PET TIP Thursday, May 9 2013 

Ticks Disease Transmission

Ticks are considered excellent carriers and transmitters of various diseases.

Ticks within the Ixodidae (hard tick) family transmit the majority of disease. The brown dog tick and the American dog tick are the most common carriers of disease in the dog. This includes ehrlichia, Rocky Mountain spotted fever and Lyme disease.

Although all ticks have the potential to transmit disease, the vast majority of tick bites are disease-free. Still it is a good idea to check your pet frequently for any signs of ticks, after he or she comes back from a potential tick infested area, even if using tick prevention medications.

Finding these pests and quickly removing them are important methods of controlling potential disease. The sooner ticks are removed from your pet, the less likely any disease transmission will occur.

The best method of controlling disease transmission is through a combination of tick avoidance and using tick preventative medications.


Good Read Tuesday, Mar 12 2013 

Thais is a major reason that I work soooo hard to get America & others to not spay so early.
That’s why thee dog chastity belt is needed.
This is a good READ:
The Ethics and Responsibilities of Spaying and Neutering By John Cargill, M.A., M.B.A., M.S. and Susan Thorpe-Vargas, M.S., Ph.D. There are many good reasons to alter your companion pet, but the question that lingers is when is the best time? Early spay and neutering is an indelicate, …controversial and emotionally charged subject at best. Should you surgically render your dog(s) incapable of reproducing? If so, when? The answers to these questions vary depending upon the situation. In ou r culture, castration (neutering) has such negative connotations that many are reluctant even to consider such an option, even though the financial costs and risks involved are much lower than spaying. On the other hand, spaying, similar to the human hyst erectomy, generally is considered routine. In this article we examine the medical, financial, social and ethical aspects involved and the responsibilities that should be embraced by parent breed clubs, local dog clubs and registries such as the American K ennel Club. Ethical, Social and Financial Benefits Of Neutering Every year U.S. shelters euthanize between 11 and 19 million cats and dogs,#1 and the pet population continues to grow. The Humane Society of the United States estimates that 2,500 to 3,000 dogs and cats are born every hour.2 From these statistic s we can glean: 1) there are too many dogs being bred, 2) too many dogs are placed with marginal owners and 3) dogs have joined the ranks of disposable commodities in our society. There are many considerations to take into account when discussing spaying and neutering animals. Among the most important are the ethical, financial and social responsibilities of the greater public. Ethical – Is it right to put unwanted dogs down as if their lives have little or no meaning or value? Does a dog, as a potential pet, have such intrinsic merit that its life becomes important to society? Although both authors feel dogs are should be categorized as livestock, we believe that as pets, companions and helpers, dogs should be placed in a special category of livestock because of their contributions to humanity. For those who would say the contribution of companionship is minor compared with the contribution of animals to the human food chain that gives life, we counter with the concept that animals part of the human food chain are commodities whereas companions of any species rarely, i f ever, are. Therefore, we claim there is a moral imperative to address the problem of unwanted dogs with appropriate spay and neuter policies for all but breeding stock animals. If putting one dog down can be considered bad, how much worse is it to have to put many times that down? It has been estimated that one pregnant female in six years together with her offspring could produce an astounding total of 67,000 dogs.3 Financial -The cost of running humane shelters and animal control programs nationally is tremendous. With approximately more than 6,000 shelters, financial estimates run from hundreds of millions to billions of dollars each year.4 Included in those estimates are costs for animal control officers, shelter administration, general operations and facilities. None of this comes cheaply. Costs for animal control facilities usually are born through taxation and through animal licensing fees. In t he case of privately funded shelters, support comes from a lot of donations. Is it fair that nondog owners and responsible dog owners should shoulder the burden of animal control costs and shelter costs? Probably not, but who said it had to be fair? Would it be more fair if dog owners beared the entire cost? Probably so, if and only if all dog owners contributed equally, but our country has been unable to devise any way, given the current legal and political climate, to ensure all dog owners contribute equally. Whose burden is it? Nationally, we suspect many more dogs are unlicensed than licensed. Some municipal and county jurisdictions have become oppressive in their licensing requirements with the result that many dog owners just don’t bother anymore. While the intent of local ordinances is to solve a problem, more often than not it is the highly visible dog fancier living in a residential area that is targeted. Yet, it