Zeuterin- Chemical Castration

[Kpowell14]

I'm currently writing a research paper on Chemical Castration using Zeuterin ( formally known as Neutersol and known internationally as Esterilsol)

I figured it would be a good topic of discussion on the forum as Zeuterin is expected to be released onto the US market December 2012... Oh wait, that's This Month!!!!

Side note- I work for a big corporate veterinary practice that I bet will Never adopt Zeuterin into its practices

Do the vet schools talk about chemical castration?

What do you think about chemical castration?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[bunnity]

It was presented in our male repro lectures with the main concern being injection technique. The professor said it was marketed to vets as painless, easy, and not requiring sedation, which turned out to not be the case.

I think this could be an option for clients that want their dog to look intact but don't want them to breed, and for wider population control if it turns out cheaper than surgery, but I'm inclined to see how it does this time around before recommending it to my future clients.

Of course, there is the issue of still having testosterone and its effects on physiology and behavior, though our repro professors said it's a mixed bag as far as health effects for male dogs (less BPH and prostatitis but more prostate cancer with neutering, for example). But that, as well as the ever-controversial behavioral effects of testosterone, will be a big hurdle for this product's success.

 

[Maschka1]

This is the first I have heard of it, but I plan to do some research. I think there is more benefit then just the "appearance of an intact dog" if it doesn't mess with sex hormones too much, maybe it would allow vets to stop pushing pediatric neuters. There is a lot of research out there on the costs and benefits of these procedures and some are relatively convincing at pointing to early spay/neuter for causing more orthopedic issues, especially in large dogs. Nature designed puberty for a reason, maybe this would be an option to allow dogs to mature properly?

 

[Kpowell14]

It was presented in our male repro lectures with the main concern being injection technique. The professor said it was marketed to vets as painless, easy, and not requiring sedation, which turned out to not be the case.

I think this could be an option for clients that want their dog to look intact but don't want them to breed, and for wider population control if it turns out cheaper than surgery, but I'm inclined to see how it does this time around before recommending it to my future clients.

Of course, there is the issue of still having testosterone and its effects on physiology and behavior, though our repro professors said it's a mixed bag as far as health effects for male dogs (less BPH and prostatitis but more prostate cancer with neutering, for example). But that, as well as the ever-controversial behavioral effects of testosterone, will be a big hurdle for this product's success.

Bahaha yea doing it without sedation doesn't seem like a smart thing to do. Especially when injection technique is important.

My research has turned up that the manufacturer is pushing it more for non profits and shelter/ high volume spay neuter clinics as it is cheaper and requires less time on the staffs part.

I think a big turn off for a lot of private practices will be that the manufacturer is requiring a training session of vets if they wish to use the product..

 

[bunnity]

Bahaha yea doing it without sedation doesn't seem like a smart thing to do. Especially when injection technique is important.

My research has turned up that the manufacturer is pushing it more for non profits and shelter/ high volume spay neuter clinics as it is cheaper and requires less time on the staffs part.

I think a big turn off for a lot of private practices will be that the manufacturer is requiring a training session of vets if they wish to use the product..

I'm glad they do have a training required though. Seems like a lot could go wrong if it went IV instead of intratesticularly.

Will it actually be cheaper - especially since sedation is required? Most vets doing high volume work can neuter a young dog in <10 minutes so I wonder if this will really be much different.

 

[Kpowell14]

This is the first I have heard of it, but I plan to do some research. I think there is more benefit then just the "appearance of an intact dog" if it doesn't mess with sex hormones too much, maybe it would allow vets to stop pushing pediatric neuters. There is a lot of research out there on the costs and benefits of these procedures and some are relatively convincing at pointing to early spay/neuter for causing more orthopedic issues, especially in large dogs. Nature designed puberty for a reason, maybe this would be an option to allow dogs to mature properly?

When you research it, look for Zeuterin, Neutersol, Esterisol, and Testoblock.. It goes by a lot of names.

 

[Kpowell14]

I'm glad they do have a training required though. Seems like a lot could go wrong if it went IV instead of intratesticularly.

Will it actually be cheaper - especially since sedation is required? Most vets doing high volume work can neuter a young dog in <10 minutes so I wonder if this will really be much different.

