Pure breed V Cross breed health

borderlinemeath

There's always the suggestion that cross breeds or mongrels are far healthier than their pure bred counterparts. A lot of the talk was always perpetuated by people who are adamant that people should rescue not breed, which is wholly understandable, but sometimes there's a bit of smugness associated with "well my cross breed is bound to be healthier than your in bred/line bred pure breed dog. I never really understood this thinking because behind every cross breed dog was unknown and unhealth tested parentage, it's a lottery really.

This study popped up on a page I follow this morning, the results are interesting, it suggests that while certain ailments are more common in pure breeds and prolific in certain breeds, a LOT of the more common ailments, heart issues, cancers, and hip dysplasia are recurrent in both pure and mixed breed dogs. And mixed breed dogs are more susceptible to cruciate ligament damage.

http://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org/blog/health-of-purebred-vs-mixed-breed-dogs-the-data

Knine

The main issue is problems are recorded in purebred dogs. Nobody really bothers with the crossbreeds.

I have had a cross breed collie die from heart failure at age 3. The terrier cross we have is plagued with health issues - joint, addisons like issues, skin problems.

My pedigree dogs all lived long healthy lives apart from one Cocker Spaniel who had a stroke age 8 & never recovered.

I have seen some terrible mouth issues & temperament problems with these Pug crosses. Think teeth puncturing the roof or lower palate of the dogs mouth.

Evac101

Hrm - when it comes to mixed breeds, how likely is it that parents have been health checked prior to breeding? Since this seems (thankfully) to be becoming an almost basic requirement in pure breed circles, thus diminishing the risk of certain common ailments, I'd assume that in accidental or purposeful "designer crossbreed" situations these are non-existent.

This said our mongrel is in, as they say, rude health, as is our pb liver spot dalmatian (aside from it's paranoia and mental health issues).

borderlinemeath

Knine wrote: »

The main issue is problems are recorded in purebred dogs. Nobody really bothers with the crossbreeds.

I have had a cross breed collie die from heart failure at age 3. The terrier cross we have is plagued with health issues - joint, addisons like issues, skin problems.

My pedigree dogs all lived long healthy lives apart from one Cocker Spaniel who had a stroke age 8 & never recovered.

I have seen some terrible mouth issues & temperament problems with these Pug crosses. Think teeth puncturing the roof or lower palate of the dogs mouth.

I think though with the emergence of "designer" crosses, that people are now paying money for, I would imagine these dogs will be vet treated and records kept with as much concern as pure breeds, which can only help studies like this.

muddypaws

Great thread.

I can see both sides of the argument. If you mate two unhealthy dogs, or one unhealthy dog with a healthy one, no matter whether they are purebreed or crosses themselves, chances are you are going to have health issues. And, as crossbreeds tend not to be health tested prior to breeding, I'd say there is probably more chance statistically that one or other of the parents will have health issues.

But, if you are breeding a recognised breed that has a very small gene pool, then chances are, any health issues are going to keep recurring and possibly get worse as unhealthy dogs continue to be bred together.

Evac101

Speaking from a purely personal basis the situation with the dalmatian breed is kind of ridiculous - a breed which has had the gene for processing uric acid into urine bred out of it* and (until recently at least) attempts to breed it back in using related breeds (English Pointer I believe in the US case) result in the breed standard authority rejecting the, now healthier and visually indistinguishable, dogs as being not dalmatians.

That sort of silliness results in PB's gaining a (justified) reputation as having inherent health issues, when the clubs/kc should be attempting to bred the flaws out while retaining the look/purpose of the breed rather then knee jerk rejecting positive changes to the breed.

And that's today's micro-rant.

The larger picture of course being that there are many, many similar health issues in other breeds that, if the health of the dogs was the paramount concern of the clubs, would be addressed by breeding corrective gene's into all the lines rather then simply reducing the gene pool further by only breeding healthy against healthy examples of the breed, a questionable long term strategy without some very detailed genetic studies.

*Leading to a much increased chance of gall stones amongst other issues (and kills grass with a speed you wouldn't believe).

borderlinemeath

Evac101 wrote: »

Speaking from a purely personal basis the situation with the dalmatian breed is kind of ridiculous - a breed which has had the gene for processing uric acid into urine bred out of it* and (until recently at least) attempts to breed it back in using related breeds (English Pointer I believe in the US case) result in the breed standard authority rejecting the, now healthier and visually indistinguishable, dogs as being not dalmatians.

