SilverServal
Tourist
While I feel there's been some good resources offered, it's becoming distressingly clear just how aggressive the majority of this server seems to be, and honestly, I'm not sure how to trust much of any of it anymore. 
Confusing/Conflicting Info on Spay/Neuter
- Thread starter alexagryphon
- Start date
kuchen
Tourist
Interesting limiting yourself to 2012... you may need to update your reading material! in case you (or anyone else) is interested here is an up to date literature review from the "Dog Aging Project" on the subject. It's really an interesting read and covers both sides reasonably well.
"Desexing Dogs: A Review of the Current Literature" ( mdpi.com/2076-2615/9/12/1086/htm )
One sentence I want to put particular attention towards:
"there are no non-reproductive tumors that show a risk decrease following desexing in dogs"
I don't know which study you were referencing when you claimed that other cancers decreased as well but that sort of result appears to be the exception and not the rule.
Your reference to material of 2012 was in answer to a statement made by another member. I can assure you that the material we go through in our veterinarian program is very much up to date. If you are a veterinarian student as I am, then you more than most should understand that old research as well as new research is studied and reviewed with long discussions in an effort to understand their validity.
BTW the paper you referenced says a lot of the same thing that I have been saying herein; This is from your paper referenced summary.
Note: There has been a battle of opinion as to an increase of other types of cancers formed due to a lack of hormones. Both sides have valid arguments on this issue but the verdict is at present still under consideration.
However the veterinarian community is moving away from total organ removal and instead is pushing for sterilization techniques that preserve normal endocrine function. From my education in veterinarian care I believe that there is a purpose for each organ and that organ systems are interdependent. I believe that removing any organ and certainly organs of the reproductive system will eventually have health consequences. The sterilization techniques I speak of leave the hormone producing organs in place and operating as normal but the animal is unable to reproduce. At this time it is believed that this will alleviate the long term effects that have been caused by spay or neutering. Further research will determine what if anything is to be done in order to curve the risk of pyometra or mammary tumors. This at present is the only anticipated downside to these new techniques.
Doggyluv
Zooville Settler
Golden Retriever Labrador, German Shepherd Vizsla, Rottweiler spay neuter — Spay/Neuter Advice
Breed-specific spay neuter research in Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Labradors, Golden Retrievers, and Vizslas. The research articles are summarized and live links are provided. spayed
www.spayneuteradvice.com
QuantumHusky
Zooville Settler
I dont understand why people think spaying is a good idea. I keep telling people this but its like people dont want to bother with taking care of their dog and it pisses me off.
Doggyluv
Zooville Settler
I couldn't agree more. Spaying and neutering should not even exist. If people could be responsible, take care of and watch their dogs and of course not breed for profit no one would need to alter dogs. If someone does have a dog they let roam the neighborhood or county get them a vasectomy. Why is mutilation the number one option
Maui69
Zooville Settler
Spays and neuters must be done when there's a health risk. Otherwise, stop being a lazy cunt and look over your dog while she's in heat or he's unbearably horny and wants to go out.
I am against spaying and neutering because the owner can't take the responsibility of looking over their dogs but I'm also against not spaying and neutering if there's a health risk that gets nullified or lowered drastically by the procedure.
I am against spaying and neutering because the owner can't take the responsibility of looking over their dogs but I'm also against not spaying and neutering if there's a health risk that gets nullified or lowered drastically by the procedure.
Bigspot
Tourist
Did not read the post at all but I am in the pet community in other places (not in the zoo way) and spay and neuter is conflicting for all!
Things are more likely with intact animals including certain cancers and diseases. You will need to be willing to take that chance or not.
It's not horrible to allow animals to be intact. In fact hormones are good to stimulate mental and physical growth usually until they are more developed/fully developed at age 2(for smaller dogs) while some larger breeds take much longer!
Castration can be a blessing
(longevity) (lesser likelihood of certain specific cancers in diseases or removes them entirely depending)
While it can quite possibly take away the dogs muscle mass, fur quality, etc.
It's a very personal choice. Just make sure you have the steps in place to take care of your pet if health issues arise.
