BAD EFFECTS OF SPAY-NEUTER,IGNORED BY AR EXTREMISTS

Join the Crusade Against HSUS+Anti-Pet Laws+Pass It Forward!—>

Updated from 2008 post, link added for formal paper summarizing study with  footnotes, bibliography (see link below)

A review of over 50-117 studies involving the altering of canines shows that there are major detrimental effects shown involving spaying-neutering–but these are NEVER mentioned by the extremists–instead, they only mention some of the risk reductions such as reducing uterine infections or uterine tumors.

http://www.2ndchance.info/cruciatelongtermneuter.htm

Major risks of altering a canine include the following:

Decreases life span

Increases risk of osteosarcoma (bone cancer)

Increases risk of obesity

Increases risk of bladder cancer

Increases risk  of prostatic cancer

Increases risk of splenic haemangiosarcoma in spayed bitches

Increases risk of cardiac haemangiosarcoma

Increases risk of urinary incontinence (bitches/dogs)

Increases risk of cholangiocarcinoma (cancer of bile ducts in spayed bitches

Increases risk of patellar luxation in small+medium sized dogs

…………………more……………………………….

Increases risk of adverse vaccine reactions

Increases risk of myasthenia gravis in spayed bitches

Increases risk of aggression, fearfulness

Increases cognitive impairment in aged dogs already showing signs of disease

Increases risk of peri-vulvar dermatitis, vaginities, cystitis, and recurrent urinary tract infections in early age spayed bitches.

Increases risk of benign perianal tumors in spayed bitches

Increases risk of cranial cruciate ligament injury

Example:  http://users.lavalink.com.au/theos/Spay-neuter.htm

Longevity, cancer and obesity:  Healthwise, Canine Companions for Independence (provide trained assistance dogs) found that early age neutered dogs had increased incidence of osteosarcoma, haemangiosarcoma, and obesity [8].

Not early age neutering specifically, but related to neutering at a young age and resultant increased height and/or weight; in Golden retrievers, “Both bitches and dogs neutered at < 1 year of age were significantly taller as adults than those neutered at > or = 1 year of age or intact animals.”  Further, “Among bitches and dogs, the taller the animal as an adult, the shorter the lifespan.”[65]

Now when the extremists keep telling us that ALL dogs need to be altered (whether by MSN, to allegedly “save” the shelter dogs) or just to do whatever the radicals TELL US they are doing—WHY should any of us believe anything they say?   They are not doctors, vets, or even experts on animals.  They know little and nothing.

As I have outlined for years, the extremists among us have no real desire to actually save or keep animals as pets. They don’t even believe in pet ownership (ONLY guardianship)  Just look at the following quoted verbiage from an AR, below pic………………………………..

“It doesn’t take any kind of grey matter to let two animals mate and result in more unwanted babies to make $$$ off of…”

That was a response received, when it was pointed out that the majority of dogs in shelters are NOT from breeders of dogs, but rather from owners of dogs of medium-large breeds which engaged in unplanned ties, not breeding purposely done as a livelihood or hobby.

 “We just won a MSN here (mandatory spay/neuter) – we’ll continue EVERYWHERE until the “male, juvenile mixed breed dogs, or old dogs, handicapped dogs, scared dogs, skittish dogs, unsocial dogs, and maligned breeds etc.” as you so lovingly call them find loving homes from people with a soul and a conscience and have LOVE to give them”

That was the response received when it was pointed out that dogs not readily adoptable (dogs with issues, behavior problems, biters, severe separation anxiety, overly skittish, etc)  are pushed onto people, or such dogs are made readily available on forums like Craigslist pets, while they flag off normal dogs that need homes. It was also pointed out that rescued, re-homed/shelter dogs only make up 15-18% of all dogs but are involved in 50%+ of the fatal attacks against people.

“Breeders are greedy snobs and most “bought” dogs I have seen have WAYYYYY more problems than any grateful dog at a shelter. THEY are the sick ones. THEY are the ones with the schitzoid personalities.”

This was the answer received in regard to the mixed male juvenile medium -large breed dogs that often cannot find homes, where such dogs were acquired at little to no cost and then abandoned at ages 1-2.5yr.  I never mentioned anything re a schizophrenic personality.

You are killers. No, we don’t want to see the end of being GUARDIANS (not owners) of pets, just more loving and less focused on the pedigree and conformation… A perfect body doesn’t make a better pet, and you breeders are just money grubbing idiots at the expense of your products.”

I am not a dog breeder but I believe  those who want to offer/ sell the public a dog that the public desires—- should be able to do so in a free enterprise system. I am not talking about illegal dogs, I am talking about ordinary purebred dogs, or mixed small breed dogs, or just common house dogs.  Apparently extremists disagree and believe the free enterprise system does not include dog breeders.

 We will NEVER back down, rest assured. We are growing in numbers while you lose more and more of your rights to kill. You kill dogs, that is what you do.

And there you have it.

Animal extremists with the brains. NOT.

9 thoughts on “BAD EFFECTS OF SPAY-NEUTER,IGNORED BY AR EXTREMISTS

  1. Dear Author:

    I have read your blog and am unimpressed and unconvinced. To quote a portion of the blog, you stated, “WHY should any of us believe anything they say? They are not doctors, vets, or even experts on animals. They know little and nothing.”

    Sincerely,
    Sarah Walker (Assuming the role of devil’s advocate)

  2. To be perfectly honest, we don’t give a rat’s ass what you think, so go away. Your educational opinion means nothing to us.

  3. this information is fantastic. Thank you!

