I'm conflicted. As an animal control officer I always preach spay/neuter. In the shelter we were sterilizing everything before it was adopted out -- often as early as 8 weeks -- because even with free spay/neuter vouchers owners were not returning to sterilize their animals. There are so many benefits to sterilizing pets, including:
- Reduction of pet overpopulation, and fewer homeless animals = less euthanasia
- Reduction/elimination of hormone driven behaviors (spraying, yowling, mounting, marking, roaming, fighting)
- Less aggression/no sexual frustration
- No testicles = no testicular cancer
- Reduced chance of developing prostate cancer
- No uterus = no heat cycles or pyometra (a life-threatening infection of the uterus often requiring an emergency hysterectomy)
- Spaying before a female's first heat cycle virtually eliminates breast cancer
I’ve found several articles about some of the adverse side effects of sterilizing an animal. I had read several years ago that early sterilization can affect bone growth and density. Many owners of working and agility dogs advise waiting until a dog reaches sexual maturity before spaying or neutering. For some larger breeds that can be as late as two years old. In another article I found, a veterinarian questioned whether early neutering actually reduces prostate cancer. And now I just received this article which poses that the age of neutering (or even neutering at all) may affect a dog's risk of developing certain cancers and joint disorders, specifically hip dysplasia. As a German shepherd dog owner, this article really concerns me.
I have sterilized all my dogs (cats too!) except for Jedi. The main reason is that he can't compete in the ring without his cojones. However, I have always thought that if I didn't succeed/like conformation (or his hips and elbows didn't pass OFA) I'd go ahead and have him neutered. Now I'm rethinking it. However, I won't stop promoting spay/neuter professionally. I think it's for the greater good of society. Does that make my a hypocrite? Any thoughts? -- K
I always desex rescue dogs in my care before they go - though with young puppies, I offer the option of them having tubal ligation or vasectomies instead of being desexed. This is so they can develop normally and hopefully minimise many of the risk mentioned.
ReplyDeleteBUT: My dogs are all entire, and I'll probably never desex them unless something significantly heinous was to occur (for example, if a bitch got closed pyometra, or if a dog developed testicular cancer). This is partly because I show and breed, but it's more because I actually think it's in an animal's best interest to keep all their bits, 'as nature intended'. Hormones have a much greater role in the body than just sex.
First off, your use of certain words makes me smile. I forget that you’re “not from around here.” It’s nice to have a different perspective as well. Sometimes I take things for granted or assume that “it’s just that way.” So thanks.
ReplyDeleteI like the option of tubal ligations and vasectomies. I hadn’t even thought of that. What a nice solution! Honestly, I don't know if they are even offered here in the States. Surely they are, but it’s always assumed that a hysterectomy or castration is the only option. I will look into this!
Nice to pop by and timely post. With some many charities offering free spaying we are amazed not more is done. Have a terrific Thursday.
ReplyDeleteBest wishes Molly