Health effects of spaying and neutering dogs

Very interesting article. Thanks for posting. Clearly this article indicates that neutering and spaying should wait until the dog is mature. The article addresses the clinical positives and negatives with, for the most part, the negatives outweighing the positives. Is it really the recommendation that we stop neutering and spaying?
We also should consider the "social" positives on which most spay/neuter campaigns are based and that is population control.
I would also like to see research comparing aggression tendencies between neutered and intact males.
Then there is the problem of keeping an intact male confined when he senses a female in heat. Most fences will not work. :
I will certainly bring a copy of this article to my Vet on my next visit. This article should produce a spirited debate.
Thanks again.

This article is an attempt to summarize the long-term health effects associated with spay/neuter in dogs,
both positive and negative, that can be found in the veterinary medical literature. This article will not discuss
the impact of spay/neuter on population control, or the impact of spay/neuter on behavior.

Click to expand...

Where's the thumbs down smiley thing? I agree with Dukesdad - to the uneducated it could appear this article reccomends not neutering/spaying at all. Additionally, I think the vast majority of dog owners in the US are not at all close to responsible enough to handle intact males or females until 14-18 months of age. On this board - sure most could probably deal with the responsibility, but I don't think this is anything that will revolutionize when common household pets should be neutered or spayed.

I'm also curious about why so many of her sources are from 1970-1988, veterinary medicine was a lot different then, and I'd be far more apt to put faith in her more recent studies cited than those from nearly 40 years ago. (Obviously I haven't read many that old)

ETC: Thanks for posting this Laura, it was an interesting read nonetheless

Laura, while this was an interesting read, I still believe and KNOW that the MAJORITY of the puplic pet owners couldn't and SHOULDN'T own an intact pet until they "mature". I think it's careless to do so and encouraging people to wait when most people do not research the breed they get, let alone actually train their dogs properly...and there are so many GD homeless animals running around the country.

Sorry. I don't believe that any dog that is not indended for competition in the ring or in the field should be intact. Color me cynical, but I for one am sick and tired of cleaning up after people's careless mistakes.

And if SOMEONE could prove to me that people could handle this responsibility, I'd eat my shoe and sing the national anthem in 5 different languages.

I'm sure the owners of all of the dogs that created these were really responsible:





That is in one shelter in Lousiana. 47 dogs in 24 kennel runs. Memphis, Arkansas, Michigan...all over...same thing. Now tell me again to keep a pet dog intact?

Interesting topic to say the least. I thought long and hard before having Tal neutered at 8 months. I knew when I got him that I would have him neutered because I had no intention of showing him or otherwise competing with him, or allow him to stud. He is a member of my family, my pet etc and I did not want to risk any accidents of unwanted puppies.

I decided to go ahead now for one main reason. His daycare requires that dogs be neutered at 7 months or they cannot attend. Given this is a great way for him to socialize with other dogs, plus it is good for him to spend time being a dog with other dogs, I did not want to deny him that joy.

I thought long and hard about it and given the daycare thing, plus I take him out as much as I can and the last thing I wanted to have to do was try and control him around a female in season.

I considered any increased risk of negative side effects as a result of having him neutered. While there may be an increased risk, there are other factors that come into play as well. There are lots of dogs who live a long, healthy and happy life as family members who were spayed/neutered at a young age. Even with an increased risk of these maladies does not mean that your dog will actually have one of them.

yellojakesmom said:

This article is an attempt to summarize the long-term health effects associated with spay/neuter in dogs,
both positive and negative, that can be found in the veterinary medical literature. This article will not discuss
the impact of spay/neuter on population control, or the impact of spay/neuter on behavior.

Click to expand...

I'm also curious about why so many of her sources are from 1970-1988, veterinary medicine was a lot different then, and I'd be far more apt to put faith in her more recent studies cited than those from nearly 40 years ago. (Obviously I haven't read many that old)

ETC: Thanks for posting this Laura, it was an interesting read nonetheless

Click to expand...

I'm not too worried that the uneducated will be reading it. I suspect an above average education is necessary to read it. I think it would put most people to sleep.

The reason so many of the sources date back into the 1970s and 1980's is because that's when those particular issues were studied. When recent studies were done, I referenced those too. It's not like the same issues are getting re-studied every few years.

Incidentally, there appears to be a perception among many that scientific studies come with an expiration date, or that they go stale after a some period of time. Not so. Good science is good science, whether it was done in 2006 or 1966. "Newer" does not necessarily equal "better".

Newer work can supercede older work when it is better. That's why the two most recent studies on prostate cancer risk as a function of neuter status carry more weight than the older ones. Not because they are newer, but because they were better designed studies with control populations. The older studies didn't have control populations.

Most of my article is based on retrospective epidemiological studies. Those kind of studies were done 40 years ago pretty much the way they are done today. Their findings don't rely on modern scientific breakthroughs in molecular biology, genetics, etc.

I hope that answers the question.

Laura Sanborn

Interesting article, but I still don't regret fixing my dogs when I did. Joker and Murph were done at 12 months old. I would liked to have waited until they were 18 months but "male" behavior seriously got in the way of their field training. The marking, humping, chasing females, etc., got out of control. Training alone could not fix this. I was working against instinct. Fixing them solved all these problems.

Trick my Collie cross was fixed at 6 months. Shelter policy. Maisy was spayed after her first season. Again, no regrets.

I think the average pet owner should not wait until the dog is 18 months old for the reasons others have said. I have seen owners with bitches in the height of their season running off leash around parks/fields during the day time. There are so many irresponsible idiots out there, the sooner it gets done the better IMO.