Important news!! WFFS is finally recognized

[Manni01]

@JB

I 100% agree that at least for now, all carriers should be removed from breeding until more is known about the disease. Clearly this is a connective tissue disease, and nobody knows yet whether hetero/carrier horses are at a higher risk of complications as they age.

I don’t see how that is punishing Hilltop - they’ve already stated he’s removed from breeding until more is known.

IMHO, a high profile operation coming out with this may easily be the catalyst for MOs to test their mares, and for many SOs to test so they can lay claim to clear stallions. SOs who find a positive stallion may or may not make that known.

Hilltop may be the catalyst for having registries start requiring testing, just as AQHA requires 5-panel testing for breeding stallions who breed more than 25 mares (why not any mare, and why not the mares as well, I don’t know).

I think there are a lot of things in your post which are a personal opinion and I am not sure whether they are based on actual knowledge…
Yes it is punishing Hilltop. If you cull the stallion from breeding, Hilltop looses income. They were lucky because only one stallion was a carrier and they have many, what about a stallionowner who just has 1 or 2 stallions and they are carriers?? For years nobody cared about it and bred whatever… And now you say carrier horses might have complications as they age??? This is an assumption of you based on no knowledge.

I am actually pretty experienced with genetic testing because in dogs this is a lot more common and I own and used to breed a very rare breed. Some years ago they found out about EIC and developed a test for it. And people reacted the same way you did. There were witch hunts and accusations and a lot of stupid things. By now everything has calmed down and is back to normal. And thats the only way to handle this.
Look at it this way. You can test for it and make educated decisions based on the test results. For me from the point of a breeder thats luxury… There are so many things which you have no information about how do you deal with that. Maybe stop breeding alltogether because you can’t eliminate the problems???
I think its weird. As long as people don’t know they willingly take a lot of risk. Once they know and have the tools to avoid it, they go crazy about it…

No the best and only way is to test and to make educated decisions… If I wanted to breed and had the right mare for Sternlicht and she was clear, I would use him any time… Why not… with 50 % chance the foal is clear and if its a carrier, it will never have problems and can be used as a riding horse, which most horses are anyhow so what…

[Manni01]

@halt

that’s not what I said.

my concerns is that since he is not the only carrier in the population, that he should not go back to stud.

there’s too many variables, too many people, too many cooks in the pot - there’s no way for an ethical stud farm like Hilltop to ensure or guarantee that other people are practicing ethical breeding practices except to, simply, remove him from the equation.

which is a shame because he is a very nice stallion.

I wrote a long post about it to JB. I do not agree with you. Culling nice stallions from breeding is not a good way to deal with a genetic disorder in a breed. The registries could simply require that one of the breeding partners has to be clear… Very easy rule and then at least one of the breeding partners has to be tested… No need to go crazy about it.

[halt]

@Manni01

I wrote a long post about it to JB. I do not agree with you. Culling nice stallions from breeding is not a good way to deal with a genetic disorder in a breed. The registries could simply require that one of the breeding partners has to be clear… Very easy rule and then at least one of the breeding partners has to be tested… No need to go crazy about it.

the problem with your proposal is that you are assuming that people will test, and do the right thing ethically.
at the end of the day, they won’t.

there is no way to enforce responsible breeding decisions in a huge group of people, and WBs have a huge pool of breeders.

we’ve witnessed first hand with HYPP, with DM in dobermans, that breeders will not always make the ethical decision and not all breeders have a resolute moral compass… with these examples so fresh and so vivid in our minds, how can we expect any different outcome?

we don’t know enough about WFFS right now to assume it is safe to keep introducing into the population. better to cull now than find out down the road that WFFS is associated with other tissue connectivity issues/ailments.

re: “culling nice stallions”. i agree, he is a very nice stallion. however, his bloodlines are not in danger of dying out… if this was a smaller stud book where stallions are rare as hens teeth, like in the connemara studbook, i’d agree with you because we need to preserve quality going forward – but there are tons of stallions out there, and mares out there, that share similar breeding… so there is nothing IMHO that Sternlicht right now can offer that another relative (without the carrier status) can’t.

[JB]

@Manni01

I think there are a lot of things in your post which are a personal opinion and I am not sure whether they are based on actual knowledge…

I thought I’d made it clear my comments are just opinion. If not, I’m making it clear here.

Yes it is punishing Hilltop. If you cull the stallion from breeding, Hilltop looses income.