That sort of silliness results in PB's gaining a (justified) reputation as having inherent health issues, when the clubs/kc should be attempting to bred the flaws out while retaining the look/purpose of the breed rather then knee jerk rejecting positive changes to the breed.

And that's today's micro-rant.

*Leading to a much increased chance of gall stones amongst other issues (and kills grass with a speed you wouldn't believe).

From memory the particular dog was entered to compete at crufts, the KC didn't have the issue, but the other competitors did.

Evac101

Hrm - I know that there was a lot of resistance from the English dalmatian breed club for at least the first 8 years he had been breeding back to 'true', this may have changed since then i.e. in the 4 years since I read the article while researching, prior to getting a dalmatian. Also - I honestly have no idea how old the article was when I stumbled across it, further muddying the timeline

sillysmiles

I think - for me - some of the issues with pure breeds are the pressure on imo unhealthy attributes for showing purposes. I'm specifically thinking of the extreme sloped back of german shepards and the breathing difficulties of certain breeds and I think that for some of those breeds it is going to be hard to come back from that.

Evac101

Oh and I am aware that certain breeds rely on health defects for the appearance of the breed (Rhodies being the most obvious example). I have no idea what the most responsible course of action would be from a ure 'health' perspective. Much as I love the Rhodie's distinctive look it's impossible to achieve it without those micro-channels, some of which can represent a direct path to the spine for issues.

borderlinemeath

sillysmiles wrote: »

I think - for me - some of the issues with pure breeds are the pressure on imo unhealthy attributes for showing purposes. I'm specifically thinking of the extreme sloped back of german shepards and the breathing difficulties of certain breeds and I think that for some of those breeds it is going to be hard to come back from that.

Yep, the breed clubs have to get on board and realise that conformation of certain breeds is detrimental to their health and well being. I know the GSD is always mentioned as being almost frog legged but at least there are straight backed dogs in the breed also. But the judges need to recognise that if they keep awarding the sloped back versions, people will keep breeding them.

Some of the brachycephalic breeds have no alternatives other than outbreeding with similar breeds to try and get back on track. And even still, outbreeding a brachycephalic breed to another breed would have to be done so carefully, dogs with restricted airways don't exercise anywhere near as much as a dog with regular skull conformation, so outbreeding would have to be done with a dog that didn't have a massive exercise need or prey drive. That's why I get so annoyed at pugs crossed with beagles, what are people thinking doing something as dangerous as crossing a dog with known breathing and overheating issues with a dog that needs a colossal amount of exercise?

doubter

Many purebreds are sensible to a 'breed specific' disease - more prone to it. Obviously, if you cross the purebred with a different breed - resulting in a Heinz 54, the logical conclusion is that the resulting offspring will have lesser chances to fall victim to the ' bad gene' as it's not doubled up.When i was breeding Siamese, kittens born with an open cleft, deformities or pure resistance were in almost any litter of my fellow breeders because the gene-pool was so small. (i had been smart enough bringing in a half bred Siamese - a cross) set my line back 5 generations but the kittens were eventually stunning and clear of genetic faults. So, I would definitely say that cross breeds - in general are less perceptive to genetically inherited diseases, and, henceforth, also less open to ' normal' health issues. However, having said all that, a well bred PB, let's say an GSD where the lines have been checked and double checked for HD, where you can see no inbreeding for at least 7 generations, is also a pretty safe bet for a healthy dog. it's the people in between, who only care for a quick buck that make our stunning euro breeds suffer..

Knine

borderlinemeath wrote: »

I think though with the emergence of "designer" crosses, that people are now paying money for, I would imagine these dogs will be vet treated and records kept with as much concern as pure breeds, which can only help studies like this.

Nope unfortunately not as the schemes I mean are Hip, Elbow, Eye tests etc. These designer back yard Greeders are only interested in making €€€. They don't care about health testing.

muddypaws

Knine wrote: »

Nope unfortunately not as the schemes I mean are Hip, Elbow, Eye tests etc. These designer back yard Greeders are only interested in making €€€. They don't care about health testing.

But maybe, with people paying big money for these dogs, they will take them to the vet when health issues present, and so that data will be recorded from now on.

borderlinemeath

Knine wrote: »

Nope unfortunately not as the schemes I mean are Hip, Elbow, Eye tests etc. These designer back yard Greeders are only interested in making €€€. They don't care about health testing.

No the breeders won't but the owners will. Moreso than the average mongrels of the past I reckon.

peasant

I think a differentiation has to be made here.