See this is what I was thinking too.. I know at my clinic we charge a ******ed amount for sedation .. We also charge a lot for Normal neuters as well ...

so while I think it will be cheaper, I'm not sure I would want to save x amount of money to have my dog "neutered" while he may still have the secondary behaviors related to testosterone in his system..

And I think the biggest thing about the time thing is that this procedure can have the dogs in and out in like 30 minutes.. As soon as the sedation has worn off they can go home, so they aren't using a kennel to recover them like a normal neuter that stays in the hospital for x amount of hours post SX...

I don't think I would do it on my dogs, but it's still very interesting

 

[StartingoverVet]

- especially since sedation is required? Most vets doing high volume work can neuter a young dog in <10 minutes so I wonder if this will really be much different.

I don't see why sedation is required... I would be perfectly willing to have someone stab me in the...

Actually on second thought... I see the point.. .

But honestly, if sedation is required I don't see much benefit. The training part seems pretty benign. It will take time, but CE is part of life as a vet.

 

[Kpowell14]

I don't see why sedation is required... I would be perfectly willing to have someone stab me in the...

Actually on second thought... I see the point.. .

But honestly, if sedation is required I don't see much benefit. The training part seems pretty benign. It will take time, but CE is part of life as a vet.

Yes very true.. I think the training session was for 5 hrs of CE.. only draw back was that it was only being held somewhere on the east coast. I would think that if they did a " coming to an area near you" promotion they would get more interest

 

[bunnity]

See this is what I was thinking too.. I know at my clinic we charge a ******ed amount for sedation .. We also charge a lot for Normal neuters as well ...

so while I think it will be cheaper, I'm not sure I would want to save x amount of money to have my dog "neutered" while he may still have the secondary behaviors related to testosterone in his system..

And I think the biggest thing about the time thing is that this procedure can have the dogs in and out in like 30 minutes.. As soon as the sedation has worn off they can go home, so they aren't using a kennel to recover them like a normal neuter that stays in the hospital for x amount of hours post SX...

I don't think I would do it on my dogs, but it's still very interesting

Private clinics charge way more than HQHV spay neuter places though (which is a whole conversation in itself). So if HQHV clinics are the target, in my area you'd need to beat a price of around $100 including sedation (I'd love to get into actual itemized costs if you have any).

I wouldn't feel comfortable discharging a patient that fast after sedation, but having it be faster is nice. Although I don't think having a kennel really adds to the price that much.

 

[Kpowell14]

Here is the link to the website for this product everyone! There Is like a 5 minute video posted on the front page that shows a dog having the procedure done.


http://http://www.arksciences.com/

 

[dyachei]

I worry about the "proving" part of it in shelter medicine. I guess you'd have to tattoo or something to be sure that the pet was neutered via this drug. It's a lot easier to prove that a dog has no testicles (although we do sometimes see bilateral abdominal cryptorchids).

Also, I'm only a year out and do a neuter in 10 mins with intradermal suturing. I'm sure shelter vets are much faster than I am.

 

[wolfspeaker]

If they developed something similar for horses, I could see it gaining more popularity. At least, in the area around me. Not sure about stables and whatnot. A lot of people prefer the look of a stallion. It's a bit of a problem. (but if testosterone was still rampant, I guess it would still be sort of a problem).

 

[that redhead]

I worry about the "proving" part of it in shelter medicine. I guess you'd have to tattoo or something to be sure that the pet was neutered via this drug. It's a lot easier to prove that a dog has no testicles (although we do sometimes see bilateral abdominal cryptorchids).

This was my first thought, too.

Plus, they have those plastic fake "implants" that you can put in the scrotum to give your dog the illusion of testicles. So you can impress all of your friends with your dog's manly nuts

 

[Kpowell14]

This was my first thought, too.

Plus, they have those plastic fake "implants" that you can put in the scrotum to give your dog the illusion of testicles. So you can impress all of your friends with your dog's manly nuts

I had never heard of this until yesterday. It amazes me the lengths people will go

 

[Lissarae06]

I don't get why people want their dogs to look intact. Dog balls are not attractive.

I have heard of chemical castration but I don't know much about it. I will have to research it a bit before forming an opinion.

 

[vetgirl4eva]

I totally agree lissarae06! Dog balls are ugly.

