Should I get my dogs neutered?

[Bonny]

That is the answer I was looking for, thank you so much. I really enjoyed reading that reply, a well thought out firsthand experience(s) combined with some medical knowledge. And thank you for addressing my vets’ strange answers. I didn’t realize they would do a vasectomy on a dog, I figured my vet would have brought that up when I expressed so much concern in a personality change…. Probably time for a new vet.
Anyway thank you everyone for your advice, I’m going to go with the vasectomy. My dogs don’t exhibit any negative behavior and I’ve taken very special care in that. And while I mentioned that mating wasn’t a concern, if I can literally just cut off the supply without removing a major endocrine gland(s) that’s sounds perfect.
I apologize if I sounded too hostile earlier, these dogs are my world and I was looking for answers. I was very confused by the lack of explanation from my vet and frustrated by all the questions pilling up in my head.
Btw it’s interesting that two of you have opposite opinions on whether or not hormones cause or prevent cancer. If you don’t mind me asking what your source of information is? I know there are several cancers that attack the endocrine system specifically but I can’t see how testosterone would trigger a tissue mutation. (Btw many forms of mutation can occur in your DNA that can be passed down, probably why your friend was so likely to develop breast cancer wasn’t so much the hormonal problem but a genetic flaw passed down. Think of it like a cancer gene). Also Metastasis is the actual process of the disease flowing between organs, Malignant is the type of cancer and there is no “going malignant” it either is or is not (benign). Malignant is just the most recognized dangerous type because of its lack of central location and its ability to travel through the blood stream and pop in one or multiple places. It also is not a specific kind of cancer it just describes its behavior. And there is no possible way to predict what cancer you will and where you will get it. It’s all a guessing game, if it wasn’t then cancer wouldn’t have such a bad reputation.

One more thing male dogs that are left in tact can develop prostrate problems as in prostrate cancer. I do have a dog that is in tact & his prostrate is enlarged. He is an older dog so with age those things do happen.

[B&Baussies]

Ok, I’m not saying I don’t believe you, but can you explain how it can cause prostate problems? I know the two are closely correlated in a lot of ways with a lot of different species. But I’m just not finding the logic in hormones causing tissue mutation. Now I can however, imagine the hormones providing a stimulus that could bring out a pre existing condition in the dogs genome, but if that was the case there would be an immeasurable amount of variables to cover. The testicles are only a part of the endocrine system and to root out any other hormones other then testosterone as a contributor would be very narrow sighted and most likely wrong. Also the prostate is at the end of the digestive track and even though it can usually correlate with the endocrine system it is also where all the food and foreign matter is passed. The most likely way for carcinogens to enter the dogs body will be through eating (unless your dog picked up smoking… lol joking). All that food will pass through and could be just as likely to provide the stimulus to inflame the prostate, maybe even cancer.
Or if you could just post the source of the information that would be nice.
I would like to add, that it is surprising that so many people think that the natural design of the dog is so flawed. Especially in such a crucial area of their body. It almost sounds like the common consensus is that if dog were to live the natural wild life (which they did before be domesticated) they would be a population full of cancerous testicles, ovaries, and inflamed prostates. I’m fairly certain that if their reproductive cycle had this tremendous flaw, the K9 species would have probably come to a screeching halt a while ago.

[Bonny]

