# Pedigree dogs exposed - A must see



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Pedigree Dogs Exposed | Watch Free Documentary Online


----------



## pinkteaji (Dec 7, 2012)

I remember watching this!! Pretty crazy. Just a question to anyone who is experienced in the breeding world (in and outside of US) but do these sort of pedigree problem happen/prevalent in the US as well? It seems that the UK dogs are suffering really badly from it (at least from the documentary's point of view it seems overwhelming majority of UK pedigree dogs). This is just genuine curiosity because I know there are irresponsible breeders but I never thought about the genetic side of it (breeding to make certain features more prominent even though there is a severe health risk associated to it). 

The German shepherd posture/leg stance always makes me really sad as well as the size of the King Charles Cavalier's heads.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

Very interesting film. And, yes, we certainly have the same problems in the US. As a result of this film and the controversy that resulted, there was at least one serious evaluation of dog breeding in the UK that resulted in a thorough report that was made public (I think there were a couple of others too). An introductory paragraph from an independent inquiry commissioned by the KC and the Dogs Trust describes the reaction to the film and the reason for the independent inquiry as follows:

"The background to the Inquiry was a showing by the BBC on 19 August 2008 of a television documentary called Pedigree Dogs Exposed. It was a hard-hitting piece of journalism written and directed by Jemima Harrison. It was aimed at those breeders of pedigree dogs who had ignored the adverse effects of inbreeding and particularly those who were breeding for extreme conformations. The United Kingdom’s premiere dog club, the Kennel Club, felt that it had been unfairly treated and complained to OfCom, the regulator of the UK Communications industry. At the time of writing, this dispute has not been settled. Nevertheless, the BBC pulled out of its long-standing arrangement to televise Crufts dog show. Moreover, the public reaction was such that Dogs Trust, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals ended their support; and Pedigree Petfoods and Hills Pet Nutrition cancelled their sponsorship of the show. The Associate Parliamentary Group on Animal Welfare (APGAW) announced that it would hold hearings on the breeding of pedigree dogs. At the same time the Kennel Club combined forces with a leading dog charity, Dogs Trust, and announced an independent Inquiry into the breeding of all dogs."

Many times important issues go no farther than people with opposing views digging their heels in and stating their views ever more vehemently. I am impressed that the KC took the step of commissioning this independent inquiry. 

You can read the full report here:
http://breedinginquiry.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/final-dog-inquiry-120110.pdf


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

*3 reports on dog breeding in the UK*

In addition to the report that I mentioned above, there were 2 others. See the following page for links to all 3:

Pedigree dogs - Health and welfare - Dogs


----------



## Leooonie (May 30, 2009)

I have to say the program was disgusting. and I dont mean the dogs. the entire show was extremely biased, with nothing in the way of a fair argument. The Kennel Club was attacked, brutally. The show itself although raising public awareness, and causing an outcry, hasnt necessarily helped all that much. It has infact made the UK public untrusting of the KC which they seem to believe is only about 'shows', whereas of course this is not the case.

Although the KC did introduce some much needed change in some standards and regulation of certain extremities, there was a HUGE amount of misinformation in the show, for example the Rhodesian Ridgeback was attacked for its breeding for Ridged dogs, and the supposed majority of dogs with dermoid sinus which according to the program is 'like a dog version of spina bifida' which is a load of bollocks. In fact if you look into the incidence of dermoid sinus, poodles and boxers are actually more likely to have this.

also, it mentioned the use of hair removal creams on chinese crested dogs. I know some americans do use shaving and hair removal creams on their dogs, but in the UK I cant actually imagine this occurring. In the UK we are not allowed to use hairsprays or colourants on our dogs, so I can only imagine this would be similar for the hairless breeds?

and actually, the GSD has had manny checks in place for dogs for much longer than many other breeds. Hip dysplacia is not purely genetic, and so it is unfair to say only the breeding of these dogs is causing it.

Basically, the program is one sided, poorly researched, and over dramatic.