is not these folks who have the stray dogs; it is not these folks giving away puppies out of a cardboard box in the local supermarket parking lot to marginal would-be dog owners. Furthermore, it is not these folks who are breeding litters so their children can witness and understand the miracles of birth and of life. Although some dog fanciers may contribute to the problem, we safely can say that as a group, they are not the root or principal cause. Even so, it is not that unusual for purebred animals to be discarded. Almost every breed has some type of national or local rescue program. Stray dogs constitute a community health hazard, too, and thus cannot be ignored by any responsible commun ity leadership. The problem is shared by all but caused by whom? What Are The Medical Ramifications? Medical questions concerning prepubertal gonadectomy (early spay/neuter at between 7 and 8 weeks of age) only recently have been addressed by peer reviewed studies. A leader in the early spay and neuter movement has been the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ Angell Memorial Animal Hospital in Boston. The hospital mainly was concerned about the use of anesthesia, special surgical techniques, hypothermia and post-surgical complications of the surgery in neonates. In partnership with its shelter, Angell developed definitive procedures and protoc ols for safely dealing with the very young animal. It is surprising, but the studies showed the neonates actually did better and had fewer complications than older animals. (#5) Additional studies are needed, however, to evaluate the long-term results and complications from this type of surgery.6# There also are some specific questions and concerns being raised about the effects of early spaying caused by other research. Although no animal studies are available yet, some human research shows bone mass in young girls is seriously compromise d if appropriate sex hormones are not available. (#7) This would increase the chance of stress fractures later in life, but one cannot assume this would affect canines the same way. Another long-term concern was incontinence in the s payed female, in that primary sexual characteristics were not as large or as well-developed among the early spay and neutered group.#8 The authors know of at least two studies that are addressing these issues. #9 Although the answers are not in yet on the full effects of spaying and neutering, research shows there are some definite outcomes: Physiological Effects of Altering. It does appear, however, that excitability and activity levels may be measurably increased in the castrated dog; however, no such finding has been made in the case of the spayed bitch.10# Closure of growth plates in the long bones is delayed measurably in the neutered dog, with the result that long bones continue growing past the normal end of growth. While neutered dogs and spayed females will grow taller than their intact counterparts, the additional length of long bone is negligible.#11 Probably the most significant physiological change in both spaying and neutering is lower metabolic rate. Spayed and neutered animals thus have a tendency to gain weight.12-16 Psychological Effects of Altering. Contrary to popular opinion, a spayed or neutered dog does not become a “wimp.” Don’t take our word for it. Go out and challenge an altered male of a breed noted for its guarding and territorial instincts and find out for yourself. The noticeable psychological change is that the neutered males will not go bonkers over the females in season, and spayed females will not be exciting the males. For animals that will not be used for breeding, the argument can be made that they w ill be happier and better off neutered or spayed. An added advantage is that if a bitch is spayed before reaching sexual maturity, the incidence of mammary cancer is diminished significantly. 17,18 Our Responsibility To The Dogs Now that we’ve established pet overpopulation is a social problem and spaying and neutering can ease the ills, what about humankind’s responsibility to its canine companions and what can we do to stop the problem before it starts? The answer is to breed only the best dogs. Is it ethical to breed other than the healthiest and best animals? To do so is to cause predictable genetic disease, pain and suffering in future generations of dogs. This practice probably was not envis ioned when “dominion over all the animals of the earth” was written. Without the pressures of natural selection favoring survival of the fittest, humans have the ability to program in a range of genetically transmitted diseases, such as canine h ip dysplasia, hypothyroidism, von Willebrand’s disease, progressive retinal atrophy and others, that have become prevalent. The authors believe and encourage those who breed or own dogs to alter all but their breeding stock and to screen that stock for genetic problems. Any animal determined to have a serious genetically transmitted disease should be removed immediate ly from breeding consideration and altered. What else can be done? Let’s take a look at the role of individual breeders, commercial breeders and retail pet stores. Individual breeders. Responsibility lies with breeders to evaluate their animals and the puppies they sell. Breeders should produce only the number of litters they can be sure to place in good homes and consider spay/neuter contracts. AKC has a w onderful