Confusing/Conflicting Info on Spay/Neuter

So, on a side note after reading this, call me ignorant if you like but a non-intact female is impossible to have sex with correct? I've been looking it up and trying to find some sort article on intact females vs. spayed. I've become even more confused due to the different types of spaying a female can receive in general and curiosity has gotten the better of me.

In general, figure that a "spayed" bitch (the usual, but not universal, practice for a spay is removal of ovaries - there went all trace of sex drive - tubes, uterus, cervix, and usually at least part of the vagina, with the remains of the vagina stitched/sealed shut) will almost certainly have little or no interest in sex, and depending on how much of the vagina is taken, it may be physically impossible to insert a penis of any size into her without causing at least pain, if not damage or even fatal injury. Exceptions to this rule are possible, but should be considered EXTREMELY unusual. A wise person will consider a spayed bitch to be sexless.

A bitch who has had her tubes tied (AKA "Tubal ligation") will be so close to unchanged by the procedure that you might as well consider her untouched, except for the fact that she can be mated by as many fertile male dogs as she cares to stand for, but she won't ever catch pregnant unless the person who performed the operation fucked it up. Purely depending on her own whims, she may or may not be interested in sex with a human, exactly like an untouched bitch, but she will almost certainly accept being mated by a dog when she comes into heat. If she welcomes your sexual advances, you should be able (assuming no size problems get in the way) to mate with her in exactly the same ways you might if she were untouched, because essentially, she IS untouched - it's just that there's "a blockage in the plumbing" that keeps eggs and sperm form getting together.

A bitch who has had a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus and usually, but not always, the cervix and a portion of the vagina, with what remains of the vagina being stitched or otherwise sealed shut) will probably be unenthusiastic about sex, and depending on how much of the vagina was taken, may be physically incapable of accepting a penis without being injured severely, perhaps fatally. This is sometimes called an "ovary sparing spay", because the ovaries are left intact in her body, and will continue to operate as usual. Because she still has her ovaries - the source of the hormones that cause a bitch to have a sex drive at all - she may well come into heat, even though no amount of mating or AI will be able to make her pregnant. If and when she does come into heat, allowing a dog to mate with her is almost certainly a bad idea, since depending on how much of her vagina was taken, he could cause a fatal injury in the process of mating with her. (by tearing open the stub of her vagina as he instinctively drives as deep as he's capable of reaching) Likewise, she may or may not accept sexual advances from a human, the same as an untouched bitch, or one who has had a tubal ligation, but it might not be possible to insert a penis into her depending on how much of her vagina was removed.

A bitch who has had just her ovaries removed will be sterile, of course, and probably won't have any interest in sex, whether offered by a human or a dog, although there's no physical reason (unless it was done so early that her organs never had a chance to develop) she couldn't accept a penis on the off chance that she's interested enough to allow it. Which she probably won't be.
 
The perfect thing to post here is that they are passing federal laws aganist zoophilia and no one in the whole 327 million people country opposes - https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/23/politics/house-passes-pact-act-trnd/index.html
In civilized world people would argue about the facts, but no .. The meat industry keeps doing their thing and any sexual with different species are denied and heavily punished.
Yes... hypocrites at work there.
We can raise them in horrible, crowded, unsanitary, abusive conditions only to kill them after a very short, miserable life to feed our fast-food addiction (wouldn't be so bad if we ate the recommended 3/4 grains/veggies, 1/4 meat portioning, and weren't so wasteful).
We can enslave them to labor for us only to kill them when they become too old or lame to work.
We can dress them up and/or teach them tricks and put them in front of a crowd for entertainment.
We can experiment on them for medicine and science (and you'll notice in the details of the PACT law - which is came about due to sicko/psycho "crush videos" - that there is an exception suggesting it's okay to crush an animal for medical or scientific reasons (WTF?).

BUT... don't you DARE have sex with them, even if the animal starts it and/or enjoys it and/or doesn't care if you do it. Yep. THAT is sick and wrong and abuse, cruelty, rape and exploitation. The whole zoosadism scandal didn't help much, either. The worst aspects of anything are always more sensationalized and in-your-face than the opposite.
I think a lot of the reason there is such a majority disgust with human+animal sex is mostly due to religion along with humans seeing themselves as "superior" to animals and nature (because we're so smart - lol), and for a person to have sex with an animal is "degrading". How dare you defile yourself by stooping to have sex with a "lesser being". Those dirty and diseased creatures (also BS). Which has led to all the other bullshit arguments such as "animals can't consent", which most of us know is a load of crap. Or animals only do it instinctually to reproduce, which really only loosely applies to animals in the wild, not domestic or those in zoos. Some "experts" say an intact animal in-season may come on to their owner sexually only if they do not have access to one of their own species, but I personally know this is bullshit; I have been involved in some dog breeding where they DID have access to their own kind and STILL showed sexual interest in their humans. And one of my personal favorites: sex with animals CAUSES disease and cancer, but if you actually do a little research (and scrape off the human bias), it's safer than having sex with humans (if your partner is healthy and taken care of).

