Mark Billadeau Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Not necessarily. The owner might choose to run in a venue that does not involve as much jumping, like NADAC, where there are whole classes without jumps and only one class really has a lot of them. The owner might choose to drop the dog's jump height if that makes a difference for that dog, and run in a class that allows for that. The owner might choose to continue to play, but know that the dog is going to knock bars a certain percentage of the time and go in without unrealistic expectations for the dog. The owner might choose to participate in the new venue that is done by video, so that he or she can just submit runs where bars are not dropped. There might be other ways to compensate for the dog's limitation of which nobody is aware yet. Please explain how knowing that a dog with ETS is affected with a genetic condition will aid in making these choices over the existing knowledge that the dog is affected with ETS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Please explain how knowing that a dog with ETS is affected with a genetic condition will aid in making these choices over the existing knowledge that the dog is affected with ETS? I've already responded to this very question. If you go back in the discussion a ways you will find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Oh dear doG! Next we'll be arguing about the meaning of "is," or better, "reality".... J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoofly Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 A genetic test has little added value for the owners with dogs already showing symptoms (clinical diagnosis is all that is needed to assess for affected dogs). This thread gets more surreal all the time. Root Beer, can you please address Mark's statement above, and explain why you seem to need genetic proof vs a clinical diagnosis? You do understand that a genetic indication is meaningless without an actual clinical, real world diagnosis, don't you? Edited to add: You know what, never mind. I have a feeling pretty much anyone else reading this thread gets it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I've read your responses. I found no added value for the owners of dogs with ETS (already diagnosed with ETS) of a genetic test for ETS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 NO ONE is unable to acknowledge the fact that people are, in fact, breeding Border Collies for sport, that this is a reality. Haven't you noticed that we have been talking about agility breeders? That is because we acknowledge that there is such a thing as agility breeders. People breeding for agility, which is a sport. Somehow this has gotten turned into, if ETS is found to be genetic, people will start breeding Border Collies for sport. Upon pointing out that this is already happening and that those very breeders are the ones who would take ETS into account in breeding (not the working breeders), some have gotten the impression that I (and others) am advocating the breeding of Border Collies for sport. I was hoping to clarify that I am not advocating any such thing, but somehow "it is actually happening already" is being equated with "I want it to happen". Which is not the case. And no one equates recognition of that fact with advocating the practice. That is something that Mark and I are going round and round and round about. Why would they? They are in touch with reality, so they are able to see that my every word and action shows that I do not advocate the practice. That has been my response to the claim, as well. You seem to be trying to manufacture some defect in perception and reasoning on the part of "working folks" -- I am not trying to manufacture anything. There is a disconnect, and I was hoping to gain some insight into that. I was honestly surprised at a lot of what I read. There has been a strong objection, not only to genetic testing for ETS, but to anyone recognizing that the people who have studied ETS most likely know more about it than those who have not, and that it might, in fact, exist. Somehow acknowledgment of it's possible existence has been interpreted as vehement support for genetic testing. And really, I don't think there is anyone here who is actually advocating genetic testing for this. I don't know if you're succeeding in persuading others that working folks have this defect, but apparently you think it's worth the effort to try. Actually, what I was hoping - and I appreciate that you have done this - is that someone among the working folks would stand up and say what you have said. That simply acknowledging that Border Collies are already being bred for sport is not the same thing as advocating the practice. And that, in fact, if ETS is a reality, it is a reality. I was very surprised at the idea that the majority of working folks really thought that if one denies that Border Collies aren't being bred for sport it isn't happening, and I wanted to make darn sure I understood that right before accepting it as fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I've read your responses. I found no added value for the owners of dogs with ETS (already diagnosed with ETS) of a genetic test for ETS. OK, well I can tell you that as someone who actually participates in Agility with a noise phobic dog, the fact that genetic testing is being done for Noise Phobia (even though the study is not yet concluded) has been helpful to me - and to my dog - from a practical standpoint, in making Agility related choices for that dog. (I gave some details about that earlier, as well) I can see the same being true for people like me to participate in Agility with dogs who have ETS. I know what they are experiencing in the sport because of it even though my dog has a different condition. I know how that experience can change substantially when there is more information - whether that information is gathered from a genetic study or some other kind of study. So, you don't see how that can be. Doesn't mean it isn't the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rave Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I think part of the disconnect here is that there is not yet any specific clinical test for ETS. People with dogs with possible ETS first exhaust all other possibilities before coming to a diagnosis. A test of any sort, whether genetic or not, will help those people circumvent the rule-out process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 That is something that Mark and I are going round and round and round about.Actually, you're going round and round with that. I know that people are breeding dogs for agility. I also KNOW that a genetic test for an agility specific issue will be used to make breeding decisions specifically for agility dogs. This is why I am against the study of ETS in Border Collies; I am against anything about the breeding of Border Collies specifically for agility. Would you have made different decisions for your dog if the study concludes that noise phobia is solely environmental? Will you treat your noise phobic dog differently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 A test of any sort, whether genetic or not, will help those people circumvent the rule-out process. The difficulty is that in order to have hope of finding a possible genetic link you must first be able to clinically diagnose dogs with ETS and those without. For EIC in Border Collies this is what the ABCA is funding; coming up with a clinical diagnosis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I have to wonder if the boards aren't running parallel universes again? We'll all come back tomorrow and *poof* this whole