program for supporting spay/neuter contracts we advise they check out.19 However, if breeders spayed or neutered their pet-quality puppies before they went to their new homes, contractual compliance wouldn’t be necessary. Commercial breeders. It is easy to take potshots at commercial breeders and to call them puppy mills. Some certainly are puppy mills run under deplorable conditions; others are well-managed agricultural activities. Until such time as dogs lose their status as agricul tural commodities, puppy mills will compete with hobby breeders for the same customers. By breeding only the best, fanciers may put pressure on commercial breeders to perform to a higher standard, which they will have to do in order to compete. Public awa reness at the pet store level is beginning to cause commercial breeders to select their breeding stock more carefully and to influence local legislators to enact puppy lemon laws. Retail stores. People in large numbers still buy puppies from pet stores, and many of them are satisfied customers. It is the rare occasion a pet store owner discourages a buyer from purchasing a pup because he or she was unsure it would fit into the buyer’s li festlye. Retail stores have a tremendous need for speed in placing puppies because they lose their appeal after only a few weeks in the store. Various ordinances have been passed in many localities and states prohibiting very young puppies in pet stores, but this has increased the pressure on the retail store to sell to anyone who walks in the door with a sufficient amount of money in hand whether or not he or she should have a puppy. We doubt this is going to change. Until society certifies humans for parenthood, it is doubtful there will be a certification for dog ownership other than, “Do you have enough money to buy this dog?” With this said, we believe the retai l store does have a moral obligation to the puppies it sells as well as a fiduciary obligation to its owners and investors. See Figure 1 for statistics extracted from the 1996 National Pet Owners Survey conducted by the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association.20 No distinction was made between purebred registered dogs and others, but we can conclude that the majority of dogs sold through pet stores are purebred because that is where the profit margin lies. Limitations In Competition? Many dog lovers want a purebred dog or there would not be so many people involved in the fancy, and puppy mills_a major source of purebred dogs_would not continue to exist. Registries such as the United Kennel Club and the AKC and the parent bree d clubs, by virtue of their declaring what is or is not a purebred dog and whether or not it may or may not compete in group and Best in Show competition, traditionally have excluded spayed and neutered animals from those higher levels of competition.21,2 2 If we decided only breeding stock should be left reproductively intact, the majority of competitors would be altered instead of the other way around. AKC regulations do allow the competition of spayed and neutered animals in many field and performance events.#23 However, some anomalies exist according to the parent breed club’s wishes: Beagles 24 and Basset Hounds #25 must be intact for field trials, and in lure coursing, spayed/neutered animals may compete, but monorchid and cryptorchid dogs may not compete.26 If the AKC and other registries would open up all competition to spayed or neutered animals, there would be less reason to keep animals intact. What Is The Answer? There are no easy or quick solutions to the problem of unwanted dogs numbering in the millions. Lemon laws may help increase the health of both puppy mill and hobby breeder puppies, thus reducing the number abandoned to their fate at shelters for health reasons. To address this situation, the HSUS once proposed a national breeding ban for dogs and cats. It since has backed off from that position and is concentrating on spay and neuter programs, which appear to be working, albeit slowly, throughou t the United States. Veterinarians for some years now have been donating time to spay and neuter clinics. Given the legal system, our current views of democracy and our understanding of “dominion” over animals, and America’s general rejection of Gestapo tactics, it only is going to be through educating the public about the overpopulation pr oblem and the fate of animals at shelters and by restricting breeding to the numbers of animals the market can bear that the excess will be trimmed. Spay and neuter programs are a very good start. There are so many unwanted dogs in the United States that the humane shelters have been overflowing for years. As dog fanciers we have the responsibility to breed only the most fit animals and to breed only a quantity that the market will bear. A ny increases above market demand will result in more dogs being sent to shelters for slaughter, however humanely it may be done. The veterinary profession also plays an essential role in addressing the problem of pet overpopulation. It seems that surgical neutering is the only viable option, but when that surgery should take place is still a controversial issue among clini cians. Medically, there is no reason not to spay and neuter; the only question is “When?” Costs of spaying and neutering are minimal. Only by reducing the number of animals capable of breeding will we be able to reduce the excess dog population and the obscene numbers of animals put to death. References 1. “National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy,” National Shelter Census:1994 results, Fort Collins, Colo., pp.1-2. 