 

[that redhead]

Here's the high end version: http://www.neuticles.com/

Things to note:
Kim Kardashian with her dog
Different "models" under FAQs
Cost: $114 for a pair of Xsmall feline ones to $600 for a pair of fancy xxlarge canine ones.

 

[StartingoverVet]

I don't get why people want their dogs to look intact. Dog balls are not attractive.

My volunteer time was in a vet clinic in Los Angeles, and I have to say a fair number of gay guys were interested in the neuticals. I didn't really get it, but that seemed to be the most prevalent characteristic of the people who went for them.

To each their own.

I agree that I would like to see some standard method of indicating that the testicles are no longer functional... tatooing is certainly an option. Or maybe add the info to the microchip?

 

[dvmdreamer]

Here's the high end version: http://www.neuticles.com/

This is too funny. I love that a Daily show quote is the first "media publicity" listed. And that all the vets' quotes are to the effect of "i think this is rediculous but if it makes people get their dogs neutered, whatever."

 

[wolfspeaker]

I don't get why people want their dogs to look intact. Dog balls are not attractive.

I have heard of chemical castration but I don't know much about it. I will have to research it a bit before forming an opinion.

The only sane reason I can think of, is for a guard dog to look more foreboding.

 

[Kpowell14]

Here's the high end version: http://www.neuticles.com/

Things to note:
Kim Kardashian with her dog
Different "models" under FAQs
Cost: $114 for a pair of Xsmall feline ones to $600 for a pair of fancy xxlarge canine ones.

Wow... That is just ridiculous

 

[Maschka1]

The only sane reason I can think of, is for a guard dog to look more foreboding.

I'm not sure why it would make the dog look more foreboding. Perhaps that is because I associate testicles with a show dog (AKA the princess).

I though Neuticles were more for trying to pull one over on dog show officials after an unfortunate accident. Everyday people get these things?

I also have to say, no matter how minor the surgery, a neuter is still a surgery. There could be some discomfort prevented. From what I can tell, this could probably be done with a whole lot less sedation, too. That said, it looks like some of the side effects could be just as bad as post surgical recovery. ie swelling and scrotal ulcers.

I have to admit, I like the direction of the idea. It seems like veterinarians are all to ready to cut off/out body parts that don't suit them. It would be nice to see less invasive options, in the field.

And lets get real, we neuter our pets to prevent new, unwanted animals. I can see some species where castration may help to handle them better, such as a 1200 lb horse, but "unwanted behavior" in a cat or dog? I believe it is a rarity that those behaviors cannot be corrected with behavior modification and training.

 

[equineconstant]

I'm not sure why it would make the dog look more foreboding. Perhaps that is because I associate testicles with a show dog (AKA the princess).

Speaking of show dogs, I'm not too clear on the showing regulations, but would this be allowed in the show ring? I mean, I guess a lot of owners would want to potentially breed their prize-winner, but do you think there could be any application there?

 

[wolfspeaker]

I'm not sure why it would make the dog look more foreboding. Perhaps that is because I associate testicles with a show dog (AKA the princess).

I though Neuticles were more for trying to pull one over on dog show officials after an unfortunate accident. Everyday people get these things?

I also have to say, no matter how minor the surgery, a neuter is still a surgery. There could be some discomfort prevented. From what I can tell, this could probably be done with a whole lot less sedation, too. That said, it looks like some of the side effects could be just as bad as post surgical recovery. ie swelling and scrotal ulcers.

I have to admit, I like the direction of the idea. It seems like veterinarians are all to ready to cut off/out body parts that don't suit them. It would be nice to see less invasive options, in the field.

And lets get real, we neuter our pets to prevent new, unwanted animals. I can see some species where castration may help to handle them better, such as a 1200 lb horse, but "unwanted behavior" in a cat or dog? I believe it is a rarity that those behaviors cannot be corrected with behavior modification and training.

If you can find a great way to 'train' an intact male cat to not spray, please let me know! That's a pretty common unwanted behavior that usually ceases a couple weeks after neutering.

 

[dyachei]

If you can find a great way to 'train' an intact male cat to not spray, please let me know! That's a pretty common unwanted behavior that usually ceases a couple weeks after neutering.