He’s already removed from breeding, at least for now. They already made the decision.
"Consequently, we have chosen to remove Sternlicht from this year’s stallion roster as we investigate the ramifications of this and other similar situations related to recessive traits and genetic testing. "

They were lucky because only one stallion was a carrier and they have many, what about a stallionowner who just has 1 or 2 stallions and they are carriers?? For years nobody cared about it and bred whatever… And now you say carrier horses might have complications as they age??? This is an assumption of you based on no knowledge.

Until it’s proven there is no risk, as is the case with Frame, then it’s a theory that still holds water. Clearly HT wants more information to make sure as well.

We don’t know there AREN’T complications.

I am actually pretty experienced with genetic testing because in dogs this is a lot more common and I own and used to breed a very rare breed. Some years ago they found out about EIC and developed a test for it. And people reacted the same way you did. There were witch hunts and accusations and a lot of stupid things. By now everything has calmed down and is back to normal. And thats the only way to handle this.

I haven’t reacted in any way that isn’t unreasonable. I think it’s more irresponsible to behave as if it’s nothing to worry about even for a carrier, than to take some precautions until more is known. I’m not on a witch hunt and certainly not accusing anyone of anything. I, and most others I’d assume, would be ok with this not being eliminated IF there’s reasonable cause to think there’s no appreciable risk of complications as the horse gets older. Some will always feel it should be eliminated, just as there are those who think that Frame should be eliminated. Why wouldn’t someone want to be extra cautious now, instead of being blase and finding out later it’s 15% or 20% of the population and we finally discover it brings age-related risk with it?

How do we even know the current status is just 6-10%? Clearly nobody knew this stallion, nor the dam of the foal, were carriers until now. How many of the stallion’s (and his carrier parent’s) offspring are now carriers, how many of them breeding stock, and how many of the mare’s pedigree are breeding stock carriers?

Look at it this way. You can test for it and make educated decisions based on the test results. For me from the point of a breeder thats luxury… There are so many things which you have no information about how do you deal with that. Maybe stop breeding alltogether because you can’t eliminate the problems???
I think its weird. As long as people don’t know they willingly take a lot of risk. Once they know and have the tools to avoid it, they go crazy about it…

No the best and only way is to test and to make educated decisions… If I wanted to breed and had the right mare for Sternlicht and she was clear, I would use him any time… Why not… with 50 % chance the foal is clear and if its a carrier, it will never have problems and can be used as a riding horse, which most horses are anyhow so what…

I agree that information makes more educated choices. The problem right now is we don’t know there are no health risks for carriers. Not all mutations are 100% benign in the heterozygous state, and there doesn’t seem to be any accumulated data out there tracking carriers through performance careers to evaluate any increased risks. Someone else in a FB group brought up “what if someone finds out this is linked to an increased risk of a heart attack from aorta failure during intense exercise?” Hasn’t there been some conversation about that type of incident here in the past, wondering what the potential causes are? What if?

A little precaution isn’t a bad thing.

[Manni01]

@halt

the problem with your proposal is that you are assuming that people will test, and do the right thing ethically.
at the end of the day, they won’t.

there is no way to enforce responsible breeding decisions in a huge group of people, and WBs have a huge pool of breeders.

we’ve witnessed first hand with HYPP, with DM in dobermans, that breeders will not always make the ethical decision and not all breeders have a resolute moral compass… with these examples so fresh and so vivid in our minds, how can we expect any different outcome?

we don’t know enough about WFFS right now to assume it is safe to keep introducing into the population. better to cull now than find out down the road that WFFS is associated with other tissue connectivity issues/ailments.

re: “culling nice stallions”. i agree, he is a very nice stallion. however, his bloodlines are not in danger of dying out… if this was a smaller stud book where stallions are rare as hens teeth, like in the connemara studbook, i’d agree with you because we need to preserve quality going forward – but there are tons of stallions out there, and mares out there, that share similar breeding… so there is nothing IMHO that Sternlicht right now can offer that another relative (without the carrier status) can’t.