2. The Humane Society of the United States. Close-up Report. Washington, D.C., 1983. 3. HSUS Web site page, Pet Population Fact Sheet, 1997, 4. John Snyder, Society of Animal Welfare Administrators, personal communication, October 1 and 17, 1997. 5. A.M. Faggella and M.G. Aronsohn, “Evaluation of Anesthetic Protocols for Neutering 6-to14-week-old Pups,” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, Vol. 205. No. 2., July 15, 1994, pp. 308-314. 6. Lisa M. Howe,” Short-term Results and Complications of Prepubertal Gonadectomy in Cats and Dogs,” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, Vol. 211, No. 1, July 1, 1997. PAGES?? 7. M.P. Warren MP and J. Brooks-Gunn, “Lack of Bone Accretion and Amenorrhea: Evidence for a Relative Osteopenia in Weight-bearing Bones,” Journal of Clinical Endochronology and Metabolism, Vol. 72, No. 4, April 1991, pp. 847-853. 8. K.R. Salmeri, M. Bloomberg, S.L. Scruggs and V. Shille, “Gonadectomy in Immature Dogs: Effects on Skeletal, Physical, and Behavioral Development,” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, Vol. 198, No. 7 , April 1991, pp. 1193-1203. 9. Ann Marder, D.V.M., Boston, and Tom Lane, D.V.M., Ph.D., University of Florida, Veterinary School of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla., personal communications, September 1997. 10. Salmeri. 11. Ibid. 12. S.W. Crane, “Occurrence and Management of Obesity in Companion Animals,” Journal of Small Animal. Practice, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 275-282. 13. C. Sloth, “Practical Management of Obesity in Dogs and Cats, “Journal of Small Animal Practice, 1992,33:178-182 ?? 14. R.S. Anderson, “Obesity in the Dog and Cat,” in C.S.G. Grunsell and F.W.G. Hill (eds), The Veterinary Annual, John Wright & Sons Ltd., 1973, pp. 182-186. 15. K.A. Houpt, et al., “Effect of Sex and Reproductive Status on Sucrose Preference, Food Intake and Body Weight of Dogs,” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 1979,174, pp.083-1085?? 16. M.V. Root, S.D. Johnnston and P.N. Olson, “Effect of Prepuberal and Postpuberal Gonadectomy on Heat Production Measured on Indirect Calorimetry in Male and Female Domestic Cats,” American Journal of Veterinary Researc h, Vol. 57, No 3, March 1996, pp.375-374. 17. R. Schneinder, “Comparison of Age, Sex and Incidence Rates in Humans and Canine Breast Cancer,” Cancer, Vol. 26, 1970, pp 419-426. 18. R. Schneinder, C.R. Dorn, and D. Taylor, “Factors Influencing Canine Mammary Cancer Development and Post-surgical Survival Rates,” Journal of the National Institutes of Cancer, Vol. 45, 1969, pp. 1249-1251. 19. AKC Registration Regulations, spay/neuter contracts, “A written agreement between buyer and seller to the effect that AKC registration papers will not be furnished to the buyer until the seller has been furnished with evid ence that the dog has been neutered or spayed is acceptable under our Rules.” To order a copy of the spay/neuter contracts or any of the the AKS’s books of rules and regulations, contact them at 5580 Centerview Drive, Raleigh, N.C. 27606; (919) 233-9 767. 20. American Pet Products Manufacturers Association, 255 Glenville Road, Greenwich, Conn. 06831;(800) 452-1225. 21. AKC Rules Applying to Dog Shows, 7/01/97, Chapter 11. “Dog Show Entries Condition of Dogs Affecting Eligibility,” Section 8, Change in Appearance, “A dog which is blind, deaf, castrated, spayed, or which has been changed in appearance by artificial means except as specified in the standard for its breed, or a male which does not have two normal testicles normally located in the scrotum, may not compete at any show and will be disqualified except that a castrated male may be entered as Stud Dog in the Stud Dog Class except as specified in the standard for its breed, or a male which does not have two normal testicles normally located in the scrotum, may not compete at any show and will be disqualified except that a castrated male may be entered as Stud Dog in the Stud Dog Class and a spayed bitch may be entered as Brood Bitch in the Brood Bitch Class.” 22. AKC Rules Applying to Dog Shows, 7/01/97, Chapter 11, “Dog Show Entries Condition of Dogs Affecting Eligibility,” Section 8, Change in Appearance, “Neutered dogs and spayed bitches would be allowed to compete in Veterans Classes only at independent specialties and/or those all-breed shows which do not offer any competitive classes beyond Best of Breed.” 23. AKC Obedience Regulations, 7/01/97, Chapter 1, “General Regulations,” Section 16. Disqualification, Ineligibility, Excusals and Changes in Appearance of Dogs, “Spayed bitches, castrated dogs, monorchid or cryptor chid males, and dogs that have faults which would disqualify them under the standards for their breeds, may compete in Obedience Trials if otherwise eligible under these Regulations.” 24. AKC Beagle Field Trial Rules, “Standard Procedures,” 2-B. 25. AKC Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedures for Basset Hounds, “Standard Procedures,” 2-B. 26. AKC Regulations for Lure Coursing Test and Trials, Chapter I, TITLE Section 3, Eligibility of Sighthounds, “Spayed and neutered hounds are eligible to participate. Monorchid and cryptorchid hounds are ineligible to partici pate.”

