Health Testing & Transparency
Health Testing: The Minimum, Going Beyond It, and Transparency
Health testing is one of those subjects where I think we sometimes get so focused on whether someone “health tests” that we forget there are several layers to that statement.
There is a difference between meeting the minimum health testing requirements for your breed, doing the additional recommended testing, and choosing to go beyond both because you want as much information as reasonably possible about the dogs you are breeding.
And then there is another piece that I think matters just as much:
What do you do with the results when they aren’t what you hoped for?
The OFA breed-specific recommendations are a great starting point. Depending on the breed, there are tests recommended for CHIC eligibility, additional optional tests, and then there are other evaluations breeders may choose to do even though they aren’t specifically listed as required or optional for that breed.
Personally, I would rather have more information than less.
One of my dogs is a good example.
She had OFA preliminary hip radiographs that were rated Good, but I still chose to PennHIP her because I wanted another objective assessment of her hips. Now, at five years old, I plan to have her OFA hips, elbows, shoulders, and spine evaluated.
Why?
Because she hasn’t lived a sedentary life.
She has worked, trained, run, jumped, herded, shown, traveled, and lived like an active dog. I’m interested not only in what her joints looked like when she was young, but how they are holding up after five years of actually using her body.
That information matters to me.
But here’s where health testing gets uncomfortable.
Sometimes you test and you don’t get the result you wanted.
A hip doesn’t pass. A shoulder doesn’t pass. An echo finds something. Maybe it’s unilateral. Maybe it’s mild. Maybe it’s something you genuinely didn’t expect.
IMO, hiding those results does absolutely nothing to help a breed.
In fact, I think the lack of transparency can actively hurt a breed because now other breeders are making decisions without having all of the information available to them.
I’d much rather hear:
“We tested. This is what we found. This is what we know. This is what we don’t know. And this is why we made the breeding decision we made.”
Because here’s another part of this conversation that gets lost:
A failing health test does not automatically mean a dog needs to be washed from a breeding program.
Health testing is incredibly important, but it is one piece of the entire dog.
You also have temperament, structure, working ability, pedigree, longevity, genetic diversity, siblings, parents, offspring, other health information, and what you’re breeding that dog TO.
Breeding decisions aren’t made in a vacuum.
A unilateral finding or less-than-perfect result may be something a breeder decides they can responsibly breed around with an appropriate mate and careful follow-up. Another result may be serious enough that breeding that dog simply isn’t worth the risk.
That requires judgment, information, and honesty.
Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
At the same time, we have to be willing to admit when something in our breeding program isn’t working.
Kennel blindness is real.
There are breeders in every breed who become so attached to their lines that they continue forward despite seeing the same health problems, poor temperaments, structural issues, or other undesirable traits appearing again and again.
Yes, it took years to build your program.
Yes, you may have generations invested in it.
Yes, starting over or bringing in completely different bloodlines can be heartbreaking.
But sometimes your program took a left when you should have taken a right, and you’ve traveled so far down that road that the responsible thing to do is admit you’re off course.
Years invested in something don’t automatically make it worth continuing.
Then there is the opposite extreme.
The breeders who constantly announce how transparent, ethical, and full of integrity they are while doing the absolute bare minimum required testing, then using that minimum as proof that they’re somehow doing more than everyone else.
Being loud about transparency isn’t the same thing as actually practicing it.
I think there has to be a happy medium.
Do the testing.
Do more testing when there is a reasonable reason to do it.
Submit and share the results, including the ugly ones.
Don’t quietly make an unfavorable result disappear.
Look at the entire dog and the entire pedigree before making a breeding decision.
Be willing to explain why you made that decision when someone genuinely asks.
And most importantly, be willing to change course when the information in front of you tells you that you should.
Health testing isn’t about collecting a bunch of passing certificates to hang on the wall.
It’s about collecting information.
And information is only useful to a breed when we’re willing to be honest about what it tells us.
Comments