The link provided http://www.morrisanimalfoundation.org/apply/studies/dog/complete.asp#dogcompletecardiovascular only tells us that Dr. Meurs made what amounts to a press release back in January of 06 about a theory she has. What Dr. Meurs presented doesn’t really rise to the level of an abstract. There is no data presented to back up any claim.  Dr. Meurs “studied” one family of Dobermans and believes that family has an autosomal dominant mode of transmission for DCM.  She provides no proof of such a finding and fails to cite where this information has been published and reviewed by peers.   If there is credible, published, peer-reviewed research supporting her theory, we need to take a look at it… it was NOT provided in the link.   I urge that this kind of data be provided before we go one step further. Otherwise, the premise of the post (and others that followed) is very misleading.  And, there is nothing at the link posted to back-up a claim that we are on the verge of genetic testing that will guarantee us a DCM free Doberman. 

The description which was posted about autosomal dominance is merely a text book definition; it does not support Dr. Meurs theory. 

We are grasping at straws here… with potentially devastating consequences for the Doberman breed.  The claim that there are now “no excuses” is more than a huge leap, it is misleading, somewhat insulting, inflammatory and would lead us down a witch-hunt path which is not remotely grounded in science.

When a life-ending disease affects an individual (or a family) it can be devastating.  I don’t mean to piss on breeder’s hopes for a test, cure or full-proof way of avoiding DCM, but the material cited is not proof of anything at all. It is simply a reason to conduct research. That is about the strongest statement one could make.  What follows is our point of view… put forth here to open some lines of discussion. 

Let’s review some of what we know about DCM:  A dog can be DCM affected and yet die of other causes (i.e., cancer, being hit by a car, etc.). A dog can live a full life (supposedly with a genetic defect to develop DCM), yet not develop DCM until late in life (after years of no symptoms). Some dogs develop DCM early in life, some live to 10 and beyond before developing DCM. 

In Dr. Meurs press release, when she theorized that DCM has an autosomal dominant mode of transmission, we have to ask, “How many generations did she study?  What was her criteria for determining that certain animals who died were free of DCM?” What percentage of the dogs did she have necropsies on?  What was their age when they died? What was the cause of death? Who determined the cause of death and how? And, since there is no way to determine the DCM status of a dog until the disease manifests itself, how did Dr. Meurs determine that the dog who died of other causes would not have eventually developed DCM if it had lived longer? How many relatives are still alive, with the possibility of developing DCM?   These are important questions… the answers to which would be covered by credible peer review. We are a long way from that point. 

At this point we are presented with a theory that DCM in Dobermans is autosomal dominant. Based upon the research of one “family” of Dobermans, Dr. Meurs hopes to discover data that will be applicable to all Dobermans.  One obvious problem with this is that all Dobermans are not affected by DCM the same way. For example, not all Dobermans die of DCM at the same age. The expression is not uniform across affected animals.  Also, Dr. Meurs hopes that her observations of this one family will lead to a genetic test that will tell us if a breeding animal has the genetic defect for DCM, but will this test tell us if our DCM affected dog is going to die at 3, 7, 10, or 14? 

Multiple genetic defects can cause the same disease; this could very well be true of DCM. So, the DCM in one dog may not be caused by the same genetic defect as the DCM in another dog.   It may not be possible to test for every defect that can cause DCM. Even in humans, we only test for the most common genetic defects for a given disease. There are probably multiple genetic defects that cause DCM, so, even when we find one genetic defect that is a cause, we have not necessarily found all the defects that can contribute to or cause DCM.

If Dr. Meurs theory for the mode of transmission of DCM is accurate and can be applied to all Dobermans, and we can develop is a test to determine the DCM clear dog, then a Heterozygous animal (DCM affected) bred to a non DCM Doberman will produce 50%  heterozygous (DCM affected) and 50% homozygous (DCM clear).  Let’s say those 50% heterozygous DCM affected dogs live to an average age of 7-10 years old. Assuming that these DCM affected dogs don’t die of something else first, one might argue that 7-10 years is a good life in exchange for other outstanding breed qualities.   Are we going to discard outstanding breed virtues (which breeders need and desire) because of a life span of 7 – 10 years? To maintain breed type and other qualities, is there some age beyond which it is acceptable for a dog to die of DCM?  Is that age eight, ten or fourteen?

We may discover the cure for DCM… or a dog can live to 14 even with DCM. 

There is no evidence presented that this research is the right track, Dr. Meurs may be taking the wrong approach entirely.