Those that are venomously against consensual sex with animals are just a bunch of fucking uninformed, only-see/hear-what-they-want, hypocrites that can't get past their own "ew" about it. They can't relate-to or understand the attraction because they don't have it, just like a homophobe can't understand why a dude would wanna poke another dude. It's all unnatural, or immoral or against God, etc., etc. And they often don't get that being attracted to animals is not a "choice", you either are or you aren't. "Why can't you just find a person to fuck??"... in most cases we prefer our animal partners over human ones.

Okay. Rant over. :)
 
Last edited:
In general, figure that a "spayed" bitch (the usual, but not universal, practice for a spay is removal of ovaries - there went all trace of sex drive - tubes, uterus, cervix, and usually at least part of the vagina, with the remains of the vagina stitched/sealed shut) will almost certainly have little or no interest in sex, and depending on how much of the vagina is taken, it may be physically impossible to insert a penis of any size into her without causing at least pain, if not damage or even fatal injury. Exceptions to this rule are possible, but should be considered EXTREMELY unusual. A wise person will consider a spayed bitch to be sexless.

A bitch who has had her tubes tied (AKA "Tubal ligation") will be so close to unchanged by the procedure that you might as well consider her untouched, except for the fact that she can be mated by as many fertile male dogs as she cares to stand for, but she won't ever catch pregnant unless the person who performed the operation fucked it up. Purely depending on her own whims, she may or may not be interested in sex with a human, exactly like an untouched bitch, but she will almost certainly accept being mated by a dog when she comes into heat. If she welcomes your sexual advances, you should be able (assuming no size problems get in the way) to mate with her in exactly the same ways you might if she were untouched, because essentially, she IS untouched - it's just that there's "a blockage in the plumbing" that keeps eggs and sperm form getting together.

A bitch who has had a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus and usually, but not always, the cervix and a portion of the vagina, with what remains of the vagina being stitched or otherwise sealed shut) will probably be unenthusiastic about sex, and depending on how much of the vagina was taken, may be physically incapable of accepting a penis without being injured severely, perhaps fatally. This is sometimes called an "ovary sparing spay", because the ovaries are left intact in her body, and will continue to operate as usual. Because she still has her ovaries - the source of the hormones that cause a bitch to have a sex drive at all - she may well come into heat, even though no amount of mating or AI will be able to make her pregnant. If and when she does come into heat, allowing a dog to mate with her is almost certainly a bad idea, since depending on how much of her vagina was taken, he could cause a fatal injury in the process of mating with her. (by tearing open the stub of her vagina as he instinctively drives as deep as he's capable of reaching) Likewise, she may or may not accept sexual advances from a human, the same as an untouched bitch, or one who has had a tubal ligation, but it might not be possible to insert a penis into her depending on how much of her vagina was removed.

A bitch who has had just her ovaries removed will be sterile, of course, and probably won't have any interest in sex, whether offered by a human or a dog, although there's no physical reason (unless it was done so early that her organs never had a chance to develop) she couldn't accept a penis on the off chance that she's interested enough to allow it. Which she probably won't be.
Informative and from reading it all together, common sense I suppose. Curiosity struck when I realized how many ways a spay can be done. Thank you.
 
I'm an interloper here however, I'm going to respond.

First: There is RISUG, this is a supposed "experimental" sterilization procedure for male dogs. It works by injecting what is called Vasgel into the vas deferens preventing impregnation. It's been tested for over 40 years now in India on people, and more recently on animals, it seems to be entirely reversible, it appears to be better than a reversible vasectomy.

You can find more information here: https://www.parsemus.org/ - there's a great deal of resistance toward this going through FDA trials because it removes the need for the human birth control pill.

For female dogs you have to be aware of pyometra, and this may also be a risk for all female animals. You have to research it. There are medical benefits for a uterectomy and with female dogs, it's almost a requirement at some point. A veternarian would have to discuss that but it is certain a female dog that never goes through pregnancy will eventually experience it and it's likely to kill her if her lifespan gets into the teens.

Second: somebody brought up politics, and that is an area which I'm intensely interested and why I went through the trouble of creating an account.

The United States is bombarded by propaganda, and more than a few Americans realize this. What is unfortunate is most Europeans are entirely unaware their "news" is propaganda. The trouble with believing you are smarter or more educated than another, is that it allows you to slack off on becoming more intelligent and more educated. This infects a large part of the world. You are told you are "superior" to keep you inferior.

For all of you: Ukraine did not have a revolution, it had a US led coup. Turkey also faced a coup which Erdogan defeated - this coup was also US led and was instigated when Turkey normalized realions with Russia in order to prevent the Turkish stream - a natural gas pipeline. Assad never used chemical weapons against his own civilian population, that was a false flag the west created (CIA/Mossad/Mi6 - who knows?) in order to justify bombing the nation so that it could be taken over by the west. Genie Energy signed an agreement with Israel in 2013 to mine the oil of the Golan Heights - you might want to look up who is on the "strategic board of directors" of Genie Energy. The attack on Syria was a bonus that Russia's only Middle Eastern base is in Syria.