Ok, I’m not saying I don’t believe you, but can you explain how it can cause prostate problems? I know the two are closely correlated in a lot of ways with a lot of different species. But I’m just not finding the logic in hormones causing tissue mutation. Now I can however, imagine the hormones providing a stimulus that could bring out a pre existing condition in the dogs genome, but if that was the case there would be an immeasurable amount of variables to cover. The testicles are only a part of the endocrine system and to root out any other hormones other then testosterone as a contributor would be very narrow sighted and most likely wrong. Also the prostate is at the end of the digestive track and even though it can usually correlate with the endocrine system it is also where all the food and foreign matter is passed. The most likely way for carcinogens to enter the dogs body will be through eating (unless your dog picked up smoking… lol joking). All that food will pass through and could be just as likely to provide the stimulus to inflame the prostate, maybe even cancer.
Or if you could just post the source of the information that would be nice.
I would like to add, that it is surprising that so many people think that the natural design of the dog is so flawed. Especially in such a crucial area of their body. It almost sounds like the common consensus is that if dog were to live the natural wild life (which they did before be domesticated) they would be a population full of cancerous testicles, ovaries, and inflamed prostates. I’m fairly certain that if their reproductive cycle had this tremendous flaw, the K9 species would have probably come to a screeching halt a while ago.

You could find out more about dogs, genetics, etc., if you want by locating a veterinary school. My veterinary found the swollen prostrate on my dog & treated it with medicine. He said it is not uncommon for male dogs in tact to have prostrate problems. My dog is a working Australian Cattle dog. As far as dogs in the wild they all eventually died from something.

[wolfsoul]

Neutering actually increases the risk of prostate cancer (up to 4 times for some types, and up to 8 times for other types -- it's quite a signifigant increase in risk). There is alot of misinformation out there about prostate cancers.
But yes, unneutered dogs will be more prone to developing cysts and enlargement of the prostate -- most often in dogs over 9 years of age. Issues like this can usually be treated with medication, but neutering can also help or cure the problem. The last male I bred to was over 10 years of age. I liked the litter so much I tried to repeat it, but at over 10, he's now developed prostate issues, and the litter didn't take. His owners are going to put him on medication for his prostate. It can happen in younger dogs too, though much less common. a friend's male started having prostate issues at age 7. She put him on medication and it got rid of the problem. Another friend has a 6 year old male; Medication didn't help in his case, he neutered the dog, but the dog is still having prostate issues several months later. It seems to run in some lines.

[dab_20]

I, for one, applaud anyone going through some in depth research about the health of your dog before going through with any type of surgery. Unfortunately, veterinarians are biased, or told certain things over and over in veterinary school that often their information could be wrong. It takes a lot of time and research to come up with a good vet IMO.

With that being said, I think the MAIN reason to spay and neuter is to prevent unwanted litters. We have thousands and thousands of dogs and cats dying in shelters every year. The average dog owner should spay and neuter their pets because the risk of them jumping the fence and breeding.
I do think it is okay to keep an intact dog as long as you make sure nothing will happen. However, intact dogs, especially males, DO show increased aggression as a whole. The majority of the dogs (around 70%+) that have attacked and killed humans are unaltered. That is a fact. OTHER dogs tend to pick fights with unaltered dogs, whether spayed or neutered. Of course we are not saying because your dog is unaltered he will be aggressive, but most aggressive dogs are unaltered. And most aggressive dogs have bad owners, too. Which most bad owners do not spay and neuter their pets.
However, if you are worried about the hormonal changes, I would go with a vasectomy. I don't think you need to cut the hormones off, and I don't think that there are rampant health problems that come with hormones. Sexual hormones actually control a lot more than just sex. Mind you, I'm not a doctor, but I am in school for nursing and have learned a lot about hormones and such that is applicable to many species, not just humans.

[snakemama]

My biggest hesitation in hormone removal is that the sex hormones do play a role in the closing of the growth plates of the bones. I'm sure that in many dogs this will have no long-term effects, but I'd rather take care with my dogs until teh growth plates are closed before desexing them. I've always opted to neuter my dogs because I'm not up to the task of keeping an unaltered dog in a busy city like the one I live in.

Your dogs are obviously past that point, so it's up to you. Wolfsoul has put up a lot of good information, and it sounds like you have things well thought out. Your pups are lucky to have an owner who goes over all of the information before making a desion about their welfare.