How many of his relatives are tested?? As you pointed out, he is from very popular lines… if you cull him and everybody uses his untested relatives do you think that’s an improvement?? IMO this is something great which Hilltop did and it could really start something if people are reasonable and smart about it. Crying out for culling is neither reasonable nor smart. And I hope Hilltop will bring him back next year with the rule that his mares have to be tested clear…

[halt]

@Manni01

How many of his relatives are tested?? As you pointed out, he is from very popular lines… if you cull him and everybody uses his untested relatives do you think that’s an improvement?? IMO this is something great which Hilltop did and it could really start something if people are reasonable and smart about it. Crying out for culling is neither reasonable nor smart. And I hope Hilltop will bring him back next year with the rule that his mares have to be tested clear…

ok but, then what? what about the offspring?

it doesn’t end with the mare, manni01. if the mare is tested and clear, the offspring still has a chance of inheriting carrier status. then what? all offspring are tested?

do you really think that will happen?

what happens to the horses that are carriers of that pairing? if you have sternlicht pass on carrier status to say, 20 foals out of a 100 foal book… you’re telling me all 20 of those foals will then have, throughout the history of their lives, owners that will responsibly not breed them? or owners that even know to test? and once they know, will test?

it’s not an improvement if people use his untested relatives. it is an improvement if they use a NON-CARRIER relative. as i said, in my post, that you quoted.

[Manni01]

@JB

I thought I’d made it clear my comments are just opinion. If not, I’m making it clear here.

He’s already removed from breeding, at least for now. They already made the decision.
"Consequently, we have chosen to remove Sternlicht from this year’s stallion roster as we investigate the ramifications of this and other similar situations related to recessive traits and genetic testing. "

Until it’s proven there is no risk, as is the case with Frame, then it’s a theory that still holds water. Clearly HT wants more information to make sure as well.

We don’t know there AREN’T complications.

I haven’t reacted in any way that isn’t unreasonable. I think it’s more irresponsible to behave as if it’s nothing to worry about even for a carrier, than to take some precautions until more is known. I’m not on a witch hunt and certainly not accusing anyone of anything. I, and most others I’d assume, would be ok with this not being eliminated IF there’s reasonable cause to think there’s no appreciable risk of complications as the horse gets older. Some will always feel it should be eliminated, just as there are those who think that Frame should be eliminated. Why wouldn’t someone want to be extra cautious now, instead of being blase and finding out later it’s 15% or 20% of the population and we finally discover it brings age-related risk with it?

How do we even know the current status is just 6-10%? Clearly nobody knew this stallion, nor the dam of the foal, were carriers until now. How many of the stallion’s (and his carrier parent’s) offspring are now carriers, how many of them breeding stock, and how many of the mare’s pedigree are breeding stock carriers?

I agree that information makes more educated choices. The problem right now is we don’t know there are no health risks for carriers. Not all mutations are 100% benign in the heterozygous state, and there doesn’t seem to be any accumulated data out there tracking carriers through performance careers to evaluate any increased risks. Someone else in a FB group brought up “what if someone finds out this is linked to an increased risk of a heart attack from aorta failure during intense exercise?” Hasn’t there been some conversation about that type of incident here in the past, wondering what the potential causes are? What if?

A little precaution isn’t a bad thing.

How do you know that there are problems related to a horse beeing a carrier for this disorder?? Do you have any proof for that?? If not it’s useless to even mention it… the bad thing about that is that there are people believing it and starting to worry about it. Without people testing for it you have no clue at all!!! And I assume you are not a breeder because otherwise you would not have written the last sentence. I never bred my nicest bitch because she has a close relative who produced with different bitches pups with seizures. So I think you don’t need to tell me about beeing precautious… I would have loved to have a test for seizuring!!! So I have no idea why people don’t use that tool but rather misuse it…
sorry for my wording but this is aber important discussion right now IMO and it needs to be handled sensible And educated!!

[Manni01]

@halt

ok but, then what? what about the offspring?

it doesn’t end with the mare, manni01. if the mare is tested and clear, the offspring still has a chance of inheriting carrier status. then what? all offspring are tested?

do you really think that will happen?

what happens to the horses that are carriers of that pairing? if you have sternlicht pass on carrier status to say, 20 foals out of a 100 foal book… you’re telling me all 20 of those foals will then have, throughout the history of their lives, owners that will responsibly not breed them? or owners that even know to test? and once they know, will test?

it’s not an improvement if people use his untested relatives. it is an improvement if they use a NON-CARRIER relative. as i said, in my post, that you quoted.

So. How many stallions are tested for this?? And I bet stallion owners with stallions from these lines will now be very cautious to test if there are more culling fans around…
so what?? If the goal is a carrier will it be bad for riding?? What are most horses bred for???

