Question On Animal Rescues

[chook1 184]

But that could be cause by anything, not just neutering, did they have an mri scan done?

 

 

I had two bitchs neither were done, both lived quite happly with each other till they were a little over 8 years old, then one day they kicked off, not just a little fight to the point of killing each other, had to be kept sepertaed, a few months later we had to have one of them pts, as she had liver falure.

 

A rescue male dog I owned started showing agressive unprictable behavour towards people, never us,

He wasn't done, showed no other signs or symtoms - he dropped dead one day, he was brain dead - his heart carried on beating for a couple of minuites afterwards, he had a supected brain toumor.

 

Doberman I knew for years (not neutered) pts after starting to show agression and started having fits, he had a brain toumor.

 

 

There are lots of different reasons why a dog could show nervousness or agression, not just with neutering.

[neems 2,406]

But that could be cause by anything, not just neutering, did they have an mri scan done?

 

 

I had two bitchs neither were done, both lived quite happly with each other till they were a little over 8 years old, then one day they kicked off, not just a little fight to the point of killing each other, had to be kept sepertaed, a few months later we had to have one of them pts, as she had liver falure.

 

A rescue male dog I owned started showing agressive unprictable behavour towards people, never us,

He wasn't done, showed no other signs or symtoms - he dropped dead one day, he was brain dead - his heart carried on beating for a couple of minuites afterwards, he had a supected brain toumor.

 

Doberman I knew for years (not neutered) pts after starting to show agression and started having fits, he had a brain toumor.

 

 

There are lots of different reasons why a dog could show nervousness or agression, not just with neutering.

No,he got put down about 30 mins after he bit his owner.

 

it could have been something like that but it would be a huge coincidence,he changed for the worst the same way most do,but he was always very more docile, wouldn't notice someone walking behind him etc

 

It's just really strange it isn't more common, the closest thing I've heard to a sensible argument is,if they got balls they can get ball cancer

[LaraCroft 863]

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

[Blackbriar 8,569]

Super knowledge, as always, Lara !

[neems 2,406]

 

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

 

maybe it was a daft comparison,but the argument of neutering dogs to stop them getting cancer is just ridiculous imo,potentially lowering their quality of life so they can live longer.

 

and my point for clueless dog owners,better a dog that runs away and mounts any bitch in sight or a nervous unstable one?

[LaraCroft 863]

 

 

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

 

maybe it was a daft comparison,but the argument of neutering dogs to stop them getting cancer is just ridiculous imo,potentially lowering their quality of life so they can live longer.

 

and my point for clueless dog owners,better a dog that runs away and mounts any bitch in sight or a nervous unstable one?

It isn't to stop them getting cancer, or to make them live longer - it is to stop unwanted puppies - the fact that they no longer have the risk of testicular cancer is a positive side effect - same as speying a bitch means they won't get a pyometra. Neither op makes them live longer, but the plus side outweighs the minus.

 

There is absolutely no evidence that castration or speying makes a dog nervous or unstable - that is totally down to handling - nothing to do with hormones.

[chook1 184]

End of the day if so many people didn't breed and throw out pups year in year out - talking about all types of breeds hear,or pass on their dogs when they can't cope or have had enough,there would be little need for so many rescues and vets wouldn't be so pushy for neutering or spaying to be done,rescues won't take the risk of putting an un-neutered dog in to a household as for all the will in the world people can lie through their teeth when they want something, they won't take the risk of there being any problems between the new dog and any resident dogs, neutering can reduce the risk of dogs fighting with one another, after all rescues need the new home to work out - they don't want dogs bouncing back time and time again, rescues run at a huge loss, neutering isn't that cheap and by the time you've factored in microchipping,vax, worming and genrel upkeep of the dog, food etc then the loss is great, you not think if there was a cheaper option rescues would take it.

[neems 2,406]

 

 

 

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

 

maybe it was a daft comparison,but the argument of neutering dogs to stop them getting cancer is just ridiculous imo,potentially lowering their quality of life so they can live longer.

 

and my point for clueless dog owners,better a dog that runs away and mounts any bitch in sight or a nervous unstable one?