    …there is one area of concern that doesn’t seem to be represented…
    the study looks at the results, But without concern of cancers.
    The question is that with not spaying my gal, other studies indicate an increase of mammary cancer risks if not spayed by the (?) 2-3 year.

    What is the increased risk of the reproductive cancers if I wait until she is past 6 years old? (I’m surprised this has not been questioned to date)

    i thank you in advance for any enlightenment to her increased cancer risk, if any.

    Ron (& Foxy)

  4. We recommend asking breeders that have studied the cases. Possibly query the dog place online, as they have tons of information.

  5. Hi,
    You state that there are many studies that show these effects on dogs, can you please cite them, my vet wants to pressure me into neutering my dog and I would like to make an informed decision on what to do and I would like to now the pros and cons of neutering.

  6. The scientific studies are out there and many of them are probably still listed on
    http://www.saveourdogs.net
    The reply below applies to dogs. Cats are an entirely separate issue and the feral cat issue will likely always be around, although it may be less of an issue in different areas.

    Many vets have bought into the belief that altering a dog is a “cure-all” and newer vets are often taught by AR vet schools, that altering is the key to everything. What altering does is to make it easier for owners to not be responsible. If your dog gets out in heat, it likely won’t get pregnant. If your dog goes into heat, it is your responsibility to keep her from dogs wanting to mount. It can be hard to do if you have multiple dogs including males. So the ARs figure that if they claim that altering everything is for the health of the dog (but fail to tell the truth about what else could happen)—-people will just believe it.

    Their REAL reason for sterilizing EVERYTHING, meaning every animal anyone wants or owns, is because Animal Rights does not believe animals are legally property. This is evidenced by the continuous attempts in Court and in legislatures, for ARs to draft laws against buying, selling, breeding, transferring, showing and even owning animals. This is shown by the Peta Orca lawsuit in San Diego, where the Peta people claimed whales have constitutional “rights.” No animal has constitutional rights. The cat case from Vermont, attempted to show a cat of $5 value was really worth whatever the owner claimed it was worth (sentimental value) because they were very attached to it. This is known as the attempt to gain a financial value (damages) via a tort claim. In the United States nearly every state holds that loss of an animal is not going to result in a tort claim for damages because there are many limits on who can recover from such things as emotional distress. The norm is that not even all family members can claim such damages, so to apportion this legal theory to animals would open a huge Pandora’s box of problems.

    In the USA, animals are basically considered property. Programs are aimed at saving many species. Programs are aimed at helping children learn safety with animals. A program to sterilize all animals is not only Animal Rights, but simply a ploy used to make everyone believe that it would work. In THEORY sterilization of all animals would work if every single female was sterilized.

    THE PROBLEM IS that this “theory” when put into practice, results are the opposite of what is desired. The lower social economic areas are seldom targeted, and are not well accepted by these areas without large efforts community-wise. Mobile spay units work but not if you don’t gain the trust of the community, and not if you don’t know how to approach it correctly. Thus seizing dogs in lower income areas will just cause people to get another one, and the cycle continues.

    Many animals in shelters are there because their owners could not keep them (job loss, home loss, divorce, etc) or many people do not know how to train animals and give up. If you think about it, animals in shelters are not due to “overpopulation” in fact, but the reality is it is a social welfare issue. Juvenile delinquency, school drop outs, poor neighborhoods, excess crime, all of these social issues result in a lower standard of care for many animals. This can be seen by going to the richest neighborhoods in any town, and you will not find their “shelter” overflowing with animals.
    It is a proven fact that the lower economic areas will have shelters with the highest numbers. Thus, only those areas affected would be the target for sterilization concerns—NOT every single person that OWNS a dog.

    As someone who has a social work background, we know this translates into how people view their standards and preferences. Many cultures do not believe in “sterilization” for animals, OR people. The sterilization concept was devised by Animal Rights to engage their lifestyle beliefs that people do not have the right to own, buy, sell, breed or transfer animals. ARs want no advertisements for animals such as puppies or kittens. Yet they will gleefully sell you THEIR puppy or kitten from their non profit group. So essentially they want all animals sterilized for their own lifestyle beliefs, that animals in their opinion, are NOT property, and that it is a moral sin to buy, sell, breed, or own an animal (since you can’t do those things to a person in theory.)

    This entire concept is shown in the Animal Law Casebook written by 3 Animal Rights Attorneys, wherein it states that IF the commercial use of animals was ELIMINATED, should the animals all be:
    1) put into sanctuary 2)sterilized 3)extinction

    As you can see, ALL 3 options given to law students indicate EXTINCTION because animals placed
    into sanctuary are never allowed to breed, and sterilized means no breeding, and extinction is obvious.
    This lifestyle belief is called the 12 Steps of Animal Rights.

    Basically it claims that animals should never be used at all. Certainly not to be bred, or bought or sold, not to be used in movies, entertainment, zoos, not for food (good heavens!) thus nearly all ARs are vegans.
    A little unknown fact is that in the nine laws of Satanic worship. one of their “laws” is that one should never kill an animal for food. Hitler comes to mind. But killing a person is ok as long as the person is not a baby. Crime is ok with Satanics, because Satanism doesn’t have the 10 Commandments, they have their “nine laws.” The Best Friends Animal Society’s founders (Utah, and soon to run the new Los Angeles shelter outlet) were of the Process Church, a Satanic group. We have that information on this site.

    Choose carefully when thinking of WHY a group keeps telling you to do something. It’s not all that obvious. Especially not to a vet. Hell, many vets can’t even I.D. numerous breeds of dogs!

  7. Interesting… I may even bring this up officially thanks to your work- as long as you cite it. Thank you, I have been always against the castration of animals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s