Do you HAVE to neuter a dog.

shuridunno

Is neutering a male dog important. He won't have a chance to be increasing the population. He's either at home or with me. My female dog is neutered.

He's eight months now so I need to be making my mind up, I think, Is there an appropriate age to do it.

There's a lot of conflicting advice, he's a Rottweiler if the breed makes any difference to advice.

DamagedTrax

you dont have to. there are as many views for as against.

Maddenman

If there is no chance of him being around other un-neutered females unsupervised,then no you do not have to neuter him. If you do neuter him it may make him more quiet and calm rather than more cross and wanting to go a stray. Taking away his manly hood does have effects on him

SillyMangoX

Not at all as long as his bits arent causing problems and you can 100% guarantee he wont get at a bitch. Even if he results in having ball related behavioural problems down the line they can always be lopped off later in life!

DamagedTrax

just to play devils avocado, it does reduce the risk of testicle cancer in males but i dont have the % numbers.

DBB

Male rotties should not be castrated before 1yr of age. As a result of a long and interesting debate on the subject here some months ago, it cleared up that there's strong evidence that male rotties neutered before 1yr of age have a ONE IN FOUR chance of developing bone cancer later in life. These are short odds, and may also pertain to other large breed dogs.
So not for love nor money would I consider neutering your dog just yet.
And for my money, as long as an owner can be absolutely sure their dog can't procreate in an unplanned fashion, or as long as hormone-related behavioural problems don't affect my or the dog's enjoyment of life, I wouldn't be racing out the door to get this op done. I think it's a very personal choice, and it's okay to leave a dog intact as long as that doesn't cause a problem for anyone down the line.

nadey

no i dont think you HAVE to but unless they are around other dogs unsupervised then yeah

i have two male dogs and nither of them are neutered and never will be

they aren't around other girl dogs so no chance getting it done

plus max the shih tzu is gay he wont go near any girl dog lol

shuridunno

Thank you all for the replies.

He does occasionally try to hump my other dog but has stopped anytime I corrected him and it doesn't seem to be a continuos problem.

He's very placid, full of fun but lazy as hell, so I think I'II leave him unless there is any other reason to.

Sigma Force

No there's no law (sadly) that says you have to neuter your dog. But it's the responsible thing to do in the long run (whether you choose to do so now or when he reaches a year of age). You cannot gurantee that one day your dog won't get to a female and cause an unplanned litter.

If a male dog smells a female in heat they will do anything they can to get at her even escape what seemed inscapeable.

If you are not planning on showing him or breeding him then neutering is the way to go long term. You might change your mind in another month or two when he starts peeing against the walls in the house lol.

Well ok it's up to you in the end, we waited till our youngest dog (papillon) was 8 months old as he was so small and they are delicate enough when it comes to anesthetics so by 8 months I felt he was big enough to take the op and he was grand. Just about time he had started peeing against walls in the house (not saying all unneutered dogs do) but he stopped all that once neutered. It doesn't stop humping totally btw ..he loves his teddy a bit too much still..poot teddy.

shuridunno

^^^^^
Your point is what I was most concerned with. As well as his health, would it drive him mad, would be be all hormonal..so to speak, when he gets older. Would he get all frustrated like:o
He's about 35-40kgs now, I wont be showing him and certainly not breeding him, he's just a pet.

Wibbs

Sigma Force wrote: »

No there's no law (sadlythank god/fates/good sense) that says you have to neuter your dog.

FYP to reflect my opinion on this. As DBB noted large breeds, especially Rotties show a statistically important increase in bone cancer that comes with neutering males. A condition relatively rare in intact dogs. It also increases prostate cancer (by threefold IIRC) yet pro neutering bodies/sites/orgs regularly claim the complete opposite. I'd also question again in large breeds, if ligament injuries that seem remarkably common these days when compared to the past may have a neutering component. There may be a relationship with HD too. iT makes sense. Testosterone in the male is a major part of the bone growth OFF switch, removing that is going to have effects. It does in humans and other animals and likely repeated in dogs. That's above and beyond all the other fucntions testosterone has in the body.