It is also how my cat lost his being intact privileges. Peeing on a backpack while the owner of said backpack is in vet school loses you testicles. You have been warned

 

[Lissarae06]

It is also how my cat lost his being intact privileges. Peeing on a backpack while the owner of said backpack is in vet school loses you testicles. You have been warned

My cat without testicles (either one of my males or my female) peed on my backpack. I had to toss my calendar and a bunch of notes. Vet thinks it was related to my pregnancy hormones so we got a plug in diffuser thing. It seems to have helped. But yes, there are more reasons to neuter than just sterilization.

 

[Maschka1]

Speaking of show dogs, I'm not too clear on the showing regulations, but would this be allowed in the show ring? I mean, I guess a lot of owners would want to potentially breed their prize-winner, but do you think there could be any application there?

That is an interesting question. I think it would sort of defeat the purpose of showing, though, wouldn't it? I mean the whole point is to prove that your dog is "worthy" of breeding...

That said, I was reading it does lower testosterone, just doesn't obliterate it, so I wonder if you wouldn't have quite as "bulky" of a dog, thus maybe it wouldn't win, anyway? I dunno...

It would seem, however, that the only way to know the procedure was done would be to get your hands on the records from the vet, so I am not sure how anyone could regulate it.

 

[wolfspeaker]

It is also how my cat lost his being intact privileges. Peeing on a backpack while the owner of said backpack is in vet school loses you testicles. You have been warned

I will be sure not to pee on YOUR backpack!

 

[dyachei]

My cat without testicles (either one of my males or my female) peed on my backpack. I had to toss my calendar and a bunch of notes. Vet thinks it was related to my pregnancy hormones so we got a plug in diffuser thing. It seems to have helped. But yes, there are more reasons to neuter than just sterilization.

lemme guess. Feliway? I love that stuff. Best invention ever for car rides with anxious cats.

 

[Lissarae06]

lemme guess. Feliway? I love that stuff. Best invention ever for car rides with anxious cats.

The one we got was Nutri-Vet.

 

[dyachei]

The one we got was Nutri-Vet.

still the same active pheromone though, right? I sprayed the crap out of their carriers and the car when we moved from TN on a 10 hr car trip. They make a wipe form now, too.

 

[Maschka1]

If you can find a great way to 'train' an intact male cat to not spray, please let me know! That's a pretty common unwanted behavior that usually ceases a couple weeks after neutering.

I have lived with intact dogs who don't mark and neutered dogs who do but I have never found a dog that couldn't work through it, with consistency. Cats, on the other hand are not my thing, and their behavior is like a mysterious black hole, to me. I only know what I have read in animal behavior books or those "cat training" TV shows, but, it seems, people have found ways to manage it.
Ultimately, marking/spraying is a behavior and I believe any behavior has the potential for modification. Obviously not always a quick and easy fix, but still fixable.

 

[Lissarae06]

still the same active pheromone though, right? I sprayed the crap out of their carriers and the car when we moved from TN on a 10 hr car trip. They make a wipe form now, too.

I think so. This is the first time I have used a diffuser thing for the cats so I'm not too familiar with the different products. I don't care what it is as long as it works

 

[dyachei]

I have lived with intact dogs who don't mark and neutered dogs who do but I have never found a dog that couldn't work through it, with consistency. Cats, on the other hand are not my thing, and their behavior is like a mysterious black hole, to me. I only know what I have read in animal behavior books or those "cat training" TV shows, but, it seems, people have found ways to manage it.
Ultimately, marking/spraying is a behavior and I believe any behavior has the potential for modification. Obviously not always a quick and easy fix, but still fixable.

Yes, but why not make it easier for that pet to modify that behavior. When you don't have the same urges, you're less likely to act on them.

 

[that redhead]

Speaking of show dogs, I'm not too clear on the showing regulations, but would this be allowed in the show ring? I mean, I guess a lot of owners would want to potentially breed their prize-winner, but do you think there could be any application there?

I'm pretty sure they must be intact. I will ask my dog showing friend

 

[Maschka1]

Yes, but why not make it easier for that pet to modify that behavior. When you don't have the same urges, you're less likely to act on them.

Well obviously I am playing a little devils advocate, here, and the situation is different for everyone, but...

Would using play, manipulating the environment, offering positive reinforcement and options for success, not be easier on the animal then anesthesia and surgery?

While researching a project for a class last semester I found several studies showing a longer life in intact animals, and less chance for certain cancers ( like osteosarcoma in dogs). So I guess if I were trying to weigh cost and benefit, it is harder then just weighing "the urine" factor.

