics to reach a proof in these studies, which is part of the reason drugs are so expensive in this country (but that's a discussion for a different board). PhD statisticians don't come cheap.

 

Anyway I can't tell you for sure whether to take G/C supplements for yourself or your pups. Personally, I agree with Bill, that G/C probably serves only to make your urine more valuable. I don't care to speculate on it's usefulness to a Border Collie.

 

Enjoy your BC -

 

kevin

[Guest C Denise Wall]

Kevin,

 

The abstract I posted was about using polysulfated glycosaminoglycans (PSGAGS) to prevent HD in pups. That was what was asked originally after all.

 

I have the complete study somewhere that I'll consult but from memory the parents had HD so these pups were highly predisposed. It's not conclusive by any means but it did appear to help those pups. As I said, I'll look it up and report back.

 

An important difference is the original poster was asking about oral glucosamine/chondroitin supplements and the study used IM injections of PSGAG. An oral G/C provides building blocks whereas the injectable probably enters the joint already assembled in the active form. As a biochemist my concern would be that giving too much chondroitin sulfate to a pup with growing joints could unbalance cartilage/bone metablolism at certain stages. Therefore, I, personally, would refrain from giving it to pups under a year until I saw some very good evidence this didn't happen.

 

As for efficacy of G/C in humans, there's actually more than anecdotal evidence out there that it's beneficial. It's common for established medical institutions to hold out for overwhelming evidence of benefit before jumping on the bandwagon but in this case there's no known side effects so the risk isn't great for possible benefit.

 

I've followed this literature for years in horses, humans and dogs, and I think these drugs/supplements provide definite benefit in many cases. I think they could be, and are being, successfully used as prevention for joint problems. Of course, if the joint is damaged to the point there is mechanical obstruction by osteoarthric changes, it won't help, so early detection and use is important. If minor trauma occurs, through injury or bad joint formation, sometimes unseen and undetectable, the materials supplied by G/C or PSGAGs are there in quantities to help the joint quickly break the damaging inflammatory/joint breakdown cycle that starts the degenerative joint disease process. In this way prevention is the cure.

 

It is my opinion that although they don't correct the underlying abnormality causing the joint problem, they help the joint cope (repair) to the point that the devastating effects of the problem are mitigated and delayed until a later time or a time where it may not matter anymore. As in, too old to do anything anyway.

 

Sorry for posting more than most people wanted to know I've put this article back up on my private web page for those interested in more on this topic:

http://www.stilhope.com/Arthritisarticle.htm

 

Denise

 

[This message has been edited by C Denise Wall (edited 06-11-2002).]

[Guest PrairieFire]

Hey Denise, Kevin, SueLee, et al...

 

NO ONE here is asking for permanent, conclusive, proof of anything - I think.

 

Like many, many, treatments - human, bovine, canine, ovine - there is a lot of "discussion"...by both the "experts" and the "non-experts" and the "users".

 

Heck, if I only used "approved" and "proven" medication on my sheep, there would actually be very little stuff I could use - the amount of "extra-label" treatments I use are pretty extraordinary.

 

I, for one, appreciate absolutely ANY info I can get on stuff - it is up to me as a (hopefully) thinking and discriminating adult - to use it properly and with discretion.

 

Thank you all for your input - I hope you keep it up...

 

------------------

Bill Gary

Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center

River Falls, WI

715.426.9877

www.kensmuir.com

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 06-11-2002).]

[diane allen]

I'll second Bill's thanks - especially to Denise. Yeah, I had to actually concentrate to get through that study post - but got the jist of it, even before reaching your plain English conclusion (but thanks for that too!). And my next question-to-be, you answered in your subsequent post. I was thinking of the supplement as more of a preventative in mid-life dogs (and one older) - no particular injury (which is what caused my orthoped to recommend it for me!), no tendency towards OCD or the like, just aging joints. My vet had already recommended it for the aging mixed breed, and after Lucy's never-quite-diagnosed-but-now-seemingly-healed injury last winter - I was hoping that it might help her live a more active life later on.

 

Denise said, "In this way prevention is the cure." That's it! Thanks!

 

diane