I'd also question this very heavily dug in meme that's seemingly above questioning. Rarely a good plan scientifically. It's up there with equally unassailable recommendations with regard to yearly multiple vaccinations. I find it funny that a human who lives to 80 years of age may have at a push 10 vaccinations in their lives, yet a dog who only lives to say 12 has 5 or 6 per year. I call shenanigans(save for the bacterial vaccines). Vets recommend all these things? Yea well colour me dubious when the same vets are pimping marginal at best dry dog food at the surgery counter*. One actually told me raw meat and bones would make my dog vicious. Eh.... no. There's also the hugely increased cost of such procedures over the last decade, but lay the blame for that on the pet insurance companies.

Another thing I've personally noted on meeting quite a surprising number of fellow dog owners on walks, is the look of disapproval oft bordering on horror when they find out my guy is INTACT:eek: and I intend to keep him that way. As if by virtue of having his full compliment of man parts he's a danger to society. Funny how the same question is rarely leveled at folks with female dogs. I mean if all female dogs were spayed we'd have no unwanted pups would we? It seems to be mostly women asking too. God knows why. On the unwanted puppies side? We're weighed down with unwanted pups at a level far far higher in the past, yet we have more neuetered/spayed dogs than ever before. Does not compute. The fact is backyard breeders won't be affected by this, better to really make an effort to clamp down on those and a lot of unwanted litters would never happen.

BTW if you think I'm blowing smoke here, I'll source studies reports to back up each one of the above points of mine.

shuridunno wrote:

^^^^^
Your point is what I was most concerned with. As well as his health, would it drive him mad, would be be all hormonal..so to speak, when he gets older. Would he get all frustrated like:o

I've have four male dogs in my life shuridunno, all intact and they never appeared hormonal and frustrated. Not even close and they were all large working breeds, not "lap dogs" by any means. Rellies and friends the same. IMHO there's an awful lot of fear mongering and guff attached to this subject on that score. Our grandparents and beyond would have had dogs and a tiny few if any would have been castrated and there wasn't anything like the hyperbole of today about this. I'd also add don't mistake the sometimes twitchy adolescence that some dogs go through as evidence of a long term thing. Many of us were a bit mad as teenagers ourselves


TL;DR? If I had a female dog I'd spay her. On the female side it defo proffers significantly more advantages than not. BTW the oft repeated "wait until her first season" meme is another example of unscientific hearsay. Healthwise it's scientifically better before. On the male side I'd say no, unless there is a good medical/scientifically backed reason especially with large breeds.




*PS I'm most certainly not one of those obsessive raw foodists, IMHO they make a number of factual errors with regard to what wild canids actually eat, but still on balance even at their most extreme the diet is leaps and bounds ahead of a dry food one for the majority of dogs.

Salt001

shuridunno wrote: »

Thank you all for the replies.

He does occasionally try to hump my other dog but has stopped anytime I corrected him and it doesn't seem to be a continuos problem.

He's very placid, full of fun but lazy as hell, so I think I'II leave him unless there is any other reason to.

As far as I know the humping thing is a dominance thing and not a sex thing.
So even if he was neutered he may still do it.

Stheno

Wibbs wrote: »

FYP to reflect my opinion on this. As DBB noted large breeds, especially Rotties show a statistically important increase in bone cancer that comes with neutering males. A condition relatively rare in intact dogs. It also increases prostate cancer (by threefold IIRC) yet pro neutering bodies/sites/orgs regularly claim the complete opposite. I'd also question again in large breeds, if ligament injuries that seem remarkably common these days when compared to the past may have a neutering component. There may be a relationship with HD too. iT makes sense. Testosterone in the male is a major part of the bone growth OFF switch, removing that is going to have effects. It does in humans and other animals and likely repeated in dogs. That's above and beyond all the other fucntions testosterone has in the body.