All my pets are altered, however I also prefer to wait until after they have reached puberty or adulthood, if possible. I am not really saying any option is right or wrong, just that the choice isnt as cut and dry as people try to make it out, to be. Everyone's situation is different and I am not going to look down on someone for what they choose (OK I take that back- neglectful people who dont alter their pets kinda rub me the wrong way).


here are a couple sources regarding osteosarcoma and bone cancers from spay/neuter in dogs:

1. Dawn M. Cooley, Benjamin C. Beranek, Deborah L. Schlittler, Nita W. Glickman, Lawrence T. Glickman, and David J. Waters2, Endogenous Gonadal Hormone Exposure and Bone Sarcoma Risk, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev,11:1434-1440; 2002
2. Ru, G., Terracini, B., and Glickman, L. T. Host related risk factors for canine osteosarcoma. Vet. J., 156: 31&#8211;39, 1998.

 

[Lissarae06]

Well obviously I am playing a little devils advocate, here, and the situation is different for everyone, but...

Would using play, manipulating the environment, offering positive reinforcement and options for success, not be easier on the animal then anesthesia and surgery?

While researching a project for a class last semester I found several studies showing a longer life in intact animals, and less chance for certain cancers ( like osteosarcoma in dogs). So I guess if I were trying to weigh cost and benefit, it is harder then just weighing "the urine" factor.

All my pets are altered, however I also prefer to wait until after they have reached puberty or adulthood, if possible. I am not really saying any option is right or wrong, just that the choice isnt as cut and dry as people try to make it out, to be. Everyone's situation is different and I am not going to look down on someone for what they choose (OK I take that back- neglectful people who dont alter their pets kinda rub me the wrong way).


here are a couple sources regarding osteosarcoma and bone cancers from spay/neuter in dogs:

1. Dawn M. Cooley, Benjamin C. Beranek, Deborah L. Schlittler, Nita W. Glickman, Lawrence T. Glickman, and David J. Waters2, Endogenous Gonadal Hormone Exposure and Bone Sarcoma Risk, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev,11:1434-1440; 2002
2. Ru, G., Terracini, B., and Glickman, L. T. Host related risk factors for canine osteosarcoma. Vet. J., 156: 31&#8211;39, 1998.

Spaying before the first heat cycle all but eliminates the risk of mammary cancer (.5% risk if done before first heat). The door swings both ways. Also, not every client is going to want to go through a sometimes lengthy training process when their stuff is getting ruined.

 

[wolfspeaker]

Well obviously I am playing a little devils advocate, here, and the situation is different for everyone, but...

Would using play, manipulating the environment, offering positive reinforcement and options for success, not be easier on the animal then anesthesia and surgery?

While researching a project for a class last semester I found several studies showing a longer life in intact animals, and less chance for certain cancers ( like osteosarcoma in dogs). So I guess if I were trying to weigh cost and benefit, it is harder then just weighing "the urine" factor.

All my pets are altered, however I also prefer to wait until after they have reached puberty or adulthood, if possible. I am not really saying any option is right or wrong, just that the choice isnt as cut and dry as people try to make it out, to be. Everyone's situation is different and I am not going to look down on someone for what they choose (OK I take that back- neglectful people who dont alter their pets kinda rub me the wrong way).


here are a couple sources regarding osteosarcoma and bone cancers from spay/neuter in dogs:

1. Dawn M. Cooley, Benjamin C. Beranek, Deborah L. Schlittler, Nita W. Glickman, Lawrence T. Glickman, and David J. Waters2, Endogenous Gonadal Hormone Exposure and Bone Sarcoma Risk, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev,11:1434-1440; 2002
2. Ru, G., Terracini, B., and Glickman, L. T. Host related risk factors for canine osteosarcoma. Vet. J., 156: 31–39, 1998.

There is also a marked decrease in occurance (apparently not word?) of certain cancers/diseases/illnesses when an animal is spayed/neutered.
To me, those far outweigh the 'benefits' of keeping an animal intact.

An animal reaches sexual maturity far before adulthood/they stop growing. It only takes 1 day past 'puberty' to create that next litter of critters.

