So, I'm reading the comments section to my post on the lies we're told in the pet media about the health effects of spay/neuter. And I'm thinking, if so many people I like and respect really don't agree with me or even address my point, does that mean I'm wrong? Incoherent? Not thinking this through?
But that's just crazy talk.
No, what this really reminds me of is the Christian right's crusade to deny the existence or efficacy of ANY method of preventing teen pregnancy, HIV, and other sexually transmitted diseases, other than the infamous abstinence method.
On the surface, they talk a good talk, don't they? Who can deny that not fucking will indeed prevent pregnancy and STDs?
The problem is, not fucking is great in theory, but real life? Not so much. Most teens who pledge not to fuck before marriage are, you know, lying. Or at least, they change their minds the first time their hormones get all frothed up. OK, not necessarily the first time. But you know, soon.
And that's how I feel about those of you who waxed passionate about spay/neuter and pet overpopulation and dogs and cats dying in shelters and all the sad and tragic and yes, true stories about unwanted pets. Pretty much everything you say is true. (And for the record, I've volunteered in shelters and for rescues. Which I guess means, I get to voice my opinion on this.)
And all that stuff about there being factors to consider other than health? That's true too, which I actually do point out in the original post.
But it's like admitting that not fucking prevents pregnancy and STDs is true. Yes, it's true, but it's not the point. The point is not that fucking causes pregnancy and STDs, the point is that fucking is fun and normal and kids are gonna want to do it. I did.
And the point about spay/neuter is not that my keeping my dogs' balls on has any effect on the numbers of dogs in rescue or shelters (although it doesn't), or causes them to have behavior problems (although they don't), or that an intact dog won't get cancer (because he might). The point is, stop lying.
The other point is, accept that just about everything on earth has at least two sides, usually a lot more, and pretending it doesn't makes just as much sense and works out just as well as pretending kids won't fuck.
I'm just saying.
Christy, maybe I should have posted on the original thread, but your words were not for naught. All of my dogs had come to me already spayed/neutered. With Merlin, (he's 20 weeks old today) this is the first time I've had to make the decision of whether to neuter him or not. I'm undecided, now, on what to do, because as you said, I only had half the story. Since I never had to think about it, I never paid attention or bothered to look to see if I was being told the entire truth.
So, let me put forth the idea that there are a lot of people that want a companion pup and that's all they want to think about. These people are very happy to go about their lives being told they should do this or that for their pets, and are then relieved of having to do the research on whether or not this is the best thing for their pet and them.
Like so many other issue, being told "this way is best" is just much easier, and less time consumming.
Posted by: CE Petro | 30 May 2006 at 02:57 PM
I read your blog from bloglines and never comment... I was thrilled to see your post the other day (many kudos for the citations!) but today I saw this post and figured I needed to visit and actually voice my support of your original plea ("Stop Lying, people").
Very well said - I couldn't agree more (with all of it)!
Posted by: Crystal | 31 May 2006 at 05:12 PM
I responded to your original entry with a comment about spaying/neutering reducing the pet population. It's not that I failed to understand the point you were making, it was that I still felt the value of spaying and neutering in general far out-weighed any arguments to the contrary. Everything I've ever read suggests the making spay and neuter clinics available at a low cost does reduce the number of animals euthanized in shelters, and that's very important to me.
My response was also based on the fact I've never seen a pro-spay/neuter article which claimed there were no side-effects. The issue of side-effects is not always addressed, but I think that's different than making an actual claim of no side-effects. I'd assume it would be up to a person's veterinarian to discuss side-effects with an owner -- mine does.
I think both sides of the argument still have grey areas. You mentioned a higher incidence of TCC bladder cancer in neutered dogs, which might be true, but I've also read that the surging number of dogs with bladder cancer can be traced to increased use of pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides (like flea powders). Some breeds have a genetic predisposition for bladder cancer. The cancer has also been linked to second-hand smoke. The cancer is still more prevalent in female dogs than in males, and it still only accounts for 1% of all cancers. I don't think anyone has been able to prove an actual physiological link between neutering and bladder cancer, just a statistical link, and I think statistics can be skewed so many ways. If I'm wrong, and research has shown physiological changes in the bladder associated with neutering which lead to cancer, then please correct me. I tried to read some of the articles you cited but couldn't find them all.
I don't know if I agree with your comparison of this situation to abstinence-only education. Abstinence-only education does not make teenagers less sexually active, and lack of sex ed does not stop teenagers from getting sexually-transmitted diseases. On the other hand, spaying and neutering does cut down on the numbers of unwanted pets in shelters, whether or not owners are aware of all the facts. Maybe you aren't putting pets there, but thousands of other irreponsible people are. Because of that, I'm quite willing to keep making those irresponsible people think that spaying and neutering is a good thing, period. When they're ready to know both sides of the story of their own volition, they can seek the information.
Posted by: Leigh-Ann | 02 June 2006 at 05:53 PM