I'd also question this very heavily dug in meme that's seemingly above questioning. Rarely a good plan scientifically. It's up there with equally unassailable recommendations with regard to yearly multiple vaccinations. I find it funny that a human who lives to 80 years of age may have at a push 10 vaccinations in their lives, yet a dog who only lives to say 12 has 5 or 6 per year. I call shenanigans(save for the bacterial vaccines). Vets recommend all these things? Yea well colour me dubious when the same vets are pimping marginal at best dry dog food at the surgery counter*. One actually told me raw meat and bones would make my dog vicious. Eh.... no. There's also the hugely increased cost of such procedures over the last decade, but lay the blame for that on the pet insurance companies.

Another thing I've personally noted on meeting quite a surprising number of fellow dog owners on walks, is the look of disapproval oft bordering on horror when they find out my guy is INTACT:eek: and I intend to keep him that way. As if by virtue of having his full compliment of man parts he's a danger to society. Funny how the same question is rarely leveled at folks with female dogs. I mean if all female dogs were spayed we'd have no unwanted pups would we? It seems to be mostly women asking too. God knows why. On the unwanted puppies side? We're weighed down with unwanted pups at a level far far higher in the past, yet we have more neuetered/spayed dogs than ever before. Does not compute. The fact is backyard breeders won't be affected by this, better to really make an effort to clamp down on those and a lot of unwanted litters would never happen.

BTW if you think I'm blowing smoke here, I'll source studies reports to back up each one of the above points of mine.

I've have four male dogs in my life shuridunno, all intact and they never appeared hormonal and frustrated. Not even close and they were all large working breeds, not "lap dogs" by any means. Rellies and friends the same. IMHO there's an awful lot of fear mongering and guff attached to this subject on that score. Our grandparents and beyond would have had dogs and a tiny few if any would have been castrated and there wasn't anything like the hyperbole of today about this. I'd also add don't mistake the sometimes twitchy adolescence that some dogs go through as evidence of a long term thing. Many of us were a bit mad as teenagers ourselves


TL;DR? If I had a female dog I'd spay her. On the female side it defo proffers significantly more advantages than not. BTW the oft repeated "wait until her first season" meme is another example of unscientific hearsay. Healthwise it's scientifically better before. On the male side I'd say no, unless there is a good medical/scientifically backed reason especially with large breeds.




*PS I'm most certainly not one of those obsessive raw foodists, IMHO they make a number of factual errors with regard to what wild canids actually eat, but still on balance even at their most extreme the diet is leaps and bounds ahead of a dry food one for the majority of dogs.

I'd agree with this for the most part, I think the fact that the dog is a large breed would be important to me, were I to neuter another large male dog I'd wait until the dog was probably three years old to allow it "grow up" fully if that makes sense.

On the vaccines side, there is now plenty of data out there that most apart from lepto are effective for at least three years.

DBB

Wibbs wrote: »

Another thing I've personally noted on meeting quite a surprising number of fellow dog owners on walks, is the look of disapproval oft bordering on horror when they find out my guy is INTACT:eek: and I intend to keep him that way. As if by virtue of having his full compliment of man parts he's a danger to society. Funny how the same question is rarely leveled at folks with female dogs. I mean if all female dogs were spayed we'd have no unwanted pups would we? It seems to be mostly women asking too. God knows why. On the unwanted puppies side? We're weighed down with unwanted pups at a level far far higher in the past, yet we have more neuetered/spayed dogs than ever before. Does not compute. The fact is backyard breeders won't be affected by this, better to really make an effort to clamp down on those and a lot of unwanted litters would never happen.

To lead on from the latter part of your post Wibbs, having been a zealous proponent of neuter, neuter, neuter over the years, I have somewhat moderated my views on it now. It seems, on anecdotal evidence anyway, that despite the increase in neutering over the past decade, the number of unwanted litters has not abated, which leads me to believe that the neutering message is simply not getting through to the right people, by and large.
In other words, the type of person who undertakes to get their dog neutered is probably not the sort of person who allows their dog to wander and procreate anyway. Irresponsible dog owners are irresponsible in many ways!