 

[Maschka1]

There is also a marked decrease in occurance (apparently not word?) of certain cancers/diseases/illnesses when an animal is spayed/neutered.
To me, those far outweigh the 'benefits' of keeping an animal intact.

An animal reaches sexual maturity far before adulthood/they stop growing. It only takes 1 day past 'puberty' to create that next litter of critters.

(LOL, I tried to spell occurrence, that way too- it is a word, but I had to look it up )

I agree with you 100% and I do not trust the average pet owner to manage that possibility, responsibly. However, perhaps this chemical castration business could allow puberty and prevent unwanted critters. I also agree that it prevents things like prostate and mammary tumors. It really is a choice that needs to be measured case by case.

But I have to ask. if you have a responsible pet owner, who brings in their Lab puppy for a pediatric spay/neuter, what is a bigger issue? Did they bring home a lab because they wanted an active breed or perhaps a working dog? How will the pediatric spay effect closure of their epiphyseal growth plates? whats going to impact that family more? Ruptured ACL at 3 yrs old or testicular cancer at 8yrs old?
Hormones and puberty play an important roll in telling bones when to stop growing, and they do this at different points during maturation. Obviously there isn't a ton of research out there and their are lots of hypothesis and controversy regarding the increase in occurrence of orthopedic issues, in our pets, but common sense tells me that this could be a very likely factor. I personally feel like, perhaps chemical castration may allow hormones to remain and still signal appropriate growth but also prevent reproduction of unwanted critters.

But like I said, for the average, "I got a dog so the kids can learn responsibility" family, I think the cost of potential orthopedic issues is far less then unwanted litters. For a working dog, competition animal, service dog, etc... this may be different. And for cats, I honestly think people need to keep them inside, and if neutering will help them do it, then more power to them.

I still say, I like the idea of alternatives for people to explore in responsible pet guardianship, and no one option is right for everyone.

 

[wolfspeaker]

(LOL, I tried to spell occurrence, that way too- it is a word, but I had to look it up )

I agree with you 100% and I do not trust the average pet owner to manage that possibility, responsibly. However, perhaps this chemical castration business could allow puberty and prevent unwanted critters. I also agree that it prevents things like prostate and mammary tumors. It really is a choice that needs to be measured case by case.

But I have to ask. if you have a responsible pet owner, who brings in their Lab puppy for a pediatric spay/neuter, what is a bigger issue? Did they bring home a lab because they wanted an active breed or perhaps a working dog? How will the pediatric spay effect closure of their epiphyseal growth plates? whats going to impact that family more? Ruptured ACL at 3 yrs old or prostate cancer at 8 years?
Hormones and puberty play an important roll in telling bones when to stop growing, and they do this at different points during maturation. Obviously there isn't a ton of research out there and their are lots of hypothesis and controversy regarding the increase in occurrence of orthopedic issues, in our pets, but common sense tells me that this could be a very likely factor. I personally feel like, perhaps chemical castration may allow hormones to remain and still signal appropriate growth but also prevent reproduction of unwanted critters.

But like I said, for the average, "I got a dog so the kids can learn responsibility" family, I think the cost of potential orthopedic issues is far less then unwanted litters. For a working dog, competition animal, service dog, etc... this may be different. And for cats, I honestly think people need to keep them inside, and if neutering will help them do it, then more power to them.

I still say, I like the idea of alternatives for people to explore in responsible pet guardianship, and no one option is right for everyone.

Yeah, you obviously don't have cats. They WILL get outside eventually. Wiley little creatures.

Yeah, my 'arguement' was more in line with the 'I got a dog so the kids can learn responsibility' type.

I do like the idea of chemical castration, I just think it still needs some work. Definitely need some form of permanent record(like tattooing). There will never be a one solution fits all.

 

[Maschka1]

Spaying before the first heat cycle all but eliminates the risk of mammary cancer (.5% risk if done before first heat). The door swings both ways. Also, not every client is going to want to go through a sometimes lengthy training process when their stuff is getting ruined.

You are right, but we are talking about male's. If there was an option for an injectable sterilization for female's, I am guessing this wouldn't be a debate. Aside from testicular cancer, reproductive status, and inappropriate urination, what good reason is there for removing the testis? neutering is not a 100% guarantee to prevent inappropriate urination or behavior, so lengthy training may still be in order. Not to mention the potential for poor urethral sphincter control and incontinence issues later in life, which will still probably be an issue for the person who was unwilling to spend a couple weeks training their dog, in the first place.
I agree that the door swings both ways, and in the case with females it is a much harder issue, but with males I am still not 100% convinced that surgical removal of the testis is a benefit to them.
I really hope that our profession will continue to advance in this area of medicine and we will find healthier and less invasive alternatives for our pets.