1) pure breeds
Some breeds are clearly afflicted by genetically carried diseases, others suffer from bred-in deformities and some poor breeds carry both whereas a lucky few still are comparatively sound.

2) crosses of pure breeds
Crossing two shallow gene pools does not make a deep one ...if you're lucky, mother nature gets the mix right and your cross is healthier than both parents, but it could go the other way as well.
Crossing two deformed breeds certainly doesn't bode well (I recently saw a pic of a Basset/Bulldog mix and there was nothing right with the poor thing)
If you're crossbreeding for health you have to start with genetically healthy stock and try to breed two types that cancel out deformities rather than enhance them (example the breeding drive back to straight back in Sheperds)

3) real mutts
They have actually become quite rare, but they certainly have the greatest genetic diversity and the biggest chance of producing genetically sound offspring.
Unfortunately people are still obsessed with getting a certain (and somewhat predictable) type of offspring from their breeding efforts so true mutts are virtually never included in any controlled breeding program...they are all accidents. And as people become more and more conscious of what is responsible dog ownership less and less "accidents" happen ...which is a good thing for the overall dog population but a huge loss to the doggy genepool.

If we (dog owners and dog breeders) are really interested in healthy dogs, we need to throw our notions of what a dog has to look like overboard fairly quickly and re-introduce the real mutt into breeding.
Breeding should be for health and type (fitness for purpose) and no longer for appearance. Unless we make that change quickly, we will have limited the gene pool so much by exclusion of "undesirables" that we may loose the healthy dog forever.

Nedbroy

borderlinemeath wrote: »

That's why I get so annoyed at pugs crossed with beagles, what are people thinking doing something as dangerous as crossing a dog with known breathing and overheating issues with a dog that needs a colossal amount of exercise?

There's also the other possibility that the breathing problems of the pug are eliminated by the longer body of the beagle and you end up with a dog with the best qualities of both, playful yet reasonably docile and able to run around as much as they feel like. Breeding purebred pugs so that their necks get shorter and breathing problems get worse just so you can show them, that would annoy me more. Most pug crosses I've seen are healthy and all the better for their crossed parentage. The stubbornness of the pug does seem to prevail though if my cross is anything to go by!
(didn't buy from a byb or puppy farm before the rants start please, adopted from an accidental litter)

Knine

Nedbroy wrote: »

There's also the other possibility that the breathing problems of the pug are eliminated by the longer body of the beagle and you end up with a dog with the best qualities of both, playful yet reasonably docile and able to run around as much as they feel like. Breeding purebred pugs so that their necks get shorter and breathing problems get worse just so you can show them, that would annoy me more. Most pug crosses I've seen are healthy and all the better for their crossed parentage. The stubbornness of the pug does seem to prevail though if my cross is anything to go by!
(didn't buy from a byb or puppy farm before the rants start please, adopted from an accidental litter)

Or much more likely the under & lower jaws are mismatched & terrible mouth issues result. I've seen them many times

borderlinemeath

Nedbroy wrote: »

There's also the other possibility that the breathing problems of the pug are eliminated by the longer body of the beagle and you end up with a dog with the best qualities of both, playful yet reasonably docile and able to run around as much as they feel like. Breeding purebred pugs so that their necks get shorter and breathing problems get worse just so you can show them, that would annoy me more. Most pug crosses I've seen are healthy and all the better for their crossed parentage. The stubbornness of the pug does seem to prevail though if my cross is anything to go by!
(didn't buy from a byb or puppy farm before the rants start please, adopted from an accidental litter)

But the people doing the cross breeding are rarely, if ever doing it for health issues, and the issue I have with beagle crosses in particular is crossing a sedentary type dog with known breathing and overheating issues with a dog with a huge enthusiasm for exercise. It's madness.

Nedbroy

Knine wrote: »

Or much more likely the under & lower jaws are mismatched & terrible mouth issues result. I've seen them many times

And would that be more or less likely than a purebred pug having breathing difficulties? Because I've seen them many times also.

borderlinemeath

Nedbroy wrote: »

And would that be more or less likely than a purebred pug having breathing difficulties? Because I've seen them many times also.

Who knows? That's the huge risk. But the guarantee would be that the cross breeders wouldn't have health tested for ANYTHING, whereas a pure bred pug from a reputable breeder should have been tested for plenty of genetic pug issues, too many to list.

peasant

borderlinemeath wrote: »

... crossing a sedentary type dog...

