The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club of Southern California

 

 



 


Joan C. Hendricks, V.M.D., Ph.D. Dean of Veterinary Medicine
The Gilbert S. Kahn School of Veterinary Medicine
University of Pennsylvania

 

Dr. Hendricks Opinion of Pedigree Dogs Exposed

 

This piece is in response to the BBC Pedigree Dogs Exposed and the Today show piece that highlighted the BBC program.

 

 

In 2008 BBC aired “Purebred Dogs Exposed”, a program that had a dramatic impact on the purebred dog world in the UK.  Recently, the show aired in the US on BBC America and was promoted on the Today Show.  There is great concern among breeders and those of us who work closely with breeders that the American public might have a negative view of purebred dogs as a result of the documentary, as was clearly the case in the UK.

Because a faculty member of my school was interviewed both for the original documentary and for the Today Show promotion, I received a lot of feedback from breeders. After a discussion with Patty Kanan and Carol Williams, I agreed to write this commentary for the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club as I am concerned about the potential impact of this documentary for several reasons. 

The documentary focused on a few breeds, among them the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.  It highlighted syringohydromyelia, a disease that presents with visually dramatic images. Not once was it mentioned that Cavalier breeders in the UK and the US for years have supported research efforts to eliminate this disease and other inherited problems in the breed; studies are ongoing to determine modes of inheritance and develop of genetic tests.

That same negative focus was applied to other breeds’ problems highlighted in the “expose”: epilepsy in boxers, breathing problems in bulldogs, pugs, and Pekingese, structural problems in German shepherds, and dermatitis in Westies. There was no mention of the efforts by breed clubs and the Kennel Club (UK) to support studies of these health problems in order to find ways to eliminate them.

Such negative emphasis and repeated mention of the term “inbreeding” implied that purebred dogs are all closely bred. Implied, but not said, was the notion that mixed breed dogs are healthier. Already the public is enthralled by claims made by promoters of mixed breeds – Labradoodles, Goldendoodles, and many other crosses of poodles and toy breeds as well as small hounds – all with the claim of cuteness and no human allergic reactions. However, high-quality scientific studies of mixed breed dogs in comparison to purebred dogs are sorely lacking.

In contrast, there are many studies of specific breeds.  Breeders of purebred dogs, individually, through their breed clubs, and through the Canine Health Foundation, have for decades supported research at veterinary and other institutions to ensure knowledge about canine diseases, treatment, and above all, prevention. These efforts not only benefit individual breeds, but frequently other breeds, mixed breed dogs, and in some cases, humans.

Unlike human health studies, where the National Institutes of Health has an annual budget in the billions, there is no public funding for such studies, so improvements in canine health rely on dog-lovers to fund them.  In theory, organizations that support animal advocacy, like PETA, HSUS, and the ASPCA could also be a source of funding—they certainly have extraordinary levels of funds—but these organizations have other priorities. None supports studies to understand and improve animal health.  The biggest organization that supports canine research outside the purebred dog community is the Morris Animal Foundation—and its funding is spread among many species of animals, not just dogs.

It is really in the dog breeders’ hands to react appropriately to mitigate the negative potential impact if the general public takes “Purebred Dogs Exposed” to heart with the same unquestioning emotional intensity that they did in the UK.  Certainly I would expect that veterinary institutions would wholeheartedly support a rational and organized response—I certainly would. I note that the AKC, through the convening of the Canine Health Advisory Panel, whose members are highly qualified and highly independent, is working to develop clear, measurable improvements in canine health.

When the Today show promotional piece aired, we received a number of contacts from breeders and others, many negative and some very positive.  At the University of Pennsylvania's School of Veterinary Medicine, we value and encourage academic freedom for all our professors to express their opinions, as they have come by them through years of rigorous training and research. As such, Dr. Serpell is entitled to express his opinions.

Our goal at PennVet is to promote animal health and we consider the AKC an important partner in advancing understanding of genetics and disease. In fact, our faculty works hand-in-hand with the AKC and I serve on the AKC's independent canine health advisory board. We recognize, too, that responsible breeders who aim to better the health and lineage of purebred dogs out-number irresponsible breeding practices and we aim to educate and support those who do act responsibly and ethically.

I believe this may be a moment for breed clubs to use their place in US society to teach the public about canine health problems, what they are doing to identify, treat and prevent them, when they DO have the microphone such as at the Invitational and Westminster dog shows.  The AKC and breed clubs have an honored and important role—fostering healthy breeding practices, supporting canine health research, supporting training to make dogs better citizens—and of course their owners, too.  Seize this high ground and raise it even higher—with the happy collaboration of individual scientists interested in dogs, veterinary schools, and foundations like the Canine Health Foundation and the Morris Animal Foundation.

The CHIC seems to be an excellent start. Here breeders and future owners can obtain information about the health test outcome of breeding animals.  Be prepared, adopt real measures to monitor health problems and promote rational measures that prevent them, supported by science.  By writing this opinion piece I hope I am showing that academic veterinarians are very likely to be strongly supportive and to help you get your message out.

Joan C. Hendricks, V.M.D., Ph.D.
The Gilbert S. Kahn Dean of Veterinary Medicine School of Veterinary Medicine University of Pennsylvania
110 Rosenthal Building
3800 Spruce Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104-6044