( I want to make it clear, I am really only trying to point out all the factors I really hope I am not coming of as a total brat. I am really enjoying the debate, but sometimes internet debates can be taken in the wrong tone. please dont take it negatively)

 

[StartingoverVet]

Speaking of show dogs, I'm not too clear on the showing regulations, but would this be allowed in the show ring? I mean, I guess a lot of owners would want to potentially breed their prize-winner, but do you think there could be any application there?

No, this would not be allowed. Show dogs are supposed to be breeding stock... a neutered dog would not be ok. Intact is a requirement.

 

[dyachei]

Well obviously I am playing a little devils advocate, here, and the situation is different for everyone, but...

Would using play, manipulating the environment, offering positive reinforcement and options for success, not be easier on the animal then anesthesia and surgery?

While researching a project for a class last semester I found several studies showing a longer life in intact animals, and less chance for certain cancers ( like osteosarcoma in dogs). So I guess if I were trying to weigh cost and benefit, it is harder then just weighing "the urine" factor.

All my pets are altered, however I also prefer to wait until after they have reached puberty or adulthood, if possible. I am not really saying any option is right or wrong, just that the choice isnt as cut and dry as people try to make it out, to be. Everyone's situation is different and I am not going to look down on someone for what they choose (OK I take that back- neglectful people who dont alter their pets kinda rub me the wrong way).


here are a couple sources regarding osteosarcoma and bone cancers from spay/neuter in dogs:

1. Dawn M. Cooley, Benjamin C. Beranek, Deborah L. Schlittler, Nita W. Glickman, Lawrence T. Glickman, and David J. Waters2, Endogenous Gonadal Hormone Exposure and Bone Sarcoma Risk, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev,11:1434-1440; 2002
2. Ru, G., Terracini, B., and Glickman, L. T. Host related risk factors for canine osteosarcoma. Vet. J., 156: 31–39, 1998.

Do you know what the number one cause of death is in dogs and cats? Euthanasia in a shelter situation. Anything that can keep them out of a shelter (in a family/owner situation) is going to be better for them. A lot of times, owners relinquish pets to shelters due to behavior issues. Most owners aren't willing to spend the time and money to behavior train. Especially if there is a "cure" of any sort. Whether this will be good for chemical castration, I'm not sure. I certainly would require sedation (which also has health detriments) to chemically castrate an aggressive, intact dog - even though it is a 28 gauge needle, most of those dogs are nasty if you even look at their nether regions.

 

[bunnity]

Two things:

Neutering reduces risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostatitis, and prostatic abscess, but it doubles the risk of prostate cancer.

The vast majority of people I know keep their cats indoors only. It's certainly possible.

 

[dyachei]

You are right, but we are talking about male's. If there was an option for an injectable sterilization for female's, I am guessing this wouldn't be a debate. Aside from testicular cancer, reproductive status, and inappropriate urination, what good reason is there for removing the testis? neutering is not a 100% guarantee to prevent inappropriate urination or behavior, so lengthy training may still be in order. Not to mention the potential for poor urethral sphincter control and incontinence issues later in life, which will still probably be an issue for the person who was unwilling to spend a couple weeks training their dog, in the first place.
I agree that the door swings both ways, and in the case with females it is a much harder issue, but with males I am still not 100% convinced that surgical removal of the testis is a benefit to them.
I really hope that our profession will continue to advance in this area of medicine and we will find healthier and less invasive alternatives for our pets.

( I want to make it clear, I am really only trying to point out all the factors I really hope I am not coming of as a total brat. I am really enjoying the debate, but sometimes internet debates can be taken in the wrong tone. please dont take it negatively)

You are still assuming pediatric neuters. You can always neuter a dog later.

BPH is another disease of purely intact males. It isn't just marking behavior that is altered by neutering.

