Yeah - if the breeder shared a story like Hank, I would definitely not necessarily run the other way. An unexplained hole in the clearances, though, is a whole other matter.I would say go with a breeder that does all health clearances as a practice...there really is no excuse for not doing them...but I also have heard exactly what Hank has posted above, so I personally would not eliminate a puppy from a known honest breeder, who does share openly info in regard to their own personal experiences! Kudos Hank!!
But at every outcross of a line, isn't there a risk of introducing a greater potential for ED if you aren't doing clearances?But if the pup comes from older, well established and respected lines, with no history of issues in this regard, I would probably be willing to let it slide.
And, what is the definition of "no history"? In the case of there being no history of clearances how would you know if it isn't a problem? I'd prefer a history of no problems provable with documentation.But at every outcross of a line, isn't there a risk of introducing a greater potential for ED if you aren't doing clearances?
Most people buy Pet dogs, not breeding dogs. If I was developing a breeding line, I would demand it.
I fear this is turning into another PD thread. I'm outta here.