----------



## cliffdweller (Jan 31, 2011)

Leooonie said:


> I have to say the program was disgusting. and I dont mean the dogs. the entire show was extremely biased, with nothing in the way of a fair argument. The Kennel Club was attacked, brutally. The show itself although raising public awareness, and causing an outcry, hasnt necessarily helped all that much. It has infact made the UK public untrusting of the KC which they seem to believe is only about 'shows', whereas of course this is not the case.


I think the point of _PDEx_ was to show some of the untoward consequences of breeding dogs primarily for show [/pet]. It presented extreme instances where I think there is little question that breeding for certain traits has led to health issues in some breeds of dogs. I also feel that it is undeniable that these issues have not heretofore been adequately addressed by those responsible for the care of the breeds in question. 

It was not a show about presenting a complete or balanced view of "pedigree dogs" and the breeding of them, but a show about where such breeding has contributed to health issues, which are not being adequately addressed by breeders or breed clubs. I think it did a reasonable job, and has succeeded in awakening many people to the underexposed consequences of breeding for "extreme" (fashionable) traits in some breeds.




Leooonie said:


> ... there was a HUGE amount of misinformation in the show, for example the Rhodesian Ridgeback was attacked for its breeding for Ridged dogs, and the supposed majority of dogs with dermoid sinus which according to the program is 'like a dog version of spina bifida' which is a load of bollocks.


The _PDEx_ people have acknowledged that the "spinal bifida" reference was a mistake:


> We made a mistake in the UK version of Pedigree Dogs Exposed in referring to the ridge as “a mild form of spina bifida”. In fact, it is dermoid sinus that some sources within the breed describe as being similar to a mild form of spina bifida, not the ridge. So although we were right in our central tenet – that breeding for the ridge costs some dogs their lives – our mistake made the problem appear greater than it is. For this, I would like to apologise to Rhodesian Ridgeback breeders.


Pedigree Dogs Exposed - The Blog: A ridge too far?​
I do not see a huge amount of misinformation in the piece. Perhaps you could provide more examples or references ?



Leooonie said:


> In fact if you look into the incidence of dermoid sinus, poodles and boxers are actually more likely to have this.


I am unable to find information verifying this assertion. Could you provide a reference ?



Leooonie said:


> also, it mentioned the use of hair removal creams on chinese crested dogs. I know some americans do use shaving and hair removal creams on their dogs, but in the UK I cant actually imagine this occurring. In the UK we are not allowed to use hairsprays or colourants on our dogs, so I can only imagine this would be similar for the hairless breeds?


I would guess that the rules are frequently broken there, as it seems they are just about everywhere, when it comes to this sort of thing.



Leooonie said:


> and actually, the GSD has had manny checks in place for dogs for much longer than many other breeds. Hip dysplacia is not purely genetic, and so it is unfair to say only the breeding of these dogs is causing it.


I think it is generally acknowledged that genetics (hence, breeding) is an important (if not the most important) contributing factor in the incidence of HD in dogs. Part of the problem with HD -- and other afflictions that are often not immediately apparent at an early stage in a dog's life --, as I see it, is that dogs bred primarily for show (or for breeding) are frequently bred relatively young with virtually no or very inadequate testing of their physical health (soundness). A trot around the show ring cannot demonstrate such physical soundness beyond what is necessary for the dog to function at a very basic level. But showing well (of course, based on a lot of stuff other than physical soundness) is frequently a (_the_) major determinant of whether a dog will be bred or not.



Leooonie said:


> Basically, the program is one sided, poorly researched, and over dramatic.


I think_ PDEx_ presents a side of the breeding of pedigree dogs that is not immediately apparent to people who are not familiar with the breeding of the dogs they regard, purchase & love as _pets_ (... the dog business is big business ...).I think awareness of this side of the dog world is important and that _PDEx_ has done a reasonable job of awakening this awareness and fostering discussion of it.

There have been other interesting discussions of _PDEx_ on this board, e.g. here.


----------

