I was discussing, the other day, the ethics of spaying and neutering cats and dogs. I know it's a given that we do this, and that we understand the overall net outcome to be a good thing. As a vegan, I'm concerned about granting as much autonomy to animals as possible, but at the same time, I recognize the need to control the population, since we have so many dogs and cats without homes. That's where we usually end the discussion, I feel.
But she brought up a few interesting points, and I was curious to hear whether or not you all had heard any of this before. She's definitely the science-y type, and has undoubtedly been reading journals and what not, and I'm... not that type. So what I'm providing is info summarized for a layman. Excuse the generalities, offered as I understand them. =P
According to her (and I don't know if this is true), some vets are refusing to perform a spay at all now, as it is deemed cruel. You're essentially performing major surgery to remove the reproductive organs. A neuter is less invasive. But in both cases, it messes with the hormone balance of the animals, essentially rendering them children for life. Some dogs, she said, even become depressed post-neutering, because they still have some memory of engaging in sexual activity (had they engaged in it before), and therefore a vague drive... but at the same time, no drive at all, because the hormones that drive sex are dead and gone. She notes that recovery from such major surgery can be flawed, and that the surgery itself and the new imbalance of hormones hurts the immune system.
There are also, she suggests, an increased risk of certain kinds of cancers. In dogs, at least, there is reportedly a 75% increased risk of the development of osteosarcoma. Colon cancer is at an increased risk. And while removal of the testicles eliminates testicular cancer, an emergency neuter can also be performed in the event of the development of testicular cancer, and recovery rates at this point are good.
Most of her information is based on findings in dogs (she's a dog person), but there are comparable findings in cats, apparently. I'm sure I could dig up sources from her if you guys want.
I did personally notice that Sophie became weirdly aggressive after her spay. She was always a little bratty, but it was like a flip was switched after that. She was EXTREMELY aggressive at vets, where she never had been before. And she still is.
Now, I'm not sure how much any of this is certain. But I'm wondering if you guys have heard anything about it. If it were true that spay and neuter are more bad than good, I guess we'd be faced with a number of dilemmas. Obviously it makes it harder to give a home to multiple animals, because you can't have unwanted litters everywhere. One solution would be to neuter all the males, and leave all the females unaltered. Or you could simply adopt animals that have already been fixed.
Any thoughts? I'm curious to hear what others might have to say, especially in light of my recent readings regarding the ethics of vaccinations.
But she brought up a few interesting points, and I was curious to hear whether or not you all had heard any of this before. She's definitely the science-y type, and has undoubtedly been reading journals and what not, and I'm... not that type. So what I'm providing is info summarized for a layman. Excuse the generalities, offered as I understand them. =P
According to her (and I don't know if this is true), some vets are refusing to perform a spay at all now, as it is deemed cruel. You're essentially performing major surgery to remove the reproductive organs. A neuter is less invasive. But in both cases, it messes with the hormone balance of the animals, essentially rendering them children for life. Some dogs, she said, even become depressed post-neutering, because they still have some memory of engaging in sexual activity (had they engaged in it before), and therefore a vague drive... but at the same time, no drive at all, because the hormones that drive sex are dead and gone. She notes that recovery from such major surgery can be flawed, and that the surgery itself and the new imbalance of hormones hurts the immune system.
There are also, she suggests, an increased risk of certain kinds of cancers. In dogs, at least, there is reportedly a 75% increased risk of the development of osteosarcoma. Colon cancer is at an increased risk. And while removal of the testicles eliminates testicular cancer, an emergency neuter can also be performed in the event of the development of testicular cancer, and recovery rates at this point are good.
Most of her information is based on findings in dogs (she's a dog person), but there are comparable findings in cats, apparently. I'm sure I could dig up sources from her if you guys want.
I did personally notice that Sophie became weirdly aggressive after her spay. She was always a little bratty, but it was like a flip was switched after that. She was EXTREMELY aggressive at vets, where she never had been before. And she still is.
Now, I'm not sure how much any of this is certain. But I'm wondering if you guys have heard anything about it. If it were true that spay and neuter are more bad than good, I guess we'd be faced with a number of dilemmas. Obviously it makes it harder to give a home to multiple animals, because you can't have unwanted litters everywhere. One solution would be to neuter all the males, and leave all the females unaltered. Or you could simply adopt animals that have already been fixed.
Any thoughts? I'm curious to hear what others might have to say, especially in light of my recent readings regarding the ethics of vaccinations.
Probably a lot, like most women. Dogs can't tell us how they feel so early signs of something wrong may go unnoticed. Unspayed females over a certain age have an extremely high chance of pyometra, and mammary cancer is pretty common as well. I don't think I would be comfortable leaving a female intact for very long. I will probably allow any future female dogs to have one or two heats before spaying, but I will spay. There is also ovary-sparing spay (removes uterus only) and that would prevent pyometra, but the mammary cancer risk is still high.
