Hip check: Is the Penn model the Beta best?
By Gina Spadafori
January 11, 2009
Another excellent post this morning from Pet Connection BFF Dr. Patty K at Dolittler, regarding what helps spot bad hips best: PennHIP or OFA? For two decades, my surgeon friends have sworn by PennHIP, even as they send in their OFA films. In recent years, it seems you hear a lot less about PennHIP, which is, says Dr. Khuly, more about marketing than merit:
[T]he history of technological standards is littered with ways in which arguably far better models lost out over their lesser rivals. And it usually comes down to marketing.
Sometimes it means getting government to buy into one standard over the other, distributing your model at a low cost to a high-use industry (reference porn and VHS) or shouldering out competitors with disingenuous practices (á la AVID microchips). Sometimes it’s just a matter of marketing-dedicated dollars and a nimble marketing arm (Microsoft vs. Mac).
Where am I going with this? For those of you whose breeds are predisposed to hip dysplasia, you might know that the OFA (Orthopedic Foundation for Animals) and PennHIP models represent rival technologies for assessing dog hips. You should also know that I consider the PennHIP model superior. [.... A]ny rational person who would compare the two technologies would be hard-pressed to side with the OFA method.
My 12-year-old retriever, Heather, got both PennHIP and OFA certs (along with other health certs), to help her breeder make decisions, even though her breeding decisions did not include Heather, who was spayed at 3, never bred. In the interim, PennHIP has lost a lot of ground among responsible, ethical breeders. Mom-to-be McKenzie is OFA certified, but Dr. K has convinced me — we have one more test to pop for. Hey, what’s another $400 when you’ve already dropped a good $10K on certs and titles? You know us greedy breeders … it’s all about making money!
I’m still really NOT convinced. THe lack of an open, searchable database, a breed in which hips are not a major concern, and the ONLY local penn hip vet being TOTALLY unwilling to market her services and you know, actually return calls to answer questions mean I’ll be sticking with OFA for the forseeable future.
Comment by Cait — January 11, 2009 @ 1:16 pm
The question you should ask yourself now is, what score would cause you to not breed. This is better done before a marginal score is tempting one way or another.
For tests to be valuable, they have to be able to change your decisions.
My problem with OFA is that I don’t think any breeder actually uses them to make a decision. What does FAIR mean in your breed? Does that mean 10% of HD, or 55%? I can tell you the answer to that with PennHIP.
IMO, OFA is used as a selling point when good, and hidden when marginal, and perhaps as a breeding tool if poor. But really now, you can LOOK at a dog and how they run and see POOR.
The OFA database is nice, but that’s about it. As a breeder, I don’t see it as crucial. I can simply ask the owners of the dogs I’m interested in for copies of their results.
I know of other health databases which aren’t much use because mandatory results posting is not a part of participation. People who do post Carrier and Affected results also do so on their own webpages. What makes me nervous is the unreported cases.
OFA hip scoring is too easy to game the system. Thus its value is little to nothing for me. I’ve never heard of the other tests OFA offers being an issue in my breed or any(or many) breeders doing them.
PennHIP gives me all the information I need to know, despite it not being a forum to advertise how wonderful my dogs are with good results. In fact, I rather appreciate it for that… people who do it and share results seem much more interested in actual hip health instead of the appearance of perfection and the advertising bonus that comes with OFA being more recognized.
OFA is like GPA, PennHIP is like SAT/ACT. One is kind of predicative but not really consistent and the other is standardized and mathematically significant. Both can be used for a benefit, PennHIP is just better and more complete.
Comment by Christopher — January 11, 2009 @ 4:55 pm