New study on Neutering/Spaying

Deb and Ed M wrote:
I guess, as someone who is only interested in owning a dog, based on their ability to be a "pet" - that I simply don't want to mess around with hormone-caused attitudes or drama or running off to find "love". I let my Vet be my guide.

I agree. I am not breeding my dogs and I am not showing my dogs in conformation where, due to the actual purpose of the competition, having an intact dog is required, so neutering simplifies things.

I don't have to worry if someone brings over an intact dog - because my dog is fixed. I don't have to worry that a stray dog is intact - because my dog is fixed. I don't have to worry about letting dog hang out in the yard. I don't have to humiliate them by putting them in diapers so I don't get discharge on my floors and furniture. I don't have to separate my male and female dogs for weeks at a time. And I don't have to pay a much higher license fee.

I'm not in any way suggesting that neutering/spaying is not beneficial - I absolutely agree it is.

But in deciding WHEN to neuter/spay your dog, breed and gender should be evaluated. This study is the first to really look at breed/gender differences and it shows that there are far more variables than a simple "wait til the dog is X, Y or Z age" before neutering.

I really wanted to bring it up because there is a growing belief that neutering/spaying is overall bad for your dog and that it creates an increase in aggression, increases health issues, etc.

Part of that is because articles have been written summarizing studies that state "the obvious conclusion" is X", when the study itself specifically warns against making that conclusion - Dr Stanley Coren did that in regards to a study looking at aggression and neutering. He wrote that the "obvious conclusion" was that neutering, and especially early neutering, caused INCREASED aggression in dogs - but the study only found that neutering (at any age) did not DECREASE aggression.

The other part is because of the general finding that large breed dogs show an increase in joint disorders with early neutering, so people tend to generalize that further and argue that no dog should be neutered before two years old.

I guess, as someone who is only interested in owning a dog, based on their ability to be a "pet" - that I simply don't want to mess around with hormone-caused attitudes or drama or running off to find "love". I let my Vet be my guide.

While this information is interesting, please consider:

This is a retrospective study and can find a statistical association. It cannot conclude causation, that requires a different kind of study (more like the life-time Golden Retriever study now in progress).

Also, the population studied was the group of animals presented to UC-Davis veterinary school. This population probably doesn't represent the whole population of dogs, or even the population that would be presented to a local veterinary hospital (not a specialty or referral hospital).

As far as the joint issues associated, is the cause the greater weight gain that occurs in a neutered individual, or the more rapid growth and since it seems to be breed related, is there some genetic component not just the fact of being neutered???

In real practice (not specialty or referral) the number 1 cancer in un-neutered females is mammary cancer. It is basically non-existent in spayed females when the surgery is performed early in life.

The association with mast cell tumor, hemangiosarcoma and to a lesser degree lymphosarcoma are troubling. Consider the incidence of these when compared to the issues that are increased in intact individuals.

When making these decisions you can't just say "she has less chance of XXX" without considering the increased chance of "YYY." There are real benefits to neutering, both physical and behavioral.