The Ukraine coup was done to prevent the Nordstream and Nordstream II. This is merely economic competition between the United States and Russia. The USSR is gone, if the nominal "leaders" of the EU cared about economic welfare of Europe, they would be allies with Russia, not the United States, which has been run by an outright mafia since George H. Bush - 1988.

The EU was a CIA creation but also in co-operation with the British and the German intelligence agencies. The citizens of this construct have no actual freedom, not even freedom of speech. Brexit will never happen, Christine Legarde is a puppet that is Europe's true nominal leader, Russia is not expansionist, nor is it a threat to the EU. Also LePen is more popular than Macron, however she will not be allowed to ascend to the presidency. It's is the old Eastern block that protects its citizens, the EU is entirely run by traitors to their people.

The US created the refugees by bombing north Africa, the Middle East, and East Asia, that is why there is a refugee influx. There is no condemnation of the United States for doing this, because the EU is entirely controlled by the United States and all of Europe is run by traitors. It appears the goal is to exterminate that European population as a whole.

There's a direct link for intelligence/creativity and paraphillia, which many of you may be unaware of. I give you this lecture that 99% of you will ignore in the hopes you'll realize what is going on. Probably a wasted effort.

Be kind to your animals. I have met true monsters. It wasn't a good idea for my sanity to see what existed because anything you can think up does actually exist. I never have encouraged harm. I hope you do not either, affection and kindness certainly trumps cruelty. And if there is a hell, I hope the sadists burn in it.

I had two dogs, they both lived to around 16, I'm done. I will forever miss them, and I will never go through that emotional toll again.
 
I’m a complete fan of spay/neuter. Really it’s up to you. For me I do it at 6 months. Shelters do it as soon as they get the puppies. Make the most educated you can. Talk to your vet.
 
Absolutely agree with Wolfy on the current research.

There are increasing number of peer-reviewed research showing that desexing at a young age can be linked to increased risk of some metabolic disorders, urinary incontinence in females, joint and bone problems, increasing risk of certain cancers, increasing risk of anxiety related behavioural issues due to the lack/imbalance of sexual hormones.

You can try and find a vet that is willing to perform a hysterectomy (Ovary sparing spay) or vasectomy for males. That way you can still preserve the hormonal balance in the body and still sterilise your pet. However, you still run the risk of ovarian and mammary tumours in older bitches, prostate and testicular issues in older males.

I agree that it is still your personally responsibility to manage your own pets at home and outside since you are the owner of the dog. No one else is gonna care for your pet the same as you would. It is common sense that intact bitches in-season must be kept away from intact male dogs or other bitches to prevent fights or pregnancies.
Question here - if the uterus is removed, but the entry is left, is it still safe or possible for them to enjoy or even do anything relating to mating/sexual acts
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most of the obsession with it in the US is because people are idiots who don't know how to take care of their animals, including actually fucking supervising them. To my understanding, neutering in males too early can cause health issues, but spaying females after a certain age can help them not die because their uterus had a conniption fit. One of my mom's dogs died that way and it's not pleasant.
 
This more feels like a thread in the dumpster fire than actually helpful. Does someone mind posting their sources so I can actually follow up on the research?
 
Possible health risks and benefits may be an interesting thing to study, but focusing on them for a decision ignores the fact that neutering an animal is mutilation just as it would be in humans. It may become necessary to save the life of the animal in case of actual testicular cancer or other painful and likely fatal conditions in a female. In that case it would be justified, just like in humans. But otherwise it shows a lack of respect for the creature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: z21
Possible health risks and benefits may be an interesting thing to study, but focusing on them for a decision ignores the fact that neutering an animal is mutilation just as it would be in humans. It may become necessary to save the life of the animal in case of actual testicular cancer or other painful and likely fatal conditions in a female. In that case it would be justified, just like in humans. But otherwise it shows a lack of respect for the creature.
Many have come to use the term "Mutilation" in reference to the spay/neuter procedure, but this is incorrect on it's basis. Mutilation is a permanent disfigurement, and to remove the reproductive ability of an animal is not a disfigurement other than the small barely noticeable scar, and to find the scar you have to look for it otherwise it goes unnoticed. The internal portion of the procedure can hardly be called a mutilation since there is no disfigurement, only a surgical removal of the reproductive organs. Many refer to it as mutilation due to their belief of the spay/neuter being an unnecessary procedure.

Rather than just stating it to be unnecessary it may help if you look at it as being preventative for several reasons. First of course the procedure will prevent unwanted puppies, but there are other health issues to consider as well. For the female being altered before the first estrus cycle prevents mammary cancer in over 99% of dogs and over 90% of cats. Mammary cancer is nine times more likely to affect a dog than a person, and dogs are the most common mammals to be victims of this deadly disease. The preventive value of sterilization in terms of mammary cancer is diminished as the number of estrus cycles the pet has increases. Other issues for female animals include prevention of pyometra (an often fatal uterine infection).
For free-roaming female dogs the chance of becoming bred by a larger male and being unable to give birth to the puppies is also a threat.