The poor thing can't breathe, hence it can't move.

The issue I would have with "puggles" is that ...yes ...you might get a slightly fitter Pug, but the puggle still has a squashed face and you certainly have a worse off Beagle in there.

If the puggle was the new breed standard for Pug I would see that as an improvement but as it is it's just another designer breed with built-in health problems and as such totally unecessary.

Nedbroy

borderlinemeath wrote: »

But the people doing the cross breeding are rarely, if ever doing it for health issues, and the issue I have with beagle crosses in particular is crossing a sedentary type dog with known breathing and overheating issues with a dog with a huge enthusiasm for exercise. It's madness.

Fair point but breeder intentions aside,
while technically you could end up with a short necked dog that can't run but wants to, you have an equal chance of producing a longer necked dog with no breathing issues and the best qualities of both dogs. I guess I'm sensitive as a cross puppy owner but I just want to get the point across that the worst doesn't always happen, it is a bit of a lottery but then again aren't the odds of producing a healthy dog better than breeding two short necked dogs and creating a guaranteed-to-be short necked puppy?

borderlinemeath

peasant wrote: »

The poor thing can't breathe, hence it can't move.

The issue I would have with "puggles" is that ...yes ...you might get a slightly fitter Pug, but the puggle still has a squashed face and you certainly have a worse off Beagle in there.

If the puggle was the new breed standard for Pug I would see that as an improvement but as it is it's just another designer breed with built-in health problems and as such totally unecessary.

But that's the thing, it might not be a fitter dog, but have the drive of a fitter dog, so be mentally frustrated. I'd rather it was crossed with a longer snouted toy dog that doesn't have the drive of a hound.

Knine

Nedbroy wrote: »

And would that be more or less likely than a purebred pug having breathing difficulties? Because I've seen them many times also.

Much more likely. I see an awful lot of Pugs. 100s in fact.

I also know of a a Pug Cross Border Terrier PTS because of severe behavioural issues. Some idiot thought it a good idea to cross what is basically a lap dog with a terrier breed who is a very active working dog. It had the body of a pug & the mind of a terrier

Nedbroy

Knine wrote: »

Much more likely. I see an awful lot of Pugs. 100s in fact.

I also know of a a Pug Cross Border Terrier PTS because of severe behavioural issues. Some idiot thought it a good idea to cross what is basically a lap dog with a terrier breed who is a very active working dog. It had the body of a pug & the mind of a terrier

What a horribly sad story. I hate to hear of dogs being pts purely for behavioural issues. No such thing as bad dogs and all that. Who knows how that little pup could have thrived with the right owners.

Knine

He could have but he also has terrible problem with his mouth. He could not breath properly or run around. He had slipping knee.

It was very sad for all concerned.

Nedbroy

Knine wrote: »

He could have but he also has terrible problem with his mouth. He could not breath properly or run around. He had slipping knee.

It was very sad for all concerned.

So it was for health problems really?
Very sad indeed. Equally as sad when purebred dogs are put down for health reasons though. Especially the ones down to a small gene pool.

Knine

Nedbroy wrote: »

So it was for health problems really?
Very sad indeed. Equally as sad when purebred dogs are put down for health reasons though. Especially the ones down to a small gene pool.

No a combination of health & behavior problems. I'm in the show dog hobby. It is very rare that a young dog would die from health issues. Lots of breeders travel all over the world for new blood or use AI.

BTW my collie cross died from heart failure very young. She had to be pts.

Nedbroy

Knine wrote: »

No a combination of health & behavior problems. I'm in the show dog hobby. It is very rare that a young dog would die from health issues. Lots of breeders travel all over the world for new blood or use AI.

BTW my collie cross died from heart failure very young. She had to be pts.

Okay. Do you mind me asking why you used the anecdotal evidence of a pug terrier you knew being pts to prove most pug crosses will have health issues? I know of a King Charles pts because it's skull was too big for its little head which was apparently a breeding issue. Doesn't mean all purebred dogs are destined to horrific illnesses or early death. Unfortunately genetics can be a bit of a lottery sometimes.

I'm very sorry to hear you lost your pet.

All I'm trying to say here is that not all crosses are bad ideas, some happy accidents can turn out to be wonderful dogs. I'm 100% certain my energetic JR pug cross with NO breathing problems and a lovely temperament is happy and had a much better quality of life than had her momma been a pug too. Sometimes it works.

Just my two cents.