I have a young adult, unspayed female, and I also get that aghast reaction from people. I will have her neutered one of these days, but I haven't been in any hurry and she will not get the opportunity to get pregnant... it just will not happen with the way I manage my dogs. My hunch is that just as recent research has shown links between neutering and subsequent health problems in males, the research is young, and I feel that with further research, problems will also be found with females which makes it a bigger long-term risk to spay them too early.
The chances of her developing mammary cancer is greater because I haven't had her spayed before her first season, but the initial risk is tiny to start with, so I am increasing a very small risk into a slightly bigger, but still very small risk.

IMHO there's an awful lot of fear mongering and guff attached to this subject on that score. Our grandparents and beyond would have had dogs and a tiny few if any would have been castrated and there wasn't anything like the hyperbole of today about this. I'd also add don't mistake the sometimes twitchy adolescence that some dogs go through as evidence of a long term thing. Many of us were a bit mad as teenagers ourselves

Speak for yourself
But a little bit of humping is perfectly natural and indeed important. It's only if it becomes a problem that castration may become necessary, but unless there is a big imbalance in hormones going on, behavioural intervention can do the trick too.

DBB

Salt001 wrote: »

As far as I know the humping thing is a dominance thing and not a sex thing.
So even if he was neutered he may still do it.

In my experience, in many cases, especially in adult dogs it's actually more an anxiety-based behaviour! So in other words, it is a symptom of an emotional problem which neutering won't necessarily fix.
However, in young adolescents, it is normal, "practise run", investigatory sexual behaviour in response to a teenage hormone surge, and of no harm unless it starts to take up too much of the dog's time. In fact, very often, the owner's response does the harm, because it can become a learned attention-seeking behaviour if the owner makes too big a deal of it.

Cherry Blossom

DBB wrote: »

In my experience, in many cases, especially in adult dogs it's actually more an anxiety-based behaviour! So in other words, it is a symptom of an emotional problem which neutering won't necessarily fix.

I have wondered before if this is similar to horses that have vices for example. It's a repetitive behaviour that releases endorphins that have a calming effect. At some stage they make the connection and become addicted. This would explain why so many dogs hump their beds before getting into them, they are setting up the 'calm' before settling down for the night.

DBB

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

I have wondered before if this is similar to horses that have vices for example. It's a repetitive behaviour that releases endorphins that have a calming effect. At some stage they make the connection and become addicted. This would explain why so many dogs hump their beds before getting into them, they are setting up the 'calm' before settling down for the night.

That's pretty much the way it seems to work alright! It's one of the feature of vices, or stereotypies, that even if the horse, or dog, or cow, or whatever animal, is later provided with an enriched environment, the stereotypy persists because it is a self-rewarding, self-comforting behaviour in and of itself. They can be very difficult to get rid of once they have become established, as you'll know from the horses.

shuridunno

Thanks again, this has been a very enlightning thread to me, I didn't realise there was so much to consider about neutering or that the views held can run deep with people.

My OH doesn't want to neuter and I thought it was predominately a health issue as he won't have a chance to procreate. At his age I won't do anything to him yet anyway.

On the note of humping...is correcting with a no and putting him out/in another room the appropriate thing to do.

Thanks again.

mymo

I wasn't going to neuter my boy at all, he never gets out without me no chance of breeding, he's indoors with us most of the time, except walks and toilet breaks. (I had been told by his breeder there was a history of bad reaction to anesthetic)
He did try and hump my neutered bitch occasionally, but then at about 3years he started humping constantly, even walking in the street, turned out 5 of my neighbours had bitches (no wonder there were male dogs roaming everyday outside in our estate), which were going into heat twice a year, so pretty much a permanent smell of bitch to him.
So I got him done at 3, he is so much better and happier in himself, and I'm glad I got him done for his own sanity.
Sorry for long post, but my point is unless you feel it is needed, don't bother, if you can be sure he can't get to a bitch, and happy with him, its fine.
One thing I will say is my fella is better with male dogs since, the odd male he would snap at, but seems fine now.