The Decision to Spay/neutert Pets Just Got More complicated Tuesday, Mar 5 2013 

Ben Hart likes to spin my head around. He is a veterinary behaviorist from the University of California at Davis, and we get together every year at the annual meeting of the International Society for Anthrozoology. Last year in Cambridge he told me about a new research project he was conducting on the downside of routine neutering of pets. Then he swore me to secrecy.

Unwanted pets have been a problem in the United States for a long time. For example, in 1867, the streets of New York were awash with homeless dogs. The city council took action. Stray dogs were impounded and drowned en masse via a device dubbed “the canine bath tub.” The “tub” was an iron crate seven feet long, four feet high, and five feet across. Forty-eight dogs at a time were jammed into the heavy cage. It was then lifted up by a crane, swung over the East River and submerged. Ten minutes later, the cage was hauled to the surface, the carcasses removed, and the cage reloaded with another batch of strays. Dog catchers could kill 750 animals in a seven-hour shift.

In the 1970s, roughly 24 million dogs and cats were killed each year in American animal shelters. By 2007, however, the number had dropped to four million. There are a couple of reasons for the dramatic decline in unwanted pet euthanasia. One is that animal protection organizations succeeded in convincing Americans that adopting a shelter dog is morally preferable to purchasing a purebred puppy. (This trend has devastated the American Kennel Club. AKC puppy registrations plummeted from one and a half million in 1992 to less than 600,000 in 2010.)

An equally important reason for the decrease in unwanted pets is the success of the spay and neuter movement. Due to the efforts of animal protection organizations, a large majority of dogs and cats in the United States are now “neutered.” (This practice is more accurately referred to as “de-sexing” in some countries.) Indeed, responsible pet ownership is now equated with having your companion animal’s testicles or ovaries removed, and in some communities it is illegal to allow a dog to reproduce without a special permit. Given the benefits of having fewer homeless dogs and cats, it would seem that de-sexing our pets is a no-brainer. But, it turns out that removing an animal’s testicles or ovaries can increase its chances of getting cancer, joint diseases, and dementia.

The Bad News: Neutering Can Be Bad For Your Pet’s Health

Ben’s research team examined the records of 759 golden retrievers seen at the UC-Davis veterinary hospital between 2000 and 2009. (Here is a copy of their article.) They focused on goldens because of the breed’s popularity and their propensity for cancer and bone and joint disorders.) Here is a summary of the results. (Note that “early-neutered” animals were de-sexed before they were one year old.)

Hip dysplasia — twice as common in early-neutered males as intact males. No effect on females.

Knee ligament damage — higher incidence in early-neutered males and females.

Lymphatic cancer — three times more common in early neutered males than intact males. No effect in females.

Cancer of blood vessel walls — four times more common in late-neutered than intact females. No effect in males.

Mast cell tumors — significantly more common in late-neutered females. No effect in males.

In short, the researchers concluded that early and/or late neutering increased the risks of all five diseases in golden retrievers. Their study was restricted to one breed, but other studies have also reported deleterious consequences of de-sexing healthy dogs. For example, castrated elderly male dogs are at greater risk for dementia. And another recent study found that neutering increased aggression problems in female dogs.

As you might expect, the relative health costs and benefits of routine neutering on the health of individual animals have become a topic of controversy. (For reviews, see here and here.) For example, the American Veterinary Medical Association’s brochure on spay and neuter omits any mention of the negative effects of de-sexing pets. Yet several recent reviews of the impact of neutering on dogs concluded that the negative health effects may well outweigh the positive effects. Indeed, after reviewing dozens of research articles on de-sexing pets, a research team headed by Clare Palmer of Texas A&M University wrote (here), “Our overall conclusion is that routine neutering of companion animals, and notably male dogs, is not morally justified.” Ouch.