In the female the estrus cycle that attracts males can be everything from annoying to dangerous; packs of male dogs seeking a female dog that is in heat can attack each other or even a person. Female dogs ‘spot’ blood during the estrus as well.

For male animals eliminating roaming and fighting can literally mean the difference between life and death. ‘Getting lost,’ is not the worst that male dogs and cats can run into. Over 80% of dogs found dead on the highway and around the same percentage of dogs that become victims of intentional animal cruelty are males that have not been neutered. Neutering, removes the male animals desire to roam, eliminates the desire to mate, and thereby stops the animal from marking it's territory. It also often makes the animal less aggressive and more passive. There are ongoing studies to determine the benefits of this part of the picture. In health benefits it removes the chance of testicular cancer which is a lower risk but still a benefit to the procedure.

Extensive roaming and fighting are associated with male cats which have not been altered. Fighting that results in bites that break the skin and cause the exchange of bodily fluids is one way that male cats get and give feline AIDS and feline leukemia virus. Female cats which breed with roaming toms are at risk of these diseases as well, and if they have a litter of kittens feline AIDS and feline leukemia virus can be spread from mother to nursing kitten. Preventing serious diseases and poor behavior is much more effective than addressing these tragedies after the fact.

Maybe this presents a view that is not often considered.
 
Last edited:
...... oh my opinion - I do believe that unless you are planning to breed your female then to have her spayed you are helping her health in the long run, and perhaps giving her a chance at a longer life. Subsequently, the 3 Female German Shepherds that I have have all been spayed pre-first cycle. The 3 Male German Shepherds that I have are intact.
 
Many have come to use the term "Mutilation" in reference to the spay/neuter procedure, but this is incorrect on it's basis.
I am not a native speaker. If castrating a human without asking them would not be considered mutilation, then castrating a dog shouldn't be called mutilation either. What we call it doesn't really matter though. It would be considered to be a terrible crime to do this to a human—independent of any health-related considerations. Why is the same procedure considered alright and even the norm in the US & UK?

Mutilation is a permanent disfigurement, and to remove the reproductive ability of an animal is not a disfigurement other than the small barely noticeable scar, and to find the scar you have to look for it otherwise it goes unnoticed. The internal portion of the procedure can hardly be called a mutilation since there is no disfigurement, only a surgical removal of the reproductive organs. Many refer to it as mutilation due to their belief of the spay/neuter being an unnecessary procedure.
Well, now I've looked the definition of "mutilation" up and it says "an act or instance of destroying, removing, or severely damaging a limb or other body part of a person or animal" or "an act or instance of damaging or altering something radically" in the dictionary. Yes, that's what neutering does. It removes whole organs (body parts) from the animal and it alters their hormone system and potentially even their behavior and character radically and permanently.

What you've written down there appears to be a redefinition of the term for the sole purpose of claiming that the term would not apply. This is a typical propaganda strategy. Besides it is an anthropocentric, objectifying approach, if the severity of the act is measured by how noticeably the scar is to the human eye. I am sure the animal won't be fooled and will notice. And other animals will probably also notice the change very easily, e.g. by the altered smell.

Rather than just stating it to be unnecessary it may help if you look at it as being preventative for several reasons. First of course the procedure will prevent unwanted puppies, but there are other health issues to consider as well. For the female being altered before the first estrus cycle prevents mammary cancer in over 99% of dogs and over 90% of cats. Mammary cancer is nine times more likely to affect a dog than a person, and dogs are the most common mammals to be victims of this deadly disease. The preventive value of sterilization in terms of mammary cancer is diminished as the number of estrus cycles the pet has increases. Other issues for female animals include prevention of pyometra (an often fatal uterine infection).
For free-roaming female dogs the chance of becoming bred by a larger male and being unable to give birth to the puppies is also a threat.

In the female the estrus cycle that attracts males can be everything from annoying to dangerous; packs of male dogs seeking a female dog that is in heat can attack each other or even a person. Female dogs ‘spot’ blood during the estrus as well.

For male animals eliminating roaming and fighting can literally mean the difference between life and death. ‘Getting lost,’ is not the worst that male dogs and cats can run into. Over 80% of dogs found dead on the highway and around the same percentage of dogs that become victims of intentional animal cruelty are males that have not been neutered. Neutering, removes the male animals desire to roam, eliminates the desire to mate, and thereby stops the animal from marking it's territory. It also often makes the animal less aggressive and more passive. There are ongoing studies to determine the benefits of this part of the picture. In health benefits it removes the chance of testicular cancer which is a lower risk but still a benefit to the procedure.

Extensive roaming and fighting are associated with male cats which have not been altered. Fighting that results in bites that break the skin and cause the exchange of bodily fluids is one way that male cats get and give feline AIDS and feline leukemia virus. Female cats which breed with roaming toms are at risk of these diseases as well, and if they have a litter of kittens feline AIDS and feline leukemia virus can be spread from mother to nursing kitten. Preventing serious diseases and poor behavior is much more effective than addressing these tragedies after the fact.

Maybe this presents a view that is not often considered.
Thanks for the prime example of 100% one-sided castration propaganda. So I guess this is what is taught to aspiring vets?
 
  • Like
Reactions: z21
Thanks for the prime example of 100% one-sided castration propaganda. So I guess this is what is taught to aspiring vets?
Yes, the health benefits, and the pros and cons of this procedure are taught in my veterinarian school, which by the way is one of the top veterinarian schools in the USA, and they are proven facts, not propaganda.

In fact all procedures are taught along with the health related pros and cons of that procedure. Pros and cons, facts, not propaganda.

Just because you are among those that want to believe this procedure to be mutilation does not mean that facts that go against what you want to believe are propaganda.

The point of asking or not asking or doing the procedure without the animals consent is moot. In the case of Female Animals they can not give their conscent for this procedure no more than they can give their consent for sex with a human and the only factor that makes it happen is the human factor. The human factor is also what makes this procedure happen to Male Animals, but male animals are able to demonstrate their desire to have sex with humans, but still are unable to provide us with an answer when it comes to having their consent for this procedure. So all in all it is a moot point.
 
Last edited:
Personally I don’t usually agree with it, UNLESS it’s viral for health reasons.

I just can’t picture anyone buying the animal and thinking, sod it, off with its nuts. It’s cruel and harsh, picture yourself having your nads chopped for the sheer sake of it, I’d not want that and wouldn’t want that for my dogs.

The ONLY reason I’d do it, and still as a very last resort is a health issue...I’ll do all I could to find ways around it before taking that route.

I understand why people say yes to it, health issues, mass breeding etc, but surely if your into this lifestyle, your more for a dog keeping his tackle? Right?

K&D
 
Personally I don’t usually agree with it, UNLESS it’s viral for health reasons.

I just can’t picture anyone buying the animal and thinking, sod it, off with its nuts. It’s cruel and harsh, picture yourself having your nads chopped for the sheer sake of it, I’d not want that and wouldn’t want that for my dogs.

The ONLY reason I’d do it, and still as a very last resort is a health issue...I’ll do all I could to find ways around it before taking that route.

I understand why people say yes to it, health issues, mass breeding etc, but surely if your into this lifestyle, your more for a dog keeping his tackle? Right?

K&D
When it comes down to health it is much more beneficial for the female to be spayed than to neuter the male. If the male is affected by testicular cancer in it's lifetime then the removal of his testicles at that time has had great success, but when the female develops mammary cancer during her lifetime the treatments have had mixed results and are most often of little consequence. Treatments for pyometra have been fairly successful as long as it is discovered and diagnosed correctly in time.
 
Yes, the health benefits, and the pros and cons of this procedure are taught in my veterinarian school, which by the way is one of the top veterinarian schools in the USA, and they are proven facts, not propaganda.

In fact all procedures are taught along with the health related pros and cons of that procedure. Pros and cons, facts, not propaganda.

Just because you are among those that want to believe this procedure to be mutilation does not mean that facts that go against what you want to believe are propaganda.

The point of asking or not asking or doing the procedure without the animals consent is moot. In the case of Female Animals they can not give their conscent for this procedure no more than they can give their consent for sex with a human and the only factor that makes it happen is the human factor. The human factor is also what makes this procedure happen to Male Animals, but male animals are able to demonstrate their desire to have sex with humans, but still are unable to provide us with an answer when it comes to having their consent for this procedure. So all in all it is a moot point.
Still sounds like propaganda. Just because "top veterinarian schools" teach you this, doesn't mean it can't be propaganda.

Can you back up any of your previous points with peer reviewed articles or it's something you have been taught and never spent any time researching if what you been taught is 100% true?

For the female being altered before the first estrus cycle prevents mammary cancer in over 99% of dogs and over 90% of cats. Mammary cancer is nine times more likely to affect a dog than a person, and dogs are the most common mammals to be victims of this deadly disease.

This bs comes from a single research from 1969 that was never repeated since then. Multiple meta-studies have found that the research was biased and thus should not be presented as a scientific fact (even if you're taught this in veterinary school) [1] [2] (second article is very recent, and while it backs up every point with other articles, it is not yet peer reviewed).

It also often makes the animal less aggressive and more passive. There are ongoing studies to determine the benefits of this part of the picture. In health benefits it removes the chance of testicular cancer which is a lower risk but still a benefit to the procedure.
What about the studies that have shown that they become more aggressive because of fear aggression? Does your "top veterinary school" just ignore those because it doesn't align with their propaganda?
The differences reported here between undesirable behaviors of castrated and intact dogs were in the range of 5.04% and 12.31%, suggesting that, for some dogs, partial or complete denial of puberty may reduce indoor urine-marking but have many other undesirable consequences.
[3]

The highest frequency of biting was reported for dogs less than 1 year of age. Relative to intact female dogs of at least 1 year of age, the odds ratio for having bitten a member of the household was highest for neutered male dogs (OR: 3.23; 95% CI: 1.83–5.71), followed by neutered female dogs (OR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.21–3.75).
[4]

Interesting how you talk about all the pros, but never mentioned any of the cons such as:
Increased risk of canine prostate cancer [5]
Joint disorders in some breeds (especially if neutered before they go thru puberty) [6], [7]
Autoimmune disorders: [8]
 
I personally am against spaying and neutering, if you live in an environment, where the dogs are being kept properly and don't just freely roam around the neighborhood. I wouldn't spay my female dog if there is no medical indication to do so.
Here in germany many people actually keep intact females and they are mostly completely healthy and fine.
Same applies to male dogs.

But in environments where many dogs live on the streets it's better to just spay and neuter them and let them roam free again. This is just for the benefit of everyone living there, humans and dogs. I think it really just depends on where you live, what kind of dog and what you are able to manage.
There's no universal answer to this.
I don't think this is mutilation to be honest (even though male dogs might get behavioral problems from having their balls removed).
But [unpopular opinion incoming] I also don't think ear and tail cropping is not mutilation if done right.
It really is your choice what you choose to do and if you can live with the negative aspects that MIGHT occur.

But honestly, don't spay our neuter if your dog is not fully developed yet. Especially when under 1 year old.
 
By Dr. Becker
There is a growing body of evidence — including new research on German Shepherd Dogs (which I’ll discuss shortly) — that indicates spaying or neutering, in particular as it relates to large breed dogs desexed early in life, significantly increases the risk of serious health problems.

For Female Rottweilers, Ovary Removal Significantly Increases the Risk for a Major Fatal Disease

In 2009, a Gerald P. Murphy Cancer Foundation study found a correlation between the age at which female Rottweilers are spayed and their lifespan.1 The study compared female Rotties who lived to be 13 or older with a group who lived the expected lifespan of about 9 years.
According to lead researcher Dr. David J. Waters, a professor in the Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences (VCS) at Purdue University:
"Like women, female dogs in our study had a distinct survival advantage over males. But taking away ovaries during the first [four] years of life completely erased the female survival advantage.
“We found that female Rottweilers that kept their ovaries for at least [six] years were [four] times more likely to reach exceptional longevity compared to females who had the shortest lifetime ovary exposure."2
Because death from cancer is so prevalent in Rotties, researchers conducted a subgroup analysis of only dogs that did not die of cancer. This focused research further proved the strong association between intact ovaries and longevity.
Even in dogs that did not die of cancer, the females who kept their ovaries the longest were nine times more likely to achieve exceptional longevity (13+ years). Simply put, study results indicate removal of a Rottweiler’s ovaries significantly increases the risk for a major lethal disease.
Did You Know That in Europe, Intact Dogs Are the Norm?
A more recent study conducted at the University of California (UC), Davis provides additional evidence that spaying or neutering, and the age at which it is done, may increase a dog's risk of certain cancers and joint diseases.
The U.S. takes a very different approach to spay/neuter compared to many European countries. In this country, not only are most dogs spayed or neutered, increasingly the preferred timing of the procedure is before the animal is a year old.
The motivation is for desexing is pet population control, and owners are considered responsible only if their pet has been sterilized. However, in many European countries, dogs remain intact and animal health experts do not promote spaying or neutering. The UC Davis study was undertaken, according to the researchers because:
"Given the importance of gonadal hormones in growth and development, this cultural contrast invites an analysis of the multiple organ systems that may be adversely affected by neutering."3
In Desexed US Golden Retrievers, the Rates of Joint Disease and Cancer Are Much Higher Than in Intact Goldens

The researchers looked at the health records of 759 Golden Retrievers. Goldens were chosen because they are one of the most popular breeds in the U.S. and Europe, are often used as service dogs, and are also susceptible to various cancers and joint disorders.
The intent of the study was to investigate the effects of neutering on the risks of several diseases in a single breed of dog, distinguishing between males and females, and between dogs that had been neutered or spayed early (before one year), late (after one year), or not at all.
The dogs ranged in age from 1 to 8 years and had been seen at the UC Davis William R. Pritchard Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital for one or more of the following problems:
The researchers focused on joint disorders and cancers because desexing removes the testes or ovaries and disrupts production of hormones that play an important role in body processes like bone growth plate closure.
Study results indicated that for all five diseases, the rates were significantly higher in both males and females that were neutered or spayed (before or after one year of age) compared with intact dogs.
Of special concern was that results showed a 100 percent increase in the rate of hip dysplasia in male Goldens neutered before 12 months of age.
Ten percent were diagnosed with the condition, which was double the rate of occurrence in intact males. Past studies have reported a 17 percent increase among all neutered dogs compared to all intact dogs.
The UC Davis researchers suggest that neutering male Golden Retrievers well beyond puberty will help prevent an increased risk of hip dysplasia, cranial cruciate ligament injury, and lymphosarcoma. For female Goldens, the research team concluded that:
“ … [T]he timing of neutering is more problematical because early neutering significantly increases the incidence rate of CCL from near [zero] to almost 8 percent, and late neutering increases the rates of HSA to 4 times that of the 1.6 percent rate for intact females and to 5.7 percent for, which was not diagnosed in intact females.” 4
izsla Study Suggests a Significantly Increased Risk for Cancer and Behavioral Disorders in Spayed or Neutered Dogs

A 2014 study of Vizslas included over 2,500 dogs and revealed that dogs neutered or spayed at any age were at significantly increased risk for developing mast cell cancer, lymphoma, all other cancers, all cancers combined, and fear of storms, compared with intact Vizslas.5
Dogs of both genders neutered or spayed at 6 months or younger had significantly increased odds of developing a behavioral disorder, including separation anxiety, noise phobia, timidity, excitability, submissive urination, aggression, hyperactivity, and/or fear biting.
When it came to thunderstorm phobia, all neutered or spayed Vizslas were at greater risk than intact Vizslas, regardless of age at neutering. The younger the age at neutering, the earlier the age at diagnosis with mast cell cancer, cancers other than mast cell, hemangiosarcoma, lymphoma, all cancers combined, a behavioral disorder, or fear of storms.
Spayed female Vizslas had a nine times higher incidence of hemangiosarcoma compared to intact females, regardless of when spaying was performed, however, no difference in incidence of this type of cancer was found for neutered vs. intact males. Neutered and spayed dogs had 4.3 times higher incidence of lymphoma, regardless of age at time of neutering, and a five times higher incidence of other types of cancer.
Spayed females had 6.5 times higher incidence of all cancers combined compared to intact females, and neutered males had 3.6 times higher incidence than intact males. The Vizsla researchers concluded:
"Additional studies are needed on the biological effects of removing gonadal
hormones and on methods to render dogs infertile that do not involve gonadectomy.”6

German Shepherds Desexed Before 1 Year of Age Triple Their Risk of Joint Disorders

As I mentioned earlier, another very recent study was conducted at UC Davis, this time involving German Shepherds Dogs (GSDs). The study results suggest that spaying or neutering before 1 year of age triples the risk of joint disorders, in particular cranial cruciate ligament tears, in these dogs.7
The researchers analyzed the veterinary records of 1,170 GSDs, both neutered or spayed and intact, for a 14.5-year period. They looked for joint disorders and cancers already linked to desexing, and separated the dogs into categories that included intact, desexed before 6 months, between 6 and 11 months, and between 12 and 23 months.
The study found that 7 percent of intact males were diagnosed with one or more joint disorders compared with 21 percent of males neutered prior to 1 year of age. Five percent of intact females developed joint disorders, compared with 16 percent of females spayed before 1 year.
Intact female GSDs were found to develop mammary cancer at a rate of 4 percent, compared with less than 1 percent of females spayed before 1 year. Intact females had no diagnosed incidence of urinary incontinence, compared with 7 percent of females spayed before 1 year. According to lead researcher Dr. Benjamin Hart of the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine:
"Debilitating joint disorders of hip dysplasia, CCL and elbow dysplasia can shorten a dog's useful working life and impact its role as a family member. Simply delaying the spay/neuter until the dog is a year old can markedly reduce the chance of a joint disorder."8
My Preference Is to Sterilize, Not Desex
Since simply delaying a spay or neuter until a dog is older doesn’t address all the health challenges we see in desexed versus intact pets, I like the Vizsla researchers' conclusion above that we need to investigate alternative methods of sterilizing dogs that do not involve removing the ovaries or testes.
YOU deside the risk of spay and nuter is it worth the cost of pet helth
 
"Fixing a dog makes them calmer and less likely to bite". In my experience its been the opposite. While i gotten bitten (play biting and the ones that drew blood) by dogs a few times, all of em were dogs were fixed.
 
"Fixing a dog makes them calmer and less likely to bite". In my experience its been the opposite. While i gotten bitten (play biting and the ones that drew blood) by dogs a few times, all of em were dogs were fixed.
From my anecdotal evidence, I have noticed the same thing. Especially in the context of dog parks and shelters, where fights between a neutered and intact male was always started by the neutered dog (fight between two neutered males have been also more common, but again this is just an observation from my point of view so it lack any empirical evidence).

I have read a research paper in the past that the decreased level of testosterone lowers their confidence and this leads to fear related aggression, and when an intact male who has more "bossy" body language comes around, they will attack because of fear.

Sorry for my bad English and if I have misused the "anecdotal/empirical" terms.
 
Just because "top veterinarian schools" teach you this, doesn't mean it can't be propaganda.
What do you think would happen to a top school if after it's students have spent almost $250,000.00 US Dollars on their education, if the graduates found out that what they had been taught was a bunch of untrue facts?
More importantly, why would a top university risk it's reputation by teaching propaganda?