I also agree the neutering message isn't getting through to the right people, the amount of puppies I have heard about lately is awful, and don't get me started on Kittens!

Wibbs

DBB wrote: »

In my experience, in many cases, especially in adult dogs it's actually more an anxiety-based behaviour! So in other words, it is a symptom of an emotional problem which neutering won't necessarily fix.

Good point D. Of the dogs I've known who were at this to a noticeable degree it certainly looked like one of those repetitive anxiety type things, rather than an actual mating attempt.

On this humping thing in general, is it more prevalent with some breeds than others? I ask because and this is purely anecdotally, in my experience it seemed to be smaller breeds with the exception of labs who were inveterate humpers? Could it also in some cases be a "dominance" expression? In wild canid groups/families, the only ones who reproduce/hump are the so called "alphas" the mammy and daddy of the social group, the others don't so wouldn't be humping. If an animal in such a group started humping they'd be challenged.

Might it be a side effect of domestication itself that locks the animal into a juvenile/adolescent mindset? OR on the other hand might it be in some dogs a "throwback" to their wild behavior? Funny that mymo mentions her guy really kicked off with this at 3 when he should be well past adolescence in domestic dogs(wolves take longer to mature and have a longer adolescence*), because "in the wild" if he was one of those "I want my own family" dogs that would be about the time he'd be leaving his family group to set up his own. Mymo's experience is not the first time I've heard of that happening around that age.






*interestingly they only come into season once a year compared to dogs twice yearly seasons. That's a pretty big reproductive change going on with domestication. Shows how much a teeny amount of difference in DNA can make such large scale differences.

kylith

There are three reasons I'd recommend neutering
1) decreased risk of cancers
2) I've heard too many tales of entire males injuring themselves trying to get to neighbourhood bitches; jumping out/through windows, over fences, etc. I have first hand experience of a lab climbing a 6' fence and chasing my brother's springer, with me in tow, down the road.
3) Imagine if you were a man, surrounded by naked, nubile, willing young women and you were never, ever, ever allowed to touch them under any circumstances. Wouldn't you rather not have those urges than to be given out to for trying to follow them?

Gael23

I would strongly advise you to have it done. I'm literally just back from the vets after having our guy diagnosed with possible testicular cancer and its tormenting me that if he was neutered years ago this wouldn't have had a chance to happen

Wibbs

kylith wrote: »

1) decreased risk of cancers

Regularly trotted out as a reason, but in the case of males inaccurate. (with the exception of testicular cancer which is relatively rare and highly curable). Castration of male dogs increases the risks of a number of cancers, bone and prostate in particular. It does lower the risk in females however. Indeed I'd also be asking why females in heat causing such problems are so common, because a spayed female will rarely go into heat.

Vince32

I don't believe that neutering a dog serves serves any benefit to the dogs overall health, considering the chances of any dog getting any type of cancer is fairly low to begin with, and neutering reduces the chance of contracting by X%, all your really doing it turning a low chance into a lower chance, which may be fine for other people, but I don't see the point in it at all.

It does help with population control, and the less unwanted dogs there are the less will be impounded or destroyed due to irresponsible or accidental breeding, and for that point, valid as it is still doesn't compel me to want to neuter any dog.

The only reason I would allow any piece of my dogs to be removed would be if there was a clear and present danger of death or injury, and I'm speak in general terms not just the reproductive system, for example if someone told me if I removed one of it's kidneys I would reduce the chance of kidney cancer by 50% ... well the Idea is laughable to me. Unless there is an immediate reason to preform surgery then I am against it. simple as.

But to stay on topic, it is a personal choice and it's up to you to weigh out the pro's and con's and decide for yourself how you want to proceed. Some people will want to take on the problems of the entire world and try to foresee every eventually that may or may not happen in the effort to be more responsible, I'm no fashion model, nor do I intend to have any children, but I'm not about to chop of my nuts just because one day I MIGHT have to deal with a cancer issue. I find the whole thing distasteful and barbaric, and as I said, I would only consent if their was an immediate medical issue to be dealt with.