The Moral Dilemma

No one wants to go back to the days when 24 million unwanted cats and dogs got the blue needle each year. But here is the ethical quandary. While neutering reduces suffering in general, it may well put your individual pet at greater risk of a serious disease such as cancer. It’s a classic conflict between what is best for the individual versus what is best for society.

Is there an alternative to routine de-sexing of pets? Perhaps. While the American ideal of near universal neuter seems to be spreading, Europeans are less inclined to de-sex their pets. This is particularly true in Scandinavia. In Sweden, fewer than 7 percent of female dogs and even fewer males are neutered. Indeed, until 1988, it was illegal for Swedes to remove the reproductive organs of their dogs and cats unless medically indicated. Stine Christiansen, a Danish anthrozoologist and veterinarian, told me that when dogs are neutered in her country, it is nearly always for medical or behavioral reasons rather population control. She says that there is no pet overpopulation problem in Denmark because people simply do not let their pets run loose. The same is true in Norway, where, with a few exceptions, it is presently illegal to de-sex healthy dogs.

I mentioned the UC Davis paper on golden retrievers to Jane Finneran, a highly regarded dog trainer. Jane was not keen on the idea that dog owners who don’t let their animals run loose would do better to not neuter their pets. “Far more puppies are killed in shelters from the ‘oops’ than any number of golden retrievers who will die from cancer!” she told me. On the other hand, when the evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad saw the study, he commented, “I have always felt very conflicted and uneasy about ‘playing God’ with our companion’s reproductive destiny.”

I expect Jane is right. But in light of the UC-Davis study and similar findings by other researchers on the health effects of neutering companion animals, I am now troubled by my unquestioning enthusiasm for plucking the gonads from every dog and cat in America.

News Flash Saturday, Feb 16 2013 


Pet Anti – Breeding System


Secure, Comfortable, Reliable!
Sometimes it is just too soon to spay
Pet Parents need security against accidental litters
Breeders want to preserve blood lines with confidence
Boarders or Kennels caring for dogs in heat want added protection
Some dogs can’t be spayed for medical reasons
Pet owner’s waiting a heat cycle before spaying wants to wait with confidence
PABS gives pet owners the ability to choose what’s right for their pet


Dexter Blanch, the president and founder of Highly Favored Creations designed PABS as a method for pet owners who delay spaying for the health and wellbeing of their dogs. With PABS pet parents don’t feel pressured into prematurely spaying dogs that are too young for the procedure. HFC has sold PABS in over 30 countries. HFC’s current Crowd Funding Campaign is aimed at producing a DRTV commercial for bringing PABS to U.S. pet owners on a mass scale. Pet owners can now wait with confidence that their dog will not bear an unplanned litter while it matures. Visit the PABS CROWD FUNDING CAMPAIGN:
Contact: Dexter Blanch, President
Mobile Phone: 318.655.4368


Most of us are bombarded with messages about taking the socially correct actions and that includes early spay and neuter of our dogs. But we need to be aware that early spay and neuter can leave dogs with their long-term health impaired and in the case of Golden Retrievers, it significantly increases the likelihood they will die of hemangiosarcoma, one of the most common types of cancer in Goldens.

GamblerIn Sweden spaying and neutering is against the law, under the animal cruelty ordinances. It is a very uncommon practice in Western Europe and yet there is no animal overpopulation problem in those countries. The reason is responsibility. Puppies are produced either because people breed dogs on purpose, whether or not they should be doing so. Or we get puppies from accidental breedings because owners were not knowledgeable or did not pay attention. Since you are reading this website we assume you are responsible and are trying to learn about how to best acquire and care for a Golden Retriever.

How Did We Get Here?

How did we get to this place where it is socially preferable to subect our dogs to invasive surgeries that leave them less healthy than just to be responsible for their behavior? There are a tremendous number of people who get their dogs from shelters and unlike responsible hobby breeders, the shelters cannot screen who is allowed to take their dogs. We know that in California 47% of the dogs adopted from shelters end up back in the shelters. So in that case it is appropriate to help society, even as it hurts the long-term health of the dogs, by making sure all shelter animals are altered before they are adopted.

What Does The Science Say?