Have a good vet. Do your research on your BREEDS or mixes (what breeds they have) and what health issues may or may not be common. Anywho bye
Things are more likely with intact animals including certain cancers and diseases. You will need to be willing to take that chance or not.
It's not horrible to allow animals to be intact. In fact hormones are good to stimulate mental and physical growth usually until they are more developed/fully developed at age 2(for smaller dogs) while some larger breeds take much longer!
Castration can be a blessing
(longevity) (lesser likelihood of certain specific cancers in diseases or removes them entirely depending)
While it can quite possibly take away the dogs muscle mass, fur quality, etc.
It's a very personal choice. Just make sure you have the steps in place to take care of your pet if health issues arise.
Have a good vet. Do your research on your BREEDS or mixes (what breeds they have) and what health issues may or may not be common. Anywho bye
Anonygoose
Tourist
The cancer argument never sat right with me. Getting animals fixed is absolutely appropriate for most situations, but saying "if you remove these organs, they won't develop X cancer" is silly. Like...yea no shit. The organs are gone. It always seemed to minimize the impact losing them has on animals.
milabue
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
I have more than once seen pens and such that seemed inpenetrable. Turns out they were penetrable, and so was the bitch. They were honest attempts to keep a female intact without making unwanted puppies.
I just don't know. Surely situations are different.
daedelus
Tourist
I'm going to need some documentation supporting the fact that Americans are less fact driven than whatever 6th world country you are from. I wish to see your papers now...
It's effectively lobotomizing your animal, they aren't the same personality.
milabue
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
nope
just look at the difference between human eunuchs and humans who have been lobotomized
MetalHeadHomesteader
Lurker
The bodily systems that rely on testosterone or estrogen are fundamentally similar between most mammals, if not all, therefore it is reasonable to assume that symptoms experienced by humans related to these hormones being low are also experienced by most mammals. But the existence of many of the discomforts and symptoms experienced due to these hormones being low can be difficult to prove through testing or examination, and animals are unable to confirm how they are feeling via communication; fatigue, cognitive decline, hot flashes, depression, all may only cause subtle behavioral changes that pet owners have been conditioned to believe are normal as pets simply power through it while going about their daily lives.
Some other common symptoms of low T/E that can be veritably observed both in humans and animals, such as weight gain and reduced physical activity, have been widely acknowledged by veterinarians as typical side effects of neuter/spay yet are usually downplayed with no further consideration of the implications.
I won't dive into the "why" of the animal healthcare industry turning a blind eye to the drawbacks of these forms of sterilization, but I'm sure you can imagine a at least a couple reasons.
Some other common symptoms of low T/E that can be veritably observed both in humans and animals, such as weight gain and reduced physical activity, have been widely acknowledged by veterinarians as typical side effects of neuter/spay yet are usually downplayed with no further consideration of the implications.
I won't dive into the "why" of the animal healthcare industry turning a blind eye to the drawbacks of these forms of sterilization, but I'm sure you can imagine a at least a couple reasons.
milabue
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
It looks like a financial thing. Cheaper to take the gonads away than to clip and tie so they can't reproduce but stil hav their hormones and have sex.
But are there problems with that, too?
MetalHeadHomesteader
Lurker
For the purpose of cutting back on unwanted animals in shelters, it's simpler to convince everyone that spay/neuter is a good thing with absolutely no downsides than to attempt to distinguish responsible owners from irresponsible owners and discriminate accordingly. It's also very profitable.
Some shelters also prefer the hormone-reducing option to vasectomy and tube-tying to reduce potential aggression in new adoptions, again taking a simpler nondiscriminatory approach for safety's sake instead of employing the procedure only as needed. Lump that on top of pet parents who are prone to fainting at the idea of their
While I was calling around to get one of my boys a vasectomy, a couple vets gawked and probed at why I didn't buy into the script they learned in school, then became agitated because they were convinced that the organ they'd evolved alongside since before mammals even existed was actually harming their health, therefore making me a bad owner.
Right.
Last edited: