Brachycephalic dogs

So being bored while Bruno is napping (dangerous thing for me) I sat googling some random things and got round to wondering what happens inside a brachycephalic dogs mouth. Everyone carries on about the breathing problems, palates etc but have you ever thought what happens with their teeth?

Well ...





**** me...

I also found this: http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2014/06/mission-accomplished-pug-with-no-muzzle.html

Pics haven't shown up. You can't use IMG codes from Google Images on the forum xx

But yes, some dogs with exaggerated brachycephaly can suffer from tooth deformities, impactions and overcrowding. It's sad.

Personally, I would take anything from a blog site with a pinch of salt. They tend to be extremely biased, from one extreme to another.

Yes, that pug looks very unhealthy. However, said pug would have failed dismally in UK show rings because of this. Even the most 'hardcore' exaggeration advocate judges would have shunned that. Pedigree Dogs Exposed is notorious for offering only half of the story (the half which gets them an audience) and failing to document the improvements being made.

There is also no mention of when the image was captured, so this could have been before the raised awareness of brachycephaly.

I completely agree that a dog bred to look like that is the height of cruelty. I just wish Pedigree Dogs Exposed would tell the full story for once.

Eleanor wrote:Pics haven't shown up. You can't use IMG codes from Google Images on the forum xx

But yes, some dogs with exaggerated brachycephaly can suffer from tooth deformities, impactions and overcrowding. It's sad.

I can see it? I've done it before as well.

The words Pedigree Dogs Exposed seem to launch a myriad of feelings. The date is on the photo and the blog says spotted today.

To be honest I think it's wonderful that they're out there constantly harping on the bad things in dog breeds. The changes have been so minimal that it's not praise worthy yet. I've read a few random blogs today and good on Jemima for not keeping quiet.

I hate flat face dogs anyway.

The posted date is there, but not the date that the picture was taken.

I'm just not a fan of Pedigree Dogs Exposed, in general. Their original documentary, although very heavily biased, was something I did actually agree with, as it highlighted the more extreme health problems of various breeds. However, there have been noticeable changes made to the breed standards, with the health of the corresponding breeds showing considerable improvement; the only reasons for most of these health improvements not being seen are 1) It's difficult to quantify the results, without there being lengthy studies conducted on each individual problem, and 2) very, very few organisations/blogs/websites want to comment on them, as the stories just don't sell.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I look at dogs the world over and for every 1 bred that is slightly better there are still 10 bred that are worse.
There needs to be someone that constantly bitches, complains and points out the problems still found. The scale is still tipped very against healthy dogs.

As for your point 2: I disagree again. Showing how much you've improved your breed will sell. The problem is that many of the improved dogs are now deemed not up to standard by judges.
It's still an evil, wrong circle that goes around and around.

That 1st pic is awful! Those teeth & gums have got tobe painful!
The pug article...I feel bad for pugs as a general as they all seem to have eye & breathing issues but that one...

I cannot imagine a comfortable life unless it lives in a mild climate all yr round.

Shisa wrote:The problem is that many of the improved dogs are now deemed not up to standard by judges.

That certainly isn't the case in the UK. The 'problem' breeds are monitored by veterinary examinations at all KC championship shows, and the Best of Breed has to be passed fit by a vet before it can have its BOB award ratified & go forward to the Group judging.

Caryll, even in South Africa we've heard how many of the 'vet inspections' are utter nonsense.

Most of them are fine. Many of the criticisms are from exhibitors who are disappointed that their little darling has failed their vet check. The vets are fully qualified & non partisan. They are not breeders and have no agenda other than to see healthy dogs. Why would they falsify their opinions?

I do agree that some breeds have been altered to such an extent that they are very unhealthy, but certainly in the UK things are being taken seriously now, and the problem breeds are improving.

It will take time. It's taken a century to get those breeds to the state they are in, and it will take longer than 5 years to make a real difference.