[halt]

@Manni01

So. How many stallions are tested for this?? And I bet stallion owners with stallions from these lines will now be very cautious to test if there are more culling fans around…
so what?? If the goal is a carrier will it be bad for riding?? What are most horses bred for???

i see your point about being worried about how stallion owners would react.

however, i think going forward, that it is very important that we try to prevent this disease, which is in a stallion that is by no means rare-blooded (meaning both of his contributors are ubiquitous in the registries) from spreading: if it is at 10% now, imagine what it will be in a few years especially considering how much success some of Sternlicht’s contributors have enjoyed… you can’t throw a stone without hitting a stallion from either parent in his pedigree…

i would hope that a stallion owner would test anyway. seeing that other stallions are positive and not waiting to face the music in your own breeding program is IMO no excuse not to test.

[oldernewbie]

@Manni01

not sure if that is what Laurierace was talking about… I believe BTW that the mare who is the dam of Sternlicht was tested and was clear, And that makes the thing really interesting IMO… And I am not sure why you even attack the mare owner without knowing facts… Thats for sure not the way to deal with a genetic problem…

Holy smokes Manni, did you read the press release from Hilltop? They say in the press release that the mare was a carrier and that’s what led them to test their stallions. I am not attacking the mare owner, it’s right there for all to see.

[JB]

@Manni01

How do you know that there are problems related to a horse beeing a carrier for this disorder?? Do you have any proof for that?? If not it’s useless to even mention it…

I’m not sure you’re completely reading or digesting my posts. I’ve stated we don’t know that. The whole POINT is that we don’t know, therefore it is not responsible to assume that carriers are no problem, and that breeding carriers to non-carriers is totally fine. ALL we know is that carriers do not express the WFFS disease. We don’t know that they don’t have other problems down the road. This is a connective tissue disease in the homozygous state. We don’t know that the hetero state is completely benign.

the bad thing about that is that there are people believing it and starting to worry about it. Without people testing for it you have no clue at all!!!

That’s exactly my point - there are clearly more carriers out there than we know of, and I have not yet found any information on any study that has looked at carriers for potential health risks as they relate to doing what we breed for - athletic performance. Maybe someone is starting to accumulate some data, that would be awesome, but the test for this was only developed a couple years ago, so everything is still brand new in terms of being able to make correlations, let alone causations.

Why should we be nonchalant about breeding more carriers just because we don’t currently have proof they will never have an issue?

And I assume you are not a breeder because otherwise you would not have written the last sentence.

For you to assume that someone needs to be a breeder to have any interest in any genetics is…odd. I took every reasonable precaution I could take for my 1, and likely only, personal breeding. I bought tested colostrum to give the foal very first thing because I knew my mare would be on domperidone - I took precautions against both the potential fescue toxicosis issue, and the low IgG that domperidone brings. Please don’t assume that people have to be breeders to have an interest in breeding-related issues.

[Laurierace]

Hilltop says they were asked about their stallions status because a mare owner had a carrier and wanted to make sure not to breed to another carrier. How do you think she found out her mare was a carrier? That is the other half of the story that is missing. The mare owner is being diligent and forthcoming as is Hilltop. Half the equation is missing. I am going to leave it at that for now.

[Manni01]

@oldernewbie

Holy smokes Manni, did you read the press release from Hilltop? They say in the press release that the mare was a carrier and that’s what led them to test their stallions. I am not attacking the mare owner, it’s right there for all to see.

yes some of Sternlichts ancestors are and were extremly popular for breeding. So IMO 10% is optimistic… another reason why culling doesn’t make sense… the problem is there already… this stallion will not be the one spreading it…

[MissAriel]

One key point when comparing HYPP to WFFS and the likelihood of breeders propagating the defective genes is that with WFFS you end up with a foal needing to be euthanized. With HYPP you end up with a horse that can grow to maturity and win oodles of ribbons because it has giant musculature. There is an upside to HYPP that doesn’t exist for WFFS, which should make WFFS much easier to eliminate.

[JB]

@MissAriel

One key point when comparing HYPP to WFFS and the likelihood of breeders propagating the defective genes is that with WFFS you end up with a foal needing to be euthanized. With HYPP you end up with a horse that can grow to maturity and win oodles of ribbons because it has giant musculature. There is an upside to HYPP that doesn’t exist for WFFS, which should make WFFS much easier to eliminate.

Not all nH (or even HH) horses end up with the larger muscling which was the original cause of this disease becoming so widespread.

We don’t actually know for sure that there is no “upside” to a hetero WFFS horse

What if (and yes, theory, conjecture, le’ts make that clear ) a hetero horse has more, but not TOO elastic, ligaments and tendons which allows a bigger, looser gait that is winning? Haven’t there been discussions right here on the trend for horses with big loosey goosey gaits? And hasn’t there been some discussion (and not just here) on whether that is caused by or leads to some neurological issues?