It isn't to stop them getting cancer, or to make them live longer - it is to stop unwanted puppies - the fact that they no longer have the risk of testicular cancer is a positive side effect - same as speying a bitch means they won't get a pyometra. Neither op makes them live longer, but the plus side outweighs the minus.

 

There is absolutely no evidence that castration or speying makes a dog nervous or unstable - that is totally down to handling - nothing to do with hormones.

 

hormones don't effect your mental state?

try telling my bird that next time she's on the blob,or the idiot who's decided to take steroids without a clue what they're doing.

 

well having seen it happen first hand many times i don't need anyone to show me evidence.

 

It doesn't matter that much to me,I'd never own a sterilised dog or a 'rescue' dog,and i'd shut down all rescues and destroy all strays after a week of not being claimed.

 

i just don't like to see dogs go through unnecessary stress/suffering.

[chook1 184]

Unnecessary suffering ? From where as dogs don't suffer anything being neutered except a little pain, and most dogs cope quite well with coming in to rescue, as most go directly in to foster homes, dogs are not like humans the don't dwell on the past or past homes, actually most dogs forget any past homes very quickly.

[LaraCroft 863]

 

 

 

 

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

 

maybe it was a daft comparison,but the argument of neutering dogs to stop them getting cancer is just ridiculous imo,potentially lowering their quality of life so they can live longer.

 

and my point for clueless dog owners,better a dog that runs away and mounts any bitch in sight or a nervous unstable one?

It isn't to stop them getting cancer, or to make them live longer - it is to stop unwanted puppies - the fact that they no longer have the risk of testicular cancer is a positive side effect - same as speying a bitch means they won't get a pyometra. Neither op makes them live longer, but the plus side outweighs the minus.

 

There is absolutely no evidence that castration or speying makes a dog nervous or unstable - that is totally down to handling - nothing to do with hormones.

 

hormones don't effect your mental state?

try telling my bird that next time she's on the blob,or the idiot who's decided to take steroids without a clue what they're doing.

 

well having seen it happen first hand many times i don't need anyone to show me evidence.

 

It doesn't matter that much to me,I'd never own a sterilised dog or a 'rescue' dog,and i'd shut down all rescues and destroy all strays after a week of not being claimed.

 

i just don't like to see dogs go through unnecessary stress/suffering.

If you are so experienced, then congratulations

 

If you will never own a neutered dog, then good luck avoiding cancer and pyometra.

 

If you really think this will help stop unnecessary stress and suffering, then you are deluded.

[vixen 528]

Well i have my lurcher bitches neutered and am planning to have one of my lurcher dogs neutered in a couple of weeks, makes no difference whatsoever to the natures of the dogs i have had neutered, BUT............. when neutering hormones DO very slightly affect the dog, the coat of a neutered dog never stays exactly the same, they seem to get a lot more dead under coat which i have noticed working with dogs of all breeds, a very small price to pay when keeping the peace in the pack and not having bitches in season to add to the male ego's being displayed, i would rather neuter than have an atmosphere between my males, which can kick off anytime, or have to have bitches injected to stop seasons which i have never done as to me is definately NOT healthy.

[neems 2,406]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

 

maybe it was a daft comparison,but the argument of neutering dogs to stop them getting cancer is just ridiculous imo,potentially lowering their quality of life so they can live longer.

 

and my point for clueless dog owners,better a dog that runs away and mounts any bitch in sight or a nervous unstable one?

It isn't to stop them getting cancer, or to make them live longer - it is to stop unwanted puppies - the fact that they no longer have the risk of testicular cancer is a positive side effect - same as speying a bitch means they won't get a pyometra. Neither op makes them live longer, but the plus side outweighs the minus.

 

There is absolutely no evidence that castration or speying makes a dog nervous or unstable - that is totally down to handling - nothing to do with hormones.

 

hormones don't effect your mental state?

try telling my bird that next time she's on the blob,or the idiot who's decided to take steroids without a clue what they're doing.

 

well having seen it happen first hand many times i don't need anyone to show me evidence.

 

It doesn't matter that much to me,I'd never own a sterilised dog or a 'rescue' dog,and i'd shut down all rescues and destroy all strays after a week of not being claimed.

