A conspiracy theory...has science and the AVMA colluded to endorse early S/N?
Attached link has more detail.
QUESTION: If early Spay Neuter is such an effective tool to stem pet overpopulation - why after 40+ years of use are we still in a huge mess?
Is this another case of conspiracy theories that are contrived from two major stakeholders with vested interests in the process - ie profit as the expense of results ?
Do shelters REALLY reduce pet overpopulation by early S/N or is this propaganda fed to the public to encourage donations because if the truth were told, they would have to admit their policies and practices taken as a whole over the last 40 years have failed? We still have kill shelters, we still have pet overpopulation ?
Do vets REALLY believe this - or is a cash cow, and just like pet food, a bone they refuse to give up.
Is a scientific study stating that you can neuter a dog at 8 weeks with the caveat it "shouldn't" affect him up to the age of 4 years a cop out?
What happens after the dog turns 4? Is it ethical to sell a shelter dog for $300 spayed at 8 weeks of age and then ask the pet owner to spend hundreds or thousands on his illness later on?
A couple quotes below:
***************************************************
The conclusion for dogs was that “with the exception of infectious diseases, prepubertal gonadectomy may be safely performed in dogs without concern for increased incidence of physical or behavioral problems during at least a 4-year period after gonadectomy.
The six month age requirement for surgery came into question in the late 1970s when shelters encountered difficulty getting adopters to comply with contractual agreements to neuter their newly adopted pets. Despite various incentives, many adopters simply refused to abide by the agreements once they had acquired the animals.
Some shelters found that litters from animals they had adopted out were being brought back to them, and that they were thus actually contributing to the overpopulation problem. They decided the best solution would be to neuter the animals before they were adopted, but the six month age restriction meant that puppies and kittens could not be altered.
Once it was determined that no compelling medical reason could be found in the veterinary literature to wait until the animals were six months of age, pediatric surgeries began to be performed. Dr. Leo Lieberman is the acknowledged pioneer of pediatric spay/neuter. He began performing the surgeries in the late 1970s, and they have been performed by shelters ever since.
http://www.aspcapro.org/pediatric-spayneuter.php
@Painted Pony: Not that Im disagreeing with you, but who exactly is a conscientious reputable breeder? And how do I recognize them?
Are we saying that a class structure for dogs should be in place to allow SOME owners the right to breed and others not? How would this work?
And what is the acceptable shelf-life for unproven theories?
If this was a business, and every stray dog that a shelter had to feed was a cost charged to the business, they would have been broke decades ago. Just saying.
@Kayleigh: Yes, interesting point on drug. But we also know prohibition in the 1930's didn't work. Its that whole Adam and Eve thing- Free will . :-)
@Painted Pony: I happen to agree with your addition. I will s/n after 18 months. For whatever reason, I have managed to own intact dogs for over 30 years and never have an unplanned pregnancy. Whatever that means.
On cats - its different. Cats are free to roam. Whole other thread. This is a dog question.
@Kayleigh: My father was a child in prohibition (during the depression) and there were stills where people cooked up their booze and sold it.... His family was poor so he used to to be one of those booze runners :-)
I am old, but not that old. (ha).
OK, I apparently just made that up, because Prohibition was repealed in Ontario in the 1930s. Did I mention I'm old. (Now I will have to ask him)
@Ariane: Those stats you quote came from HSUS? Kind of suspicious when the people that take your money are the ones providing the stats. And w hile what they say may be true, its what they leave out that I wonder about? They claim a lower rate of euthanasia today than ever before, but there stats are limited to HSUS - we have many more private rescues and "Mom and Pop" shops than in the 1970s which often take overflow from shelters or dogs that would otherwise be on death row. And many dogs are sold for science labs - its a neat and tidy way of keeping your kill rates low.
They claim the US per capita spend on shelters is $8 today - is that good? We don't know, because we have no numbers (historically) to compare it to.
@Ariane: I enjoyed reading your last link. I admit a personal bias, I grew up in a time when women were routinely given hysterectomies - and now we know this is actually detrimental to health. Your article acknowledges that both humans and dogs fare better with ovaries. Its not anthropomorphic.
here is the article I found on stats - the devil is in the details. Note the dense urban centers like NYC have much lower numbers of dogs entering shelters and they admit the reasons for this are not completely understood. They note the problem with historical comparisons is the assumption that human population and dog ownership is related - and that may be true nationally, but not regionally.
http://www.humanesociety.org/animal_community/resources/timelines/animal_sheltering_trends.html