 

[Maschka1]

Do you know what the number one cause of death is in dogs and cats? Euthanasia in a shelter situation. Anything that can keep them out of a shelter (in a family/owner situation) is going to be better for them. A lot of times, owners relinquish pets to shelters due to behavior issues. Most owners aren't willing to spend the time and money to behavior train. Especially if there is a "cure" of any sort. Whether this will be good for chemical castration, I'm not sure. I certainly would require sedation (which also has health detriments) to chemically castrate an aggressive, intact dog - even though it is a 28 gauge needle, most of those dogs are nasty if you even look at their nether regions.

I am painfully aware. I spent the last 6 years working with and rehabilitating aggressive dogs, including shelter and rescue settings and animals deemed un-adoptable. you might say it is the topic which I am most passionate about and have spent considerable time researching chemical and physiological reasons for mis-behavior. One thing I have learned, is most animals relinquished for behavioral issues are not fixed by a simple surgical procedure. In my experience, I don't really understand where the notion came from that spay/neuter is a fix all. In fact, research has shown that spaying an already aggressive female dog can actually lead to an increase in aggression due to lowered progesterone levels. Castration is not a cure for anything. There is no simple cure for behavioral issues. The reason people give up their pets is because most people have this wacky notion that their dog will be like Lassie or they remember the geriatric dog from their childhood that was too arthritic to cause much discontent.
In my opinion, behavioral issues, in today's pet population is more a product of lack of education for the human factor in the equation and not realizing what it means to live with, and provide for, another species. Its very sad that so many are euthanized every year because people want robot accessories and dont consider the animals needs, but I really doubt reproductive status plays into that in the grand scheme of things.

I guess if you have a male who is truly showing aggression due to male rivalry or becomes more aggressive when there is a bitch in heat, then I do 100% agree that castration is a viable option.

If you have any evidence to the contrary, then I would really love to get my hands on it as I really do love learning about behavior. And I agree, doing a chemical castration without any sedation, heck even on a nice dog, sounds like a terrible idea.

 

[Lissarae06]

You are right, but we are talking about male's. If there was an option for an injectable sterilization for female's, I am guessing this wouldn't be a debate. Aside from testicular cancer, reproductive status, and inappropriate urination, what good reason is there for removing the testis? neutering is not a 100% guarantee to prevent inappropriate urination or behavior, so lengthy training may still be in order. Not to mention the potential for poor urethral sphincter control and incontinence issues later in life, which will still probably be an issue for the person who was unwilling to spend a couple weeks training their dog, in the first place.
I agree that the door swings both ways, and in the case with females it is a much harder issue, but with males I am still not 100% convinced that surgical removal of the testis is a benefit to them.
I really hope that our profession will continue to advance in this area of medicine and we will find healthier and less invasive alternatives for our pets.

( I want to make it clear, I am really only trying to point out all the factors I really hope I am not coming of as a total brat. I am really enjoying the debate, but sometimes internet debates can be taken in the wrong tone. please dont take it negatively)

You mentioned both spay/neuter when discussing osteosarc risk so I chose to also talk about spays.

 

[PetPony]

So are all of these health risks related to not spaying and neutering really as common as it always sounds they are? We aren't nearly as aggressive about spaying and neutering in Germany and when I was shadowing our vet there, the majority of animals were still intact, especially the males. It isn't at all expected of you to spay/neuter as much as it is here, where many people automatically look down on you for not doing so (not saying everyone does, but I have met a lot of people that do).

 

[orcagirl]

I don't get why people want their dogs to look intact. Dog balls are not attractive.

I have heard of chemical castration but I don't know much about it. I will have to research it a bit before forming an opinion.

I saw testicles on an Airedale today coming out of Petco (I was just pricing kennels, it's not my favorite chain by any stretch of the imagination). It was just weird. I'm used to it on some dogs, but it just didn't look right on this one.

So are all of these health risks related to not spaying and neutering really as common as it always sounds they are? We aren't nearly as aggressive about spaying and neutering in Germany and when I was shadowing our vet there, the majority of animals were still intact, especially the males. It isn't at all expected of you to spay/neuter as much as it is here, where many people automatically look down on you for not doing so (not saying everyone does, but I have met a lot of people that do).

When we talked about it in anatomy, we learned it depends on the breed of dog. Some breeds are more predisposed to certain diseases after neutering. However, the benefits can outweigh the risks in other breeds. (We didn't talk a whole lot about it, but it did make sense in my mind).