Mutts are Healthier than Purebreds?

Question

Can I see the scientific proof of this flimsy argument please?

Because as far as I'm aware "hybrid vigour" applies to TRUE hybrids, not mongrels.
And a well-bred, genetically tested purebred should be healthier than a randomly bred mutt.

But apparently, I, along with my university level science courses are incorrect.
Proof please?

Answer 1

''And a well-bred, genetically tested purebred should be healthier than a randomly bred mutt.''



Well yes. But where do all the nasty, sickly purebreds come from? Would you not expect a cross breed with health checked parents to be healthier than most purebreds?



Flat Coated Retrievers have some good qualities, but lack genetic diversity. Why not breed them with Labs and widen the gene pool? I guarantee my Lab/ Golden, Sheba, was better bred than any dog you ever owned.

Answer 2

Hybrid vigour really refers to any plant or animal cross breed in first generation. They are known to be bigger and healthier and more fertile than their parents. Now, if both parents had the same genetic disease then the mix will not be magically free from it. So claiming that a mix will be healthy just because its a mix is wrong.

But, when dealing with established breeds that have very small gene pool the breeders will sometimes intentionally outcross. One example would be Irish Wolfhounds, if they were not outcrossed they'd be likely extinct now. There is a Schnauzer outcross project underway in Finland now aiming at improving the health of breed.

Answer 3

First, to Kelly.

You made some excellent points.

To the op - edited again - see last add below.



The gene pool on ALL purebred dogs bred for more than 100 years is too small. It is genetically impossible to improve on, or even maintain "x" breed over "x" hundred years and not see a decline in health.



We are not nature, we have perverted natural selection. Nature would have let many purebred dogs go extinct if allowed - we've manipulated things for our own interests.



Re the hybrid vigour thing - I agree that a Lab x poodle is not a hybrid - its still a DOG. Still has 78 chromosomes in 39 pairs. A fun fact I learned last week: ALL dogs share over 98% of the SAME DNA. Which means when you cross a Lab with a poodle the variation on genes is less than 2% .



So, by that standard, I cannot believe any mutt is better off simply because its a mutt but SOME mutts no doubt will be better based on a more judicious cross. ANNA has made that point. And I agree with her.



The fact mutts are not valued here in NA means most are bred indiscriminately - hence the reason they are just as sickly as the purebreds.



Now, cross a dog with a jackal - and that (to me) is a hybrid. (Note not every Jackal can be hybridized if that is a word)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canid_hybrid



In fact, they have done just that in Russia - saw it on the "Science of Dogs" last week. Apparently, there are all of 40 of them in the world - live in Russia, the state refuses to export them out, and they are superior to any living dog for scent discrimination. (Kind of odd looking but I digress). These dogs can detect explosive residue less than a grain in a duffel bag - and they never stop working.



But point: THAT dog is a hybrid - and the fact it is all of 25 years old, crossed with a jackal which is part of the same genus as dogs, makes me think it MUST be healthier. It HAS to be.



BTW, no such thing as "average" purebred or "well bred" purebred. Impossible to quantify. You are reaching. You have a degree - you know better.

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

Edited for space (again). See last note below



@ Andromeda



Thanks for the interesting link. Funny it mentions cows - this documentary I watched last week ``The Science of Dogs`` which was produced by National Geographic - anyway, they made a comparison to cattle. The point: you can breed cows and cross them- but by and large they come out looking like a cow. You don`t get curly coated cows, or short legged cows, or cows with different kinds of tails. Cows are not dogs.



In dogs - these characteristics like (size, colour, coat, instinct) have been traced to exist in less than 2% of the DNA. Which means we mutate a dog from a Chi to a Great Dane using just 2% of the DNA.



Your article also pointed out while seeing eye dogs are doing it - the breeders dont.



