Re: rarities in the gene pool still show up on occation -- USBA Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09:51:25 11/22/09 Sun
Author: grant
Subject: Re: rarities in the gene pool still show up on occation
In reply to: Jenny W 's message, "Re: rarities in the gene pool still show up on occation" on 09:16:38 11/22/09 Sun

This again reminds me of the things I first heard said of the blue Dobes (circa 1976). Whether fact or folklore, I was told on multiple occasions by multiple people that the blue Dobes had a strong tendency towards assorted skin maladies including allergies, mange, and skin cancer, and poor coats in general. I've never seen any firm numbers to support or refute these claims but I do find it interesting that this blue dog theme is repeated in various breeds.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

I don't buy that one bit, and here is a common sense reason as to why -- Lee, 10:34:51 11/22/09 Sun

Re: I don't buy that one bit, and here is a common sense reason as to why -- Jenny W, 11:40:13 11/22/09 Sun

simple...you can't have it both ways. Either dogs were selected for performance or they were not -- Lee, 20:07:31 11/22/09 Sun
- I'm obviously not making the point very well... -- Jenny W, 06:14:52 11/23/09 Mon
  - You made your point, I just disagree -- Lee, 06:48:18 11/23/09 Mon
    - I just disagree -- Jenny W, 08:16:07 11/23/09 Mon
      - Re: I just disagree -- Christel, 12:00:41 11/23/09 Mon
        Re: I just disagree -- Christel, 12:02:57 11/23/09 Mon
        The best health test is objective work and earning a keep...close to natural selection -- Lee, 16:59:20 11/23/09 Mon
      - Did you even read my post? I said the opposite, that they are not performance selected anymore. -- Lee, 16:56:19 11/23/09 Mon
        Re: Did you even read my post? I said the opposite, that they are not performance selected anymore. -- Paul C., 17:48:43 11/23/09 Mon
        Re: Did you even read my post? I said the opposite, that they are not performance selected anymore. -- Lee, 23:48:26 11/23/09 Mon
        There's no need for rudeness -- Jenny W, 20:43:06 11/23/09 Mon
        I am not intending aggression, but clarity. -- Lee, 23:46:24 11/23/09 Mon
        I'm bored now... -- Jenny W, 04:56:30 11/24/09 Tue

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-7
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.