The point is we don’t know nearly enough about the life of a carrier horse

@Manni01

If the goal is a carrier will it be bad for riding?? What are most horses bred for???

See above - we have no idea whether there are longer-term issues potentially arising from the heterozygous state.

[Manni01]

@JB

Not all nH (or even HH) horses end up with the larger muscling which was the original cause of this disease becoming so widespread.

We don’t actually know for sure that there is no “upside” to a hetero WFFS horse

What if (and yes, theory, conjecture, le’ts make that clear ) a hetero horse has more, but not TOO elastic, ligaments and tendons which allows a bigger, looser gait that is winning? Haven’t there been discussions right here on the trend for horses with big loosey goosey gaits? And hasn’t there been some discussion (and not just here) on whether that is caused by or leads to some neurological issues?

The point is we don’t know nearly enough about the life of a carrier horse

See above - we have no idea whether there are longer-term issues potentially arising from the heterozygous state.

Exactly we don’t know. And I am not sure how much sense it makes to make assumptions if we don’t know. Usually that causes more harm then anything. It does make sense to encourage everybody to test because that will educate people and produce informations… everything else is a witch hunt

[soloudinhere]

@Manni01

I wrote a long post about it to JB. I do not agree with you. Culling nice stallions from breeding is not a good way to deal with a genetic disorder in a breed. The registries could simply require that one of the breeding partners has to be clear… Very easy rule and then at least one of the breeding partners has to be tested… No need to go crazy about it.

Doing this 100% ensures that there will be MORE carriers in the future and this contributes to PROPAGATING a genetic defect.

of course, it’s all about money - hilltop loses income. Which they willingly lost rather than continue to spread a known defect. A carrier can beget a carrier. To continue to breed and say only one parent has to be tested accomplishes nothing by continuing to spread the defect as well as birth afflicted foals. Why would that be a reasonable solution?

[JB]

@Manni01

Exactly we don’t know. And I am not sure how much sense it makes to make assumptions if we don’t know. Usually that causes more harm then anything. It does make sense to encourage everybody to test because that will educate people and produce informations… everything else is a witch hunt

I still haven’t seen any witch hunting

We shouldn’t make assumptions about this either way, which is all I’m pointing out. We should not assume that carriers are 100% unaffected in any way. So when there is no information about negative effects of carriers, we should not assume that continuing to breed carriers to non-carriers is ok. Press and hope for more research into this so we can start to get a better picture of who has it and whether there are increased health risks.

Better to proceed cautiously and limit expansion and then find out it’s really all good, than to assume nothing is wrong with carriers and end up with a bigger population of carriers that have more and more apparent long-term negative issues. That’s all pretty much everyone has been going for.

[dr_j]

@JB

It will never be wiped out because of all the “backyard” breeding, and because there were SO many horses with it by the time it was discovered, much less by the time it had a test for it I agree the AQHA fell down by not just disallowing any new ?H registrations as soon as there was a genetic test. Money trumps integrity. APHA has fallen even harder as they still allow even HH horses (unless there’s a very recent change).

WFFS has a better chance being wiped out but only if there’s a global decision to not allow carriers into the registries. Theoretically that’s desirable. Is it a realistic desire? I don’t know.

I take (rightly or wrongly) Hilltop’s comment of "as we investigate the ramifications of this " to mean what I hope it means, which is to do and allow more investigation into any long-term health risks of even carriers. If this is truly a mutation which is totally benign in the hetero form, then it’s no different from the Frame Overo gene. But if there is any link to the increased risk of things like heart attacks from weakened connective tissue, that’s a very different issue. That could take a long time to uncover

There is a very good chance like HERDA and Ehlors Danos in people, the heterozygotes probably have traits, , which make them above average athletes. Elimination from the gene pool of the carrier state shouldn’t be the objective. Never producing an affected animal while maintaining the excellent traits of the carriers in the gene pool (of which many won’t be related to that gene specifically) should be the goal.

[Manni01]

@dr j

There is a very good chance like HERDA and Ehlors Danos in people, the heterozygotes probably have traits, , which make them above average athletes. Elimination from the gene pool of the carrier state shouldn’t be the objective. Never producing an affected animal while maintaining the excellent traits of the carriers in the gene pool (of which many won’t be related to that gene specifically) should be the goal.

Thank you!!!