For a long time there was no research done on this. Dogs were altered, they lived, no one followed sets of altered and unaltered dogs until recently, when medicine for dogs has become a profitable business. The only side by side study of effects of early spay and neuter was done by Canine Companions for Independence. CCI would like to alter their trainee puppies as soon as possible to make life easier for their puppy raisers. CCI found that animals altered early could not be used as service dogs because of behavior issues.

Nature gave animals endocrine glands for the same reason people have them. They play a large part in behavior and physical development, the rate at which bones develop, the size of the dog and how the dogs behave. It is only in the last ten years that veterinary medicine has been profitable enough to fund the studies that are not being done, most of which provide surprising data on early spay and neuter. There are a number of attachments on this subject, some more technical than others. I would urge you to read at least the one by Christine Zink, DVM. See the bottom of the page.Smooch

Many uninformed people and veterinarians would probably tell you that six months of age is the optimum time. But there is absolutely no research to support this. Your veterinarian probably attended a vet school before this research was available. And they may have attended a school supported by HSUS (Humane Society of the United States). HSUS* promotes early spay and neuter without regard for the health of the dogs but even they no longer promote mandatory spay and neuter.

What About Goldens Specificially?

If you are considering a Golden Retriever, we assume temperament and behavior matters to you. If you have not considered Golden Retriever rescue, they have some wonderful dogs. If you feel you need to know more about the breeding, health and temperament of a potential family pet, that may be why you are at this website. And if you are wanting a Golden that looks like the dogs on this website, let me assure you that a Golden Retriever puppy that is altered early will have longer legs, less bone, a narrow and longer muzzle, be a couple inches taller and not resemble its littermates. It will NOT look like the dogs you are seeing here.


But let’s start with the benefits of early spay and neuter and there are some. Bitches that are spayed prior to their first season will not develop mammary cancer and not get pyometra. Dogs that are neutered have no testicles and therefore no testicular cancer. These are all low-incidence events and usually easily treated surgically.



Urinary incontinence.
Increased barking and aggression toward people and dogs.
The likelihood of getting hemangiosarcoma (a non-treatable cancer that is the most common cancer in Golden Retrievers) is increased by 5 times.
Triples the risk of hypothyroidism.
If done before one year increases the risk of osteosarcoma.
Increases the risk of orthopedic disorders, possibly including hip dysplasia.
Recurrent urinary tract infections.
Increases the risks of adverse reactions to vaccines.
Increases the risk of obesity by 1.6 – 2 times.


Quadruples the small risk of prostate cancer.
Increased barking and aggression toward people and dogs.
The likelihood of getting hemangiosarcoma is increased by at least 1.4 times.
Triples the risk of hypothyroidism.
If done before one year increases the risk of osteosarcoma.
Increases the risk of CCL injuries.
Significantly increases the risk of orthopedic disorders, including hip dysplasia.
Triples the risk of obesity.
Increases the risks of adverse reactions to vaccines.
Increases the risk of geriatric positive impairment.


For these reasons anyone who acquires a Golden Retriever from Sunbeam is contractually obligated to leave their dog intact until it is mature. We realize in most communities that means paying a license fee that is significantly higher. But you need to weigh that against treating a lifetime of avoidable health problems.

Please feel free to share this information with you veterinarian. We support spaying and neutering dogs that are not part of a breeding program at the appropriate time. We are opposed to early spay and neuter of Golden Retrievers whether voluntary or mandatory. And if you would like more articles, please email us at

* HSUS operates no shelters; in fact the HSUS President, Wayne Pacelle has said this about distinct breeds “One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” He has also stated: “I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals”.

We urge donations to your local animal shelter, not to HSUS.

Article from Dr. Chris Zink

Opinion of the Society of Theriogenology (A specialty group in the AVMA)

AVMA Letter on MSN


No Review for this site



Making pet parents aware Monday, Dec 31 2012 

It’s has become a mission of mine for 2013 in the USA. Making pet parents aware that spaying too young can take 4 to 6 yrs. off their pets life. We all should wait 18 to 36 months (depending on breed) to allow growth plates to grow out before we spay or neuter.
As a manufacture of (PABS) pet anti breeding system. I sell anti breeding products internationally rather consistently. Here we’re not as aware as other countries of the harmful thing we are doing. By operating on our pets too young. We’re taking life away from our four legged love ones.

There is new scientific findings to support what I’m writing about today. I will post links to those findings in the very near future.

Happy New Yr.