[IRescue452]

Well those organs aren't needed if you aren't planning to breed so I think its best to remove them while the dogs are young and healthy. IF they get testicular cancer they might not do so until they are seniors and then perhaps the procedure would be more risky. Also, cancer spreads and grows before you even know its there. By the time you catch it and try and have the dog neutered to take the cancer out, it may not be completely removable.

Also, I wonder how much you socialize your dogs. People come into the dog park all the time with unaltered males and they say their dogs aren't aggressive. But have unaltered male dogs in the park ALWAYS seems to cause trouble in the group. Even if that particular dog isn't being the aggressor, his prescence is hyping up all the other dogs. Even my spayed female shepherd will start her dominant act when an unaltered dog is around. I hate when people come in with unaltered dogs.

[dab_20]

Also, I wonder how much you socialize your dogs. People come into the dog park all the time with unaltered males and they say their dogs aren't aggressive. But have unaltered male dogs in the park ALWAYS seems to cause trouble in the group. Even if that particular dog isn't being the aggressor, his prescence is hyping up all the other dogs. Even my spayed female shepherd will start her dominant act when an unaltered dog is around. I hate when people come in with unaltered dogs.

I very much agree with this.

[B&Baussies]

I actually socialized them quite a bit when they were between 3-9 months, never at an actual dog park though because they were my babies still and wouldn’t be able to defend themselves if something happened and for some reason I couldn’t intervene. They were introduced to two older female Australian Shepherds and got along great. As well as an unaltered fully grown German shepherd who didn’t act aggressively towards them. He really didn’t care about them but sniffed and showed little interest. (The German shepherd saw me as family and was one of the main inspirational reasons why even decided to get a dog after ties had been mostly cut with the family). They will also see the occasional neighbors’ dog and they will exchange pleasantries similarly to me and the owner engaging in small talk. No cases of aggression but they do get really antsy, usually calming down shortly after they realize they aren’t going to see the dog or have been given permission to engage. I think it's the wondering that makes them so fidgety.

I’ve introduced them and continue to introduce them to a multitude of environments, from taking them to a friend’s house or apartment, to talking them on trips like camping, or just going from a walk around the lake we have to drive to up the road. Not to mention that at certain hours of the day (really late or really early) and a few mostly private outdoor areas I train them with no leash and have done so since they were little bitty. As a result the know how to behave with a leash and they know the rules of when I take them off and we aren’t inside. They usually don’t get farther away than 20ft except in fields where then is much more visibility then it’s more like 50ft.

They’ve only encountered a dog one time that I wasn’t ready for and they behaved perfectly. It was 1:30 in the morning and I was letting them run around the field behind my apartment (if I'm gone a good bit of the day I like to give them and outlet for some energy before bed) and a neighbor the building over brought out their dog (female at that). And my dogs started to go over till I said “Stop, Lets go inside” (another story for another day: but I have put a lot of time in expanding their vocabulary so in this case they understood “stop” and “inside”), I didn’t even yell it but both dogs stopped in their tracks but remained completely focused on the female dog till I got their leashes on. They were probably 9-10 months old then. I had just recently stopped letting them socialize with other dogs till I knew what to do about this surgery. Just in case problems did start to develop.

After all even though they get along great with each other, if for some reason they do start acting aggressively towards other dogs I’m nervous for the other dog more than them really (regardless of who’s aggressor). I’ve instilled a very real since of loyalty towards each other and while I’m not the really worried about them fighting each other; if one gets into a fight with another dog, the other dog is not up against 60 lbs of Australian shepherd, it’ll be up against 120 lbs of Australian shepherd with two mouths. (That’s assuming they are the same size they are now, they are only 11 months old and the vet said they would probably grow a little more, not tons obviously but there are two so if they gain another 10-15 lbs that another 20-30 lbs of dog). So I’ll probably continue taking it easy as far as socializing them more till I feel I’m in the clear.