So, that has always been my problem with the claim breeders are reputable- they are not. They THINK they are because they try hard. But reading a few books on genetics, breeding a few litters, and then calling yourself a geneticist who is IMPROVING the breed is just a fabrication and delusion. Its like some people here who claim to be dog trainers... just because you have done something for 30 years badly doesn`t make you more qualified. In fact, you are likely doing more harm than good because there is no foundation. Same with breeders.



The GSD is a perfect example: spondylosis was traced back to a world Seiger in the 1960`s and it has become pervasive today in the German Show line of GSD because a titled sire is sought after and EVERY breeder wanted to breed to that dog. It was documented and I`ve posted the link in past. Look at any pedigree today and tell me titles don`t factor more heavily in breeding decisions than function or form.



If and when breeders were required to DNA test their stock and register it in a 3rd party database and have it maintained such that new breedings were evaluated genetically FIRST (much like they do now in zoos with endangered species that are captive bred) then yes, we would no doubt have the collective ability to radically improve our breeds.

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

To op: FYI, dysplasia is not inherited. What this documentary highlighted is that since only 2% of DNA is responsible for all genetic mutations - specialization of a breed MUST come with consequences. Example: Dalmatian - selecting for coat colour is linked to deafness. Briard - selecting for type is linked to blindness. Since all type variations are intrinsically connected in a very small gene pool (2%) our obsessions with type is responsible for most illness. Cross a Briard x Dalmation - and you would begin to eliminate blindness and deafness. Intelligent crossing WOULD improve dogs. Society is not yet ready to make the leap.



If you want proof- you need to watch that documentary and then start again with a fresh set of facts.

Answer 4

by way of fact they are questioning approximately poorly bred purebreds that come from a small gene pool by way of fact the fool breeders purely keep breeding a similar canines by way of fact they have a similar call. nicely bred purebreds are the healthiest, by way of fact their breeders heavily elect in a thank you to easily right do away with undesirable features and develop sturdy features. The canines would come from a "smaller gene pool" whether it fairly is heavily observed to do away with problems. Mutts would come from a miles better gene pool, yet they at the instant are not likely to be from nicely bred mom and father so as that they are able to have purely as many problems as one breed or problems from each breed in its history! So, it fairly is rubbish whether lots human beings say the "smaller gene pool" hurts the breeds. additionally, appropriate now it fairly is being perpetuated by using fashion designer canine breeders, it somewhat is the purely right protection they'd desire to why they are breeding mutts so as that they are going to yell it at all and sundry that dares question their stupid breeding practices. upload: easily the technological expertise would not help the thought mutts are extra healthy than nicely bred purebred canines. A nicely bred purebred canine is wellbeing screened and is no longer extensive-unfold to be carrying undesirable features. Mutt is a usual term, please tutor me any "technological expertise" that helps the thought they are extra healthy, for the reason that they arrive from ANY genetic historic past fairly of a carfully chosen wholesome inventory? How is the thought a "larger gene pool" that still comes from each physique of those "small gene swimming pools" and therfore nevertheless carry all of those gentic features fairly of a few that are heavily monitored and eradicated is extra healthy purely by way of fact there are extra factors at artwork technological expertise?!?!? All those mutts are nevertheless a technique of all the inbreeding it took to create those unique breeds and to cultivate canines. in case you will evaluate mutts to purebreds, you will desire to look in any respect the factors till now making a end. comparing mutts to purebreds with a matching high quality breeding, the poorly bred purebreds will probably have extra themes. yet mutts are not bred with the making plans a nicely bred purebred is, so because it somewhat is an entire distinctive tale! you could no longer roll all purebreds into one ball, and there are very very very few mutt breeders available doing any actual wellbeing screening and genetic making plans so i do no longer see ANY foundation for assessment!

Answer 5

hv is just a bonus on top of the average, if hv is 2



then dogs with values for a trait of 2 and 3, the average of the puppies are 2.5+2 = 4.5



which means poorlybreed puppymill dogs despite how many breeds they have in them is not going too breed better puppies



and yes there are poor purebreeders as well, and of course if you had dogs of the same breed with those values the average for the puppies would be 2.5 so yes sure



but say the best you could get in one breed was 10, and in another breed 11, yes now the only way too get better would be through utilization of hv which could get you up on an 12.5



however those who have the good dogs arent the ones mixbreeding, they are working on making their own breed better, and so obviously geting a puppy from a 9 x 10 breeding within a breed, with a puppy average of 9.5 is heaps better even if purebreed, then the mutt at 4.5



also there need to be compatibility on several things, you got a herding breed with bad hips, want too get it better by breeding in another type of dog, say its border collie...ok friend of yours got a basset with excelent hips...are you going too get a good herding dog with good hips? or are you going too risk ending up with a dog with less herding instincts, maybe hunting instincts which it utilize on the sheep, a build which is inadequate for the job where it cant keep up with the sheep in speed and so on and forth



HV is good, but too get full effect of it, there are so many factors needing too be taken into account, and too get full effect you have too use the same pricinples as in good responsible purebreeding, the principles dont change.



edit

A breeder producing 10% puppies which would need to be put down, are a breeder taking short cuts, and trying too hide the consequenses, too try and make a profit and get quick results. Its the equalent of Out of sight, out of mind.



We are moving into a new age, the information you needed too put yourself into to have done all you could too try and make sure you breed as best as you could 5 years ago, is already outdated.

There been huge changes especially the last 10-20 years in the amount and avaliability of information and registrations, as well as awareness among breeders on what too look for and how too figure out if a kennel with dogs of interest paper wise are genuine or hiding issues.



Culling the issue dont help if its already well intigrated in the line, its generally safer too breed a sick dog from an overall healthy line, then breed a healthy dog from sick lines, the inheritability risk is bigger the higher frequensy there is in a line of something even if you only breed on the healthy dogs. So if you find yourself having issue with health on a high number of dogs out of your line, likelyhood is you got a genetic issue in your line. If it look like a duck, walk like a duck and talk like a duck, it probably is a duck.



Chix, if you got a value system, you can, because then you can calculate averages



and i am convinced its going too come, they used it for long already in other animal breeding fields, and i frequently use translators on the web too read kennel pages and such in different countries, it already is at testing stadium for some traits some places



http://www.seeingeye.org/cms/uploads/IEWG1999.pdf

article is over 10 years old, but debate it, and already then it was in use for a couple traits in some breeds by some breeding programs, but not by average breeders...however now a lot of it is just up too the national kennel clubs i think, and i wont be amased if in the comming years it starts entering the field more and more...



not with the rapid development and changeover of things the last decade, this is tomorow in dog breeding, its not culling puppies that are born, its preventing breeding them by more and more acurate information of which parent animals actually should be breed

Answer 6

I'd like to finally hear it too, since 2 of my 3 mutts have health issues and I'd really like to know show them some studies that PROVE they're supposed to be healthier than their purebred step-brothers and sisters, who by all accounts should have 3 tails each and a few extra legs between them



@Vee Dubya - that's an issue of poor breeding practices and has NOTHING to do with breeding purebred dogs vs mutts



@? - I haven't seen the 'Pedigree Dogs Exposed' BS in a while, but figured someone might pull it out of their @ss to 'win' this argument. Here's a quote from the article you didn't even bother to read "There are several scientific studies which have explored the issue and found either no difference or that crossbreeds are healthier overall". The part about them being healthier overall simply relates to the fact that breeding practices being equal, poor to excellent, mutts have a BETTER chance of winning the genetic lottery. Period. If you want to put mutt breeders up against EXCELLENT purebred breeders, then the mutts lose every time because their breeders will not allow the cost of health testing to cut into their profits. The fact that the overwhelming majority of dogs are poorly bred is the ONLY reason that mutts would come out ahead in any study, since genes don't discriminate when faulty ones are passed down

Answer 7

What morons dont get is that if you somehow breed 2 mutts and they supposedly inherit all the good qualities of their mutt parents, they ALSO inherit ALL the bad qualities too. There is no such thing as up without a down or a left without a right which is why really good breeders cull as in kill pups that dont inherit the good stuff.



The other point of this is, 90% of working dogs come out of PROVEN, PUREBRED parents, not mutts.

With an average working life of 5-7 years, as long as that dog is healthy enough to work that time, it can then retire...how many mutts are out there working compared to that 90%?

Why do working dog people go to the ends of the earth to select the right PUREBRED for the job instead of just running down to the pound?

Mutt advocates will argue this point forever out of ignorance and emotions, but, you learn to ignore them because you know better, end of. Hope I helped



ADD: Kelly...my point is that the average WORKING life of a police dog is 5-7 years. Herding dogs, same thing and the same with the S/R dogs you mentioned. No one works a 12 year old dog on a serious basis.

SERIOUS breeders DO kill pups that wont make it as working dogs all over Europe daily, its a fact of life and one that more breeders need to start doing if they want to put out great dogs as they should.

NO serious breeder breeds because of the love, they do it to produce great working dogs AND make as much money as they can out of it, its a business and dogs of that caliber are not cheap to buy.

Next, no Kelly, its NOT adopt, is PAY, money exchanges hands, its called selling and buying, adoption is reserved for human kids and we dont need to confuse them and make them think they are on the same level with an animal.



ADD: Kelly, thanks for the emotional rant all amateur pet owners are known for. Not a single iota of intelligence in there. You have been cleaning dog sht for 20 years, I have been TRAINING working police and patrol dogs for 32. Love dogs? NO, not the way you do, but, I will tell you this, NO ONE is as close to their WORKING dog as I am to mine.

Regardless of what you think and claim, what I stated here IS REALITY, period, end of, please take your rantings somewhere else and have a great day!!



ADD: Chix, you are indeed lucky to have me here and I am a HUGE pillar in my society. Yes, my dog is here to serve me in a WORKING capacity, not the creepy, sick one you think of...tells you a lot about some lonely woman whose FIRST priority is her dogs..must be a wonderful social life...

The care I provide for my dogs is better then anything you do for yours, trust me, I depend on my dogs, not travel down waterways with them and think they "feel me" because of some magical bond.

At least I am not hiding behind some name of a regular in here with no email and talk about some "secret facility" you trained at that happens to pump out more sport dogs then you can count.

Have a wonderful evening and please, be kind to your dogs...



ADD:Chix you love to insinuate and such about trainers with 30 plus years of experience...tell you what..MY experience is something I have PROVEN track of, do you have that?

My experience can be tested ANYTIME, can yours? When you have turned out as many GREAT working dogs as I have, then you can talk to me, til then, please keep fantasizing and let ME handle the serious training stuff.

Answer 8

i love mutts

Answer 9

You are not going to find anyone that provide proof because it doesn't exist. As you you said, a well-bred, tested purebred should be healthier.

Answer 10

Never gonna happen. All anyone will bring up is inbreeding - that's it. There are NO valid long term studies on this.



Not to mention its not just genetics that affect a dog's overall health. And you know the number of health issues common to MANY breeds.

Answer 11

While none of us are experts in genetics It HAS been shown ( in studies in Germany,Sweden, Australia, and the US) that mixed breed dogs do have a greater longevity than their purebred counter parts. Thanks to terrible breeding practices, and breeders being more concerned with conformation and performance in the show ring then the health of the dog. Many genetic health issues are recessive and can be "bred out" particularly when two breeds are crossed.



Several studies have shown that mixed-breed dogs have a health advantage. A German study finds that "Mongrels require less veterinary treatment". Studies in Sweden have found that "Mongrel dogs are less prone to many diseases than the average purebred dog" and, referring to death rates, “Mongrels were consistently in the low risk category”.



In one landmark study, the effect of breed on longevity in the pet dog was analyzed using mortality data from 23,535 pet dogs. The data was obtained from North American veterinary teaching hospitals. The median age at death was determined for pure and mixed breed dogs of different body weights. Within each body weight category, the median age at death was lower for pure breed dogs compared with mixed breed dogs. The median age at death was "8.5 years for all mixed breed dogs, and 6.7 years for all pure breed dogs" in the study.



A 2003 study in Denmark also found "Higher average longevity of mixed-breed dogs (grouped together).





http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9158552



In my own experience (20 years as a tech) mixed breeds do outlive their purebred counter parts by several years and while they can all suffer from the same disease all dogs are susceptible to, they are less likely to suffer from genetic disorders.



ADD: @ Greekman..not really sure i get your point.What do working dogs have to do with genetic flaws? Good reputable breeders DO NOT kill puppies, and if they do they need to have their a**es thrown in jail! As for dogs being able to work 5-7 years...um....ok. Is that why i had a Mixed breed ( who was a rescue) that did search and rescue for 8 years? I have a friend that adopted a border collie mix who was slated to be euthanized, he is 12 and is still herding. BYBs are a blight yes..puppy mills? I have gone undercover in them and helped to shut a couple down ( no easy task) the fact is, there are millions of adoptable dogs out there being killed by the thousands on a daily basis, You love animals..ADOPT..dont SHOP. I love dogs of all breeds, and there are some excellent breeders out there. There are also a TON of morons calling themselves "reputable breeders". A good breeder does it for the love of the breed ( breeding OUT genetic flaws) NOT the bottom line.



ADD: Greekman..you are seriously warped and confused. And if you dont love animals why are you answering questions about them? having been a technician for 20+ years, and doing rescue, training, and having working dogs I can confidently say you are wrong on all counts. If anyone kills a puppy for not living up to what they consider breed standard, I would certainly have them run in and prosecuted for animal cruelty. As for a 12 yeard old dog not being able to work, what do you call being the head herding dog on a 2500 head cattle ranch? I have a few friends that work in animal welfare in the UK, and I certainly intend to ask them about this practice of killing puppies. Im sure they will tell me it is not "normal" practice. And considering what I know from them of even slaughtering standards and laws in the UK, I will confidently say you are full of crap. Im guessing that you are one of those people that would purchase from puppy mills as well. The idiotic theory that money buys perfection. Seriously, try to bulls**t someone that doesn't know better.



ADD: You have a great day too Greekman..I am very sorry for your pets as they are obviously mere commodities to you. And you have it a little mixed up ...Im the one that can help save your dogs life. Not that you would take him to the vet. Im sure you would not bother considering that , according to you, you could just buy another one. Its so very sad that there are people like you in the world contributing to the pain and suffering of dogs. Just the fact that you promote animal cruelty is horrible. But I realize that anything I say would be wasted on you....You cant have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.



ADD: @ Chix..Thank you for your intelligent, well written response. Dont worry, it would take much more than a cruel, single-minded, twit to run me off! LOL Having worked for the AHS ( Associated Humane Society) for many years, I have had to deal with much worse. Great points on the "hybrid" theory.

Answer 12

I can't cite sources without doing a little searching- but purebreds have inherent genetic defects that stay with the breed BECAUSE they don't get bred out. Many of them are recessive. Problems with joints, heart, eyes, skin diseases, and even cancer are common within select breeds.

Answer 13

I'm with ya! Thumbs up! People are constantly screaming that myth form the top of the hills!!

Answer 14

I have also asked to see proof of this, many times. No one has produced any studies or provided links to this.

Answer 15

No.



Lies spread by BYBers and mutt owners.

Answer 16

Here it is, written by a vet, all the references to the studies are at the bottom of the article.



http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2011/01/hybrid-vigour-fact-or-fiction.html