Can you back up any of your previous points with peer reviewed articles or it's something you have been taught and never spent any time researching if what you been taught is 100% true?
When one gets to the level of education I am at then you spend more time researching data then you do in a classroom listened to a professor's lecture. And I should point out that both views are taught and discussed so this may dispel the thought of propaganda. The university never pushes a single view of anything upon us - they simply supervise us as we research and discover each topic of our curriculum.
Epidemiological Study of Mammary Tumors in Female Dogs Diagnosed during the Period 2002-2012 - US National Library of Medicine
Study shines spotlight on neutering - American Veterinary Medical Association
Epidemiological study of canine mammary tumors: Age, breed, size and malignancy - Research Gate
RETROSPECTIVE HISTOPATHOLOGICAL STUDY OF CANINE MAMMARY GLAND TUMOURS DIAGNOSED FROM 2006 – 2012 - Research Gate
Setting the Record Straight on Spay and Neuter Myths - PetMD
Welfare implications of gonadectomy of dogs - Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Do Spayed and Neutered Dogs Get Cancer More Often? - Scientific American
Ki-67 and PCNA Expression in Canine Mammary Tumors and Adjacent Nonneoplastic Mammary Glands -  Veterinary Pathology
Survival analysis of female dogs with mammary tumors after mastectomy: Epidemiological, clinical and morphological aspects - Research Gate

This bs comes from a single research from 1969 that was never repeated since then.
That as you call it BS comes from 1999 - 2012, which is 30 years to 42 years after what you stated and originated by the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital in Madison WI and has been repeated by Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences and by UC-Davis.

I don't think I need to go on and as any person with any education knows there is always another study, and always more research. Research and data are often found to conflict but NOT all research and data are found under the same testing conditions or periods of time. Often when carefully conducted studies are completed they are in parallel to the original study, but sometimes they show differences and thereby we learn.

There was the belief that the female animal should be over 1 year of age and have had her first or second estrus cycle previous to being spayed up until around 2012, and then the teaching changed due to research to having the spay preformed at the age of 9 months, and the present teaching is at 6 months and previous to the first estrus cycle. Continuing research may one day change this again and the belief of what is best for your animal all depends on the knowledge that both you and your veterinarian have acquired.
 
6 months and previous to the first estrus cycle
Can you please explain why six months?
I think this is extremely fucking young. Basically every person I know and hear of never even wastes a thought on ever spaying at only six months.
People here would be beyond devastated if they'd hear about a dog undergoing this surgery at that age.

(I am not going to read all those studies, I just want it explained in a short and simple way)
 
Can you please explain why six months?
I think this is extremely fucking young. Basically every person I know and hear of never even wastes a thought on ever spaying at only six months.
People here would be beyond devastated if they'd hear about a dog undergoing this surgery at that age.

(I am not going to read all those studies, I just want it explained in a short and simple way)
In the US, that happens at that age because that's when dogs can start producing offspring, and when they can start getting aggressive. It's really stupid, as appropriate training can counter it easily.
 
In the US, that happens at that age because that's when dogs can start producing offspring, and when they can start getting aggressive. It's really stupid, as appropriate training can counter it easily.
This... Many, many times this.

But it's not likely to happen.

It's just another manifestation of the whole concept of "Doesn't matter what "it" is, I want it, I want it *NOW*, and I don't want to hear about needing to make any effort for it. I want a magic button I can push to make whatever I desire come to pass, and to hell with working at it even a little!" that I first noticed starting to take over here in America around 25-30 years ago (though I suspect it's probably been going on even longer), and has been getting steadily worse.

Prime example:
Liposuction.
Problem: "I'm turning into a disgusting blob of fat. FIX IT!"
Common sense solution: Put down the ding-dongs and doritos and the 2 liter of pepsi, turn off the TV, pick your lard-ass up off the couch, and get some exercise.
Typical American's response: "Fuck that, I wanna stay right here on the couch watching Oprah, gnoshing my doritos, packing in the twinkies and moon-pies, and washing the whole mess down with as much pepsi as I can pour into my face, and I wanna be thin again! NOW! Make it happen!"

Same thing as far as keeping a dog/cat from getting pregnant/causing a pregnancy - "I don't want to be bothered with training it, or keeping it supervised, I want an instant, no-effort fix - cut part of her guts out/lop his balls off and be done with it already!" Aided and abetted by the vet industry, which absolutely adores the quick and easy money from a little-or-no-effort surgery.
 
Can you please explain why six months?
I think this is extremely fucking young. Basically every person I know and hear of never even wastes a thought on ever spaying at only six months.
People here would be beyond devastated if they'd hear about a dog undergoing this surgery at that age.

(I am not going to read all those studies, I just want it explained in a short and simple way)
Six months is the minimum age a puppy can undergo surgery safely in terms of being safe for the anesthesia.

I have 2 female German Shepherds that just recently were spayed at six months of age and they are doing fine. Their surgery was 2 months ago. I also have 1 female German Shepherd that was spayed in the same manner and she will be 7 years of age in July, and has had no medical issues.
 
Last edited:
In the US, that happens at that age because that's when dogs can start producing offspring, and when they can start getting aggressive. It's really stupid, as appropriate training can counter it easily.
In the US and everywhere else, Female dogs can not become pregnant until they are in heat and depending on breed their first heat will occur between 8 months to 1year 4 months of age.
I have never heard of anyone being able to train the instincts out of an animal and if given a chance nature will usually take it's course.
 
Back
Top