 

i just don't like to see dogs go through unnecessary stress/suffering.

If you are so experienced, then congratulations

 

If you will never own a neutered dog, then good luck avoiding cancer and pyometra.

 

If you really think this will help stop unnecessary stress and suffering, then you are deluded.

Not all that experienced at all but worked in a couple of big boarding kennels for about 8 years,and seen a clear correlation.

 

if my dogs get cancer they'll be put to sleep.

 

if i'm right in what i've seen (i could be wrong) it would mean less suffering,getting rid of rescues and just destroying all stray animals would do a lot more to stop suffering though.

[LaraCroft 863]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vasectomy doesn't always stop the dog from looking for bitches in season.

Vasectomy still leaves the dog at risk of testicular cancer later in life, now pet dogs are living far far longer than nature initially intended.

 

On the balance of things, castrated dogs are generally easier to cope with ( from a female hunting point of view ) and the operation involved is barely any different if you castrate, than if you do a vasectomy - and I have done lots of both in dogs.

 

yeah i've read these excuses,they don't wash with me.

 

if you can't stop a dog mounting random bitches,running off or pissing in the house you shouldn't have a dog at all,and that sort of person certainly imo couldn't be trusted to then look after and nurture a dog which has just had such a massive change made to their hormone levels.

 

as for the cancer argument,it's just silly imo.

 

you can get cancer in your eye,why not get one eye removed?

half the chances.

Each time a cell divides, there is a risk of mutation causing cancer. If the cells don't divide much, the risk is lower. Thats why skin cancer, lung cancer, gut cancer, breast cancer etc are high - the cells divide very fast. Ditto testicles. It's just maths, nothing more. Eyes don't have the same cell turn over, nor do hair follicles, or muscle tissue etc.

 

I agree about behaviour - but I am sure you understand that a lot of people who own dogs have no idea about behaviour, and that is where the problems start.

 

maybe it was a daft comparison,but the argument of neutering dogs to stop them getting cancer is just ridiculous imo,potentially lowering their quality of life so they can live longer.

 

and my point for clueless dog owners,better a dog that runs away and mounts any bitch in sight or a nervous unstable one?

It isn't to stop them getting cancer, or to make them live longer - it is to stop unwanted puppies - the fact that they no longer have the risk of testicular cancer is a positive side effect - same as speying a bitch means they won't get a pyometra. Neither op makes them live longer, but the plus side outweighs the minus.

 

There is absolutely no evidence that castration or speying makes a dog nervous or unstable - that is totally down to handling - nothing to do with hormones.

 

hormones don't effect your mental state?

try telling my bird that next time she's on the blob,or the idiot who's decided to take steroids without a clue what they're doing.

 

well having seen it happen first hand many times i don't need anyone to show me evidence.

 

It doesn't matter that much to me,I'd never own a sterilised dog or a 'rescue' dog,and i'd shut down all rescues and destroy all strays after a week of not being claimed.

 

i just don't like to see dogs go through unnecessary stress/suffering.

If you are so experienced, then congratulations

 

If you will never own a neutered dog, then good luck avoiding cancer and pyometra.

 

If you really think this will help stop unnecessary stress and suffering, then you are deluded.

Not all that experienced at all but worked in a couple of big boarding kennels for about 8 years,and seen a clear correlation.

 

if my dogs get cancer they'll be put to sleep.

 

if i'm right in what i've seen (i could be wrong) it would mean less suffering,getting rid of rescues and just destroying all stray animals would do a lot more to stop suffering though.

8 years working in kennels ? - then I shall bow out to your superior knowledge and wish you all the best...

[neems 2,406]

I never claimed to be an expert,I just know to believe what i see with my own eyes over what people with agendas want people to think...

[RubyTex 1,957]

My dogs had his bollocks off about a year now. Since then he put on a bit of weight, which i worked off, and has shown no signs of a change in behaviour. There has been no change in his working ability either. If another dog has a go at him or the pup, he kicks off just like he did before the op. He's still got his 'manliness'.

 

I think the dogs you have experienced may have been affected by other factors