Before we come together as a group and consider formal action to discriminate against the very foundation of our breed, based on what is essentially a Press Release from January of 2006, we need to be aware of the consequences.  This will mean a profound, dramatic shift in the Doberman breed. If we eliminate all breeding lines that have DCM, we will be summarily eliminating almost all of our top Dobermans. Do we want to go this new direction?  I think we need to take a step back and ask some important questions including: Has Dr. Meurs’ data been presented to peer review journals? Has it been duplicated? What do peer review journals say about this data?

With respect to the lists we are compiling for Cyberdobes, there are lost of problems with the DCM lists themselves and with the assumptions being made based on lists. These lists may be comforting to pet buyers who want data in the hopes that data alone is a guarantee of something.  For a list to be of applicable value to breeders, we would have to exhume every Doberman who ever lived, and perform some test to see if they harbored the genetic potential for DCM (and beyond the problems of such an undertaking, we don’t have that test yet).  Dogs who died of other causes may have harbored the genetic potential for DCM, they just didn’t live long enough to develop DCM because something else killed them first.

What does it mean to be on the DCM list? It means a necropsy determined that the dog died of DCM. 

What does it mean to not be on the list? Nothing at all with respect to DCM.  

If a dog dies of something other than DCM -  that does NOT mean he did not have the genetic potential to develop or transmit DCM. All it means is that he/she did not die of DCM.  The fact that a dog died of other causes, and a necropsy determined that the cause of death was something other than DCM ( i.e., infection, cancer, being hit by a car,  a safe fell from the sky, the dog was struck by lightening,  or any of a 1001 other causes of death), is not proof that the dog would not have developed DCM if he had lived longer.  Our lists might give breeders both false sense of confidence about breeding lines being clear of DCM and a false sense of blame about who is transmitting DCM.  These lists are dangerous.

Considering what is at stake here, we need solid science based upon credible research. 

In the interim, we need to remember that some of the greatest Dobermans who ever lived died of DCM. Some of the greatest Dobermans in our breed have produced DCM or are in the pedigree of DCM dogs. Almost every top dog in this country descends directly or indirectly from dogs that had and/or produced DCM, they are the very backbone of our Breed… they define Doberman breed type and quality. I am speaking of the Windwalker, the Vindicator, Kafka, Eddie ...  Thunder, the list goes on and on. Look in almost any pedigree; these bloodlines are there and so is DCM …  somewhere.

There are HUGE assumptions being made here, one is that we are all willing to completely abandon breed type and the tremendous quality produced by the lines of DCM affected dogs so that we can gain a few more years with our dogs.  Whether it is PC or not, I am not willing to act rashly out of emotion and discard generations of quality simply because of the fear that my dogs may die at 6 – 10 of DCM.   DCM or no, I am not willing to give up bloodlines which profoundly anchor Doberman Breed type so that some people can have “a guarantee” that their dog will live to be 14.

NO THANK YOU!!!! 

I will take 6, 8 or 10 years with dogs related to the Windwalker, the Vindicator, Kafka, Eddie, Dagger, Thunder and/or their progeny any day of the week, even knowing about DCM in their bloodlines. Without them, we would not have the breed as we know it today.   

The emotion we read again and again from owners of dogs who have died of DCM is, in some ways inflammatory. What we are reading is that people are grieving over the loss of their precious loved one, and – understandably- they want to lash out and blame something… they blame DCM for their grief. The simple truth is, when we loose those we love, we grieve, regardless of the cause of death. Arthur and I grieved terribly when we lost Liz last year and it had nothing to do with DCM. We were grieving the loss of a cherished family member.  Even dogs that have DCM and who have died of DCM still provide beautiful, valued, useful contributions to the breed and to their owner’s lives. 

I have no crystal ball, but I would not give up one precious moment with ANY of my loved ones simply because of how or when they will die.  And make no mistake, when any loved one dies, we grieve, regardless of the cause of death and regardless of whether they have shared our life for  3 years or 30.  Death - for any reason - is sad. It is not more or less so because it is the result of  DCM.

Bottom line, we need to tread carefully. I can see this issue tearing the DPCA apart.  Based upon what was presented in the link, calling that press release “research” and urging that we act upon it to exclude any animal from a breeding population (without solid, published, peer-reviewed science) is simply wrong.  If it comes to it, I would rather deal with the consequences of DCM than abandon a breeding line based on DCM status.   For those who want a 14 year guarantee on a Doberman - based on the credible science we have in 2006- I don’t see how you can achieve that goal…yet. It is still a ways off in the future.  And, every step of the way, we need credible, published, peer reviewed  science to guide us.  

 

-written by Elaine Greenwood/published on this site with permission of the author

http://logresfarm.com/

To Top

Home