thread will not be reality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Actually, you're going round and round with that. I was under the impression that you and I were having a two way discussion. I know that people are breeding dogs for agility. I also KNOW that a genetic test for an agility specific issue will be used to make breeding decisions specifically for agility dogs. This is why I am against the study of ETS in Border Collies; I am against anything about the breeding of Border Collies specifically for agility. I have no issue with the fact that you are against it, or that anyone is, for that matter. Only with the implication that those who are not against it are advocating the breeding of Border Collies for Agility. Would you have made different decisions for your dog if the study concludes that noise phobia is solely environmental? Will you treat your noise phobic dog differently? Would I have if that conclusion had been reached back when I was making those decisions? It is likely. Will I change what I am doing now? Of course not - I've found what works for us. I had the information that I needed to make those decisions at the time. I'm not going to change them now, regardless of what information comes out. But if there had been conclusive information out when I was making those decisions, my choices may well have been different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I was very surprised at the idea that the majority of working folks really thought that if one denies that Border Collies aren't being bred for sport it isn't happening, and I wanted to make darn sure I understood that right before accepting it as fact. I'm very surprised that you have somehow gotten the idea that a "majority of working folks really think that if one denies that border collies aren't (huh? don't you mean are? not quite understanding the double negative here...) being bred for sport that it isn't happening" since I've read every post of this entire thread and NOWHERE did I read a working person assert that border collies are NOT being bred for sport. In fact, over and over working dog folks have LAMENTED the fact that border collies are being bred for sport. You can't disagree with something, or think it's bad, if you don't think it exists. So how you've managed to interpret all the anti-ETS posts in all their forms in this horrendously long thread as working people somehow denying the existence of dogs being bred for sport is beyond me. Maybe it's you who has gotten an idea about what working border collie people believe or don't believe and are clinging to that idea despite all the evidence to the contrary right here in this thread. I agree with Liz--this whole thread of the conversation has become completely surreal. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushdoggie Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 The difficulty is that in order to have hope of finding a possible genetic link you must first be able to clinically diagnose dogs with ETS and those without. For EIC in Border Collies this is what the ABCA is funding; coming up with a clinical diagnosis. So, I ask, because I really don't know: is the only value in taking swabs (as they are doing in this study) to determine a genetic marker that will be used in breeding decisions? Is there no other possible outcome of identifying something that may be found like being able to identify a disease and be able to treat it, or compare it to something we may know about the human markers for a disease and compare them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I have no issue with the fact that you are against it, or that anyone is, for that matter. Only with the implication that those who are not against it are advocating the breeding of Border Collies for Agility. RB, do you know what purpose a genetic marker has? Do you understand the implications of knowing a genetic marker? Do you know why genetic markers are breakthroughs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I was under the impression that you and I were having a two way discussion. The issue boils down to your unduly optimistic belief (not supported medically or scientifically) that knowledge of a genetic link for an affliction will aid in the management of the affliction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I'm very surprised that you have somehow gotten the idea that a "majority of working folks really think that if one denies that border collies aren't (huh? don't you mean are? not quite understanding the double negative here...) Type-o. My bad. Well, there's some more common ground. We are mutually surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 So, I ask, because I really don't know: is the only value in taking swabs (as they are doing in this study) to determine a genetic marker that will be used in breeding decisions? Is there no other possible outcome of identifying something that may be found like being able to identify a disease and be able to treat it, or compare it to something we may know about the human markers for a disease and compare them? In order to identify a genetic marker for an affliction one must first be able to clinically diagnose a dog (or a person) with the affliction. Once the marker(s) have been found treatment will still be dictated by a clinical diagnosis since having the genes won't necessarily indicate how badly one will be afflicted. Take for example CEA. We have the genetic test for CEA. It can identify those dogs affected, those that are carriers (only useful for breeding) and those that are normal (only useful for breeding). How badly CEA is manifested in the affected dogs ranges from blindness to "go normals" (no impact on vision) and this must be determined clinically not by a genetic test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 The issue boils down to your unduly optimistic belief (not supported medically or scientifically) that knowledge of a genetic link for an affliction will aid in the management of the affliction. And there we will have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to take on a pessimistic view of the situation if it is not in my nature to do so. Neither medicine nor science have jurisdiction over hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackdawgs Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 And there we will have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to take on a pessimistic view of the situation if it is not in my nature to do so. Neither medicine nor science have jurisdiction over hope. If hope trumps science and medicine, there really is no need for a genetic marker, is there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 If hope trumps science and medicine, there really is no need for a genetic marker, is there? If hope solves all our problems, then we would have no more problems. And that's a much less expensive way of doing it than research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackdawgs Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 If hope solves all our problems, then we would have no more problems. And that's a much less expensive way of doing it than research. And hope certainly requires less thought and scientific rigor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 And hope certainly requires less thought and scientific rigor. Yes and yes but maybe not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 ^^ J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Anybody able to hum the theme from "Twilight Zone"? I could try humming it but no one would recognize it if I did, no matter how hopeful I was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.