Golden Retriever Dog Forums banner

Are DNA tests trustworthy?

4 reading
3.2K views 11 replies 7 participants last post by  scritch  
#1 ·
It has come to me recently that we might not be able to rely on all breeders' claims about DNA tests on their dogs. Let me give you a "hypothetical."

Let's say there was a recent dog show, a big specialty, that was offering DNA swabs, where you'd sign up, bring in your dog to get swabbed, the dogs' identities would be verified and swabs taken. Then the host club would send those swabs in for analysis and filing with the OFA. But what if one breeder wouldn't bring their dog to be verified, but insisted that the swab given to them, saying they would swab their dog and send it in themselves? Why would such a longtime breeder not just let their dog be ID'd and swabbed, but insist on doing it themselves and "sending it in later?" Would there be any way of assuring the OFA that the dog actually swabbed was the dog ultimately given the clearance?

And that got me thinking because, of course, these DNA businesses hand out swabs to owners all the time, who then submit them on their own, with no verification that the dog named is the dog swabbed. Breeders can easily falsify such tests if they know a particular dog is affected or a carrier of some genetic disease and they want the test to show clear. They can simply swab one of their clear dogs and send it in, can't they? I've seen breeders fake eye clearances (they show buyers faked clearances and say they simply never sent them in to OFA). It's even easier to fake a DNA clearance than an eye clearance.

So I'm wondering how many dogs out there with DNA clearances for genetic disease are actually affected or carrier dogs, whose breeders/owners sent in a swab from a different dog. Are there any safeguards against that? How trustworthy are these DNA clearances?
 
#2 ·
The whole stud book of AKC is on the honor system. Yes, all of that is possible. I'm also 99% sure that very well known pedigrees of very famous dogs (including dogs in each of our pedigrees) are fudged, an accidental breeding before DNA testing was available, a breeder who lied, etc, and what is on the pedigree we all know is not the actual ancestor. I have ZERO evidence or knowledge of this being true, I just don't see how it could not be true, given the honor system of AKC registration and human nature. Luckily, with DNA tests we can simply test every puppy.
 
#3 ·
Let's say there was a recent dog show, a big specialty, that was offering DNA swabs, where you'd sign up, bring in your dog to get swabbed, the dogs' identities would be verified and swabs taken. Then the host club would send those swabs in for analysis and filing with the OFA. But what if one breeder wouldn't bring their dog to be verified, but insisted that the swab given to them, saying they would swab their dog and send it in themselves? Why would such a longtime breeder not just let their dog be ID'd and swabbed, but insist on doing it themselves and "sending it in later?" Would there be any way of assuring the OFA that the dog actually swabbed was the dog ultimately given the clearance?
For whatever it's worth, I would have liked a clinic like that which has all the supplies and would do the test for you, verify microchip, and send it in for you! But without extra costs for doing it. <= My vet was willing to do it for me, but they would have charged an extra $50+ to do it!

Also, sending in to OFA... some people do not want to send all the results in to OFA because it adds up if you did a full panel....

Otherwise, I think nobody should accept "cleared by parentage" posted on K9data.
 
#5 ·
For whatever it's worth, I would have liked a clinic like that which has all the supplies and would do the test for you, verify microchip, and send it in for you! But without extra costs for doing it. <= My vet was willing to do it for me, but they would have charged an extra $50+ to do it!
Paw Prints genetics did that for me last year at Louisville show, they did the swab, verified microchip and sent it in for me. I paid them direct. For the full golden panel it was like $100. Cheap. Great deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Megora
#4 ·
In a way, it's kind of like that warning about sending your human DNA to Ancestry. com or a similar organization. Don't send it if you aren't prepared for some uncomfortable family secrets to be revealed.

Getting back to the topic at hand, your speculation is one of the reasons I don't like to see "Clear by Parentage" in a pedigree.

Trust, but verify.

Kelly
 
#7 ·
I bought a puppy from a breeder that boasted full testing of the puppy's sire and dam(hips, elbows, shoulders, eyes, heart, etc) plus full DNA testing for genetic disorders. Litter was AKC registered, and I registered the puppy & got her pedigree/papers.

Soon after getting her home, I noticed that she had flakey skin. Breeder said it was probably just allergies, but I knew something else was causing this. I did a DNA test, and turns out my puppy has ichthyosis. But the sire's DNA test indicates he's CLEAR for the disease. So, that's impossible. The breeder stopped answering my emails/calls, and ghosted me.

The sire's DNA was on file with the AKC, so I pursued a parentage test. Voila - the sire listed on her AKC papers was 'excluded' as being her father. So the AKC revoked her registration. And they said they'd 'investigate' the breeder.

Well... the breeder never responded to the AKC's inquiry letter... even though she continued to register new litters with the AKC through the whole process.

AKC's 'investigation' concluded without ever hearing back from the breeder, but they tell me that they can't share the outcome with me for 'privacy' reasons. However, when people inquire about this breeder, the AKC tells them that she is 'in good standing'. And she continues to register litters.

Conclusion... in my experience, the AKC is just a money maker and has no integrity at all.
 
#10 ·
I bought a puppy from a breeder that boasted full testing of the puppy's sire and dam(hips, elbows, shoulders, eyes, heart, etc) plus full DNA testing for genetic disorders. Litter was AKC registered, and I registered the puppy & got her pedigree/papers.

Soon after getting her home, I noticed that she had flakey skin. Breeder said it was probably just allergies, but I knew something else was causing this. I did a DNA test, and turns out my puppy has ichthyosis. But the sire's DNA test indicates he's CLEAR for the disease. So, that's impossible. The breeder stopped answering my emails/calls, and ghosted me.

The sire's DNA was on file with the AKC, so I pursued a parentage test. Voila - the sire listed on her AKC papers was 'excluded' as being her father. So the AKC revoked her registration. And they said they'd 'investigate' the breeder.

Well... the breeder never responded to the AKC's inquiry letter... even though she continued to register new litters with the AKC through the whole process.

AKC's 'investigation' concluded without ever hearing back from the breeder, but they tell me that they can't share the outcome with me for 'privacy' reasons. However, when people inquire about this breeder, the AKC tells them that she is 'in good standing'. And she continues to register litters.

Conclusion... in my experience, the AKC is just a money maker and has no integrity at all.
AKC won't tell you anything. I ran into the same issue with them. I sent an email to the AKC delegate for GRCA about what I think needs addressed. (Totally different than this) Anyway, for my case, she said that the information should be published in the AKC Gazette. Maybe an option? Go back to when you filed and do some research there. AKC Gazette is online with free access.
 
#8 ·
AKC's 'investigation' concluded without ever hearing back from the breeder, but they tell me that they can't share the outcome with me for 'privacy' reasons. However, when people inquire about this breeder, the AKC tells them that she is 'in good standing'. And she continues to register litters.
Random curiosity - how do you know they never heard back from the breeder? <= I'm literally just curious.
 
#12 ·
I kept calling the AKC to get status updates. They were allowed to tell me that she hadn't responded yet. They gave her four weeks(I think) to respond to the first letter, then sent another letter, and it was a few weeks after that that they told me they didn't get a response so were closing the case.
 
#9 ·
I guess I just don't understand why someone would lie about these things. I'm not one to withhold information either. If you ask me something, I will be 100% honest with you. I just don't randomly give out information or run my mouth about someone else.