South Africa & Chastity Belt for Dogs Wednesday, Nov 28 2012 

Dear Dexter
When I received the PABS set (with the extra size free – a big thank you) I thought I was going to have trouble with Lundi pulling it off herself. How wrong could I have been?
Lundi wore it throughout her season without a hitch. I had to make a minor shortening adjustment for the strap from the collar to the tail area but it fitted well in all other respects. I am delighted to be able to tell you that she did not fall pregnant even with all her flirting and my male, Growler’s attention.
One slight detail that perhaps you can give me some advice on if possible – I found that the cross across the tail would slip off to below her tail quite often but just hitched it back over her tail (her tail is docked to about 12cm).
She will have her first litter of puppies with her next season and then plan to skip the one following that to give her proper time for her body to recover.
What more can I say – the PABS system is a dog owners dream come true and I cannot thank you enough for advertising it on the web and allowing me to keep my companion at home instead of putting her in kennels. She would have been so unhappy as all my dogs sleep inside in my bedroom at night and have never had to spend a night alone in some foreign place.
I hope that I have told enough people about my success to help themselves and their dogs as well by contacting you. Our vet was most impressed though she did laugh at first when I told her what I was going to do – don’t think she really believed that you could buy a dog “chastity belt” and use it with success! Well you proved her wrong.
Yours sincerely
South Africa

Fiona Brown
Lawton Freight cc
Telefax: 033 3302742

WHY (PABS) Pet Anti Breeding System Friday, Jul 20 2012 


  PABS IS NOT A SUBSTITUE FOR SPAYING. PABS is for pet owners who want to delay spaying to promote the health and longevity of their pet family member. Recent studies have indicated that early spaying may lead to multiple long term health affects for the family pet. Even more disturbing is that early spaying may even reduce the pets life expectancy by 4-6 years.

  (; The link to the study. (


  Pet owners who want to delay spaying have few choices. Typically, pet owners are faced with subjecting their family pet to potentially harmful temporary chemical treatments. PABS is the only temporary nonchemical, nonsurgical, noninvasive anti-breeding device that allows the pet owner to choose the time for spaying, while posing absolutely no harm to the pet.


Customer Endorsement of PABS Monday, Jun 11 2012 

We have 2 Giant Schnauzers whom we love. We wanted to enjoy the experience of pups and had to find a secure method of postponing the experience until we were ready. The videos on the PABS website sold us, safe, secure, and non invasive for our girl. We weren’t impressed with the “temporary chemical solutions”, and separating our dogs is not possible since we won’t lock one of them outside away from the A\C, our affection, or each other. They became lifelong best friends as soon as she got over her trepidation of the 125# dog she met at 8 weeks of age. We have been through 3 belt sizes now as Tesla has grown. She is about 95# now and at a XXL belt. We don’t know what we would do without our PABS. We had 8 awesome Giants with her first litter and in about 2 more years we want 1 more litter, until then she will be secure with her awesome fashion accessory. Even after we are done with breeding our dogs I don’t believe we will be “fixing” our dogs since they aren’t broken and we really do love our boy and our girl just the way they are and don’t want to alter her hormones or her personality. She is our feisty girl that is perfect just the way she is and we want to keep just the way she is now. PABS gives us the perfect solution to keep her happy and un-altered.

Australian’s (Down Under) Endorsement of “Natural Pet Birth Control” PABS Tuesday, Apr 10 2012 

Hi Dexter and “the Team”  at Highly Favored,
Thank you for your quick response to my email which I only wrote12 hours ago!
I have ordered the medium PABS for my Australian Dingo at your suggestion.
I wish to take this opportunity to Thank You and “the Team”   at Highly Favored for the wonderful job you are doing stopping unwanted & accidental breeding.
You are a nice company, efficient and    for you are supplying a daman highly sought after by pet owners who want to rid themselves of the worry of unwanted puppies. 
The alternatives were very grim for me and left me in a complete dilemma as to what was in the best interests of my pet as well as my responsibility to not breed.
There were only 3 options  :    Barbaric operation which on my Dingo would have not been humane considering her timid nature already,  the “needle”  which is renowned for causing uterine infections and a tablet which is given 30 days prior to the heat -highly impractical when as you know animals do not tell you 30 days that they’re due to go on heat.   Then, my friend told me about you and I was so relieved.
We all need to tell everyone about your product!  Thankyou
Kind Regards,

Next Page »