That's how I feel about it, and all my dogs have been, and will be 'entire' for their whole lives.

PS: If one of my dogs does get a type of cancer, they all have pet insurance and with today's medical advancements the chances of one getting an incurable type is virtually nil, and even if I did spay or neuter the chance of getting cancer is still present, albeit lower if they were, the overall chance of getting cancer is realistically low at either side of the fence.

Vince

DBB

Wibbs wrote: »

On this humping thing in general, is it more prevalent with some breeds than others? I ask because and this is purely anecdotally, in my experience it seemed to be smaller breeds with the exception of labs who were inveterate humpers?

I honestly don't know if there's any breed tendency Wibbs, but my guess would be that the smaller breeds do it as they're more likely to be put into a situation that it'll become an attention seeking behaviour... or perhaps it's tolerated for longer than it would be if a German Shepherd started humping the visitor's legs?

Could it also in some cases be a "dominance" expression? In wild canid groups/families, the only ones who reproduce/hump are the so called "alphas" the mammy and daddy of the social group, the others don't so wouldn't be humping. If an animal in such a group started humping they'd be challenged.

Between dogs, yes it could be a status-related behaviour, but I think that in most cases with pet dogs, especially when they're being introduced to each other or in other high-pressure situations, it's a comfort behaviour which indicates underlying anxiety in that particular situation.
I think sexual behaviours in domesticated dogs are probably as far removed from wolf/wild canid sexual behaviours as any other dog behaviour is. It is likely that domesticated dogs came from wolves which, with time, showed a reduced tendency to form family groups, with consequent changes in the way dogs use body language and the stresses they undergo having to mix with dogs they don't know/are not related to a LOT in our modern world. This is so far removed from what they'd ever have had to do in the wild many moons ago.
So, it's harder to call why domesticated dogs hump, the reasons can't be as clear-cut as they seem to be in genuine canid family groups!

Might it be a side effect of domestication itself that locks the animal into a juvenile/adolescent mindset? OR on the other hand might it be in some dogs a "throwback" to their wild behavior?

Neither can be ruled out, until we know more!

planetX

No-one has mentioned aggression, is that not a factor? I've never owned an intact dog, but with cats neutering decreases aggression considerably.

As far as thread title goes - 'do you HAVE to neuter a dog'- I did, as I'd signed an agreement to when I adopted from a rescue. I hope it was the right thing to do, what I read on here is a bit worrying...

Vince32

I've heard reports that neutering a male does make it more docile, but as far as aggression goes, I think that is something that has to be trained out with work and perseverance, removing the testicles will do very little to counter the underlying problem.

As for health issues, there are pro's and con's to every medical issue, but there is no need to worry about cancers, in general they are unlikely to present in any animal or human, but in the case that a dog does get a cancer, there will be very suitable treatments for most types, and the option of euthanasia to ease suffering in untreatable cases.

I know no one wants to say goodbye to their dogs, but given the fact that we humans live 4-5 times longer than dogs it's a certainty that we will have to at some point, sad as it is, allowing the animal to suffer before death is a non option for me.

The short answer to this question is, no you do not HAVE to neuter or spay your pets, but given the various schools of thought on the subject it is a personal decision, one to be made after some research had been carried out to make an informed decision. However, if you have signed a legal document, you are held to it by law. Some people think some laws are stupid and don't need to be obeyed, but we cannot pick and choose which laws we want to obey, however silly or misguided we deem them to be.

Vince

iguana

planetX wrote: »

No-one has mentioned aggression, is that not a factor? I've never owned an intact dog, but with cats neutering decreases aggression considerably.