***If you get easily offended do not read this next part. I will keep it clean but this is coming out of frustration towards the topic more so then anyone specifically***

I’m getting really frustrated with people so willing to toss out medical knowledge without actually possessing any medical knowledge. Any of you who use the argument stating that “unless you plan on breeding them, neuter them because the organ serves no other purpose” are wrong. Dead wrong, I can’t think of one organ that doesn’t have either multiple functions or a function with multiple purposes. In fact I think it’s because of people like you, so willing to take everything said by your vet at face value and never thinking it might be wrong; that there is so little knowledge on the subject. I mean how long has a vet been able to say “chop its balls off and that’ll fix everything” before someone said “wait… maybe that’s not it”. How long has it been since anyone has really researched the subject?? Why would/ wouldn’t you research something that is at least publicly known to be beneficial but lacks any real evidence?(yes the would/ wouldn’t is on purpose cause you should really ask yourself both questions). And if you believe what evidence is shown, do you even consider the context it is in?? After all there are good pet owners and there are bad pet owners but to a vet and a researcher you’re the same mathematically. Why should I take the same advice you’d give some ******* neglectful owner? Obviously being a good owner my dogs are more prone to different behaviors and illness then one who doesn’t care. Reinforcing what I’m saying with MY vet’s lack of knowledge on the subject, her complete disregard for anything having to do with their environment, and the blank look she gave me when I started talking about different types of biological functions on a genetic level. Considering the fact that she was probably in school after high school for almost half the amount of time I’ve been alive, I was expecting to learn something that visit and be the one with the blank look not the other way around.

Seriously, if you’re going to take the time and preach it at least find some sound evidence in the matter or be quite. It only take a few minutes to open a tab and google search something (anything is better than nothing, and most search engines have a scholarly search tab which brings up much more reliable information if you really wanted to put the time in it) and it prevents you from looking dumb when someone calls you out. While any advice is much appreciated can you really consider it advice if the statement lacks a reason? YOU say that the testicles only purpose is breeding so removing them is best; I say that keeping them in will make them grow ten feet tall and fart out thunder storm. The fact is both these statements have the same amount of validity without a logical explanation as to why these outcomes are expected.

I know some people are probably reading this and thinking, “Yeah, I know what the reason is, it’s hormones that can cause cancer”. To you people, I applaud you for looking for a reason but did you really just have to take the reason at face value? After given a reason wouldn’t the next step be to connect to the two? Explain how they correlate. Not in this case. In this case its: Testosterone is in the testicles, the testicles get cancer, so the testosterone must be the cause of cancer. You guys remind me of a saying I heard a few years ago; you hear hoof beats but you think “horse” not “zebra”. Sometimes things aren’t so obvious when you only try to interpret it one way.

And for most of you people out there talking about cancer. Why don’t you crack open a book, your material is either very dated or a product of your imagination, at least when I’m giving someone advice and the information is my opinion I have the common decency to let them know that and that there is no evidence (although even in these cases I provide a reason for my opinion). And anyone that thinks that cancer prevention is anything more than a shot in the dark is very naïve. There is a reason we have so many cancer foundations and so many different organization created for the sole purpose of funding these cancer research foundations. The fact is cancer is still a mystery and the best solution we’ve been able to come up with for people is chemotherapy and radiation which **** near kills you by itself. I think if the solution was so simple we would have capitalized on it years ago.

[Karen]

Calm down. You asked for advice, we offered a variety of it.

I do not think anyone said "testicles are only there for breeding," and I know I mentioned that given your dog's age and breed, they are likely done their bone growth, so neutering them now would be fine in that regard.

[anna_66]

Seriously, if you’re going to take the time and preach it at least find some sound evidence in the matter or be quite. It only take a few minutes to open a tab and google search something (anything is better than nothing, and most search engines have a scholarly search tab which brings up much more reliable information if you really wanted to put the time in it) and it prevents you from looking dumb when someone calls you out. .

I'm sorry but this is so insulting. If you feel this way, why didn't you just google it yourself or go to someone who is a professional (other than your vet now)?
You wanted others opinion, so they gave it.