I have no idea about cats but for dogs it's pretty much a complete myth. In fact there is a certain amount of evidence that with certain breeds the opposite holds true and dog on owner aggression increases, especially for spayed females. And in males it increases the risk of progressive geriatric cognitive impairment which is a common cause of perceived aggression in older dogs. I really hate this myth as so often in both real life and on forums I see people with badly controlled young dogs decide to get the dog neutered to fix the behaviour. Then 6-12 months down the line they are surprised to find that their dog's behavioural problems have worsened rather than improved, because they haven't bothered to make any practical effort to correct the bad behaviour.

Both my boys are intact (well Toby is missing a leg) and they aren't aggressive dogs. They spend nearly half their lives wrapped around each other, cuddled up to each other, grooming each other, playing with each other etc. They can drink from the same bowl or eat off the same plate without incident. We'll be bringing a baby into the house in a few months and while we will be taking all sensible precautions to protect the baby and ensure the dogs don't feel sidelined, I don't have any particular worries about safety.

People should neuter their dogs if they are genuinely worried that the dog may play a part in producing an unwanted litter. But they should be made aware of the negative health implications before the procedure goes ahead, instead of being given a highly overstated list of positive side-effects.

DBB

iguana wrote: »

In fact there is a certain amount of evidence that with certain breeds the opposite holds true and dog on owner aggression increases, especially for spayed females

I wasn't aware of breed differences, any chance of a linky to the research Iguana?
Just to comment on the increase in aggression in spayed females, my understanding is that aggression can increase in females who were already showing signs of aggression, or excessive fear, prior to being spayed, particularly if spayed young. In other words, females with questionable behavioural stability pre-spay may become worse post-spay.

I really hate this myth as so often in both real life and on forums I see people with badly controlled young dogs decide to get the dog neutered to fix the behaviour. Then 6-12 months down the line they are surprised to find that their dog's behavioural problems have worsened rather than improved, because they haven't bothered to make any practical effort to correct the bad behaviour.

This is indeed all too often the case: not training a young, exuberant dog is not going to be fixed by removing his testicles... oh were it that easy!
However, neutering can help to lower aggression levels in male dogs, if it is aggression they are exhibiting, as opposed to just being a loopy youngster. That said, neutering to lower aggression may do just that... lower aggression. It cannot and should not be relied upon as a cure, because there's a lot more to aggression that hormones alone.
And therein lies a problem: many people are given the impression (by vets? by books? by rescue agencies?) that neutering stops aggression, and they are disappointed when they find the aggression has not gone away following the procedure.

iguana

DBB wrote: »

I wasn't aware of breed differences, any chance of a linky to the research Iguana?

I read it in this study. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Vi7L8bFE8GYJ:www.cdoca.org/downloads/files/Early%2520SN%2520and%2520Behavior.pdf+&hl=en&gl=ie&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgXKVDK6lG64Co5LiAO9_cd6ZSuwvxn7vfdXFb0jfLc6AHRWO9ZkKSGSP_8JZXCUACvX2LpmK0FjJU6hVuiilPKcvRrj8Jb3tDt34EAYGHtN-IkJ6sRXEhrNL_uyRl8ek3MhoEU&sig=AHIEtbR0MEwwa-Y8gdkv0eoqvwTA1pgy_g&pli=1

DBB

iguana wrote: »

I read it in this study. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Vi7L8bFE8GYJ:www.cdoca.org/downloads/files/Early%2520SN%2520and%2520Behavior.pdf+&hl=en&gl=ie&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgXKVDK6lG64Co5LiAO9_cd6ZSuwvxn7vfdXFb0jfLc6AHRWO9ZkKSGSP_8JZXCUACvX2LpmK0FjJU6hVuiilPKcvRrj8Jb3tDt34EAYGHtN-IkJ6sRXEhrNL_uyRl8ek3MhoEU&sig=AHIEtbR0MEwwa-Y8gdkv0eoqvwTA1pgy_g&pli=1[/QUOTE]

Thanks a mill for that. It would be nice to see a similar longitudinal surveywhere the dogs had been scored both before and after neutering. I am pretty sure there's research out there on this, if I get the time I'll go for a look, but that research throws up some interesting stuff!

Vince32

Poor doggies !!!