Spay and Neuter Hurts Dogs and Cats-It’s A Fact

Posted on 02/25/2009

A review of over 50-117 studies involving the altering of canines
shows that there are major detrimental effects shown involving spaying-
neutering–but these are NEVER mentioned by the extremists–instead,
they only mention some of the risk reductions such as reducing uterine
infections or uterine tumors.

Major risks of altering a canine include the following:

Decreases life span

Increases risk of osteosarcoma (bone cancer)

Increases risk of obesity

Increases risk of bladder cancer

Increases risk of prostatic cancer

Increases risk of splenic haemangiosarcoma in spayed bitches

Increases risk of cardiac haemangiosarcoma

Increases risk of urinary incontinence (bitches/dogs)

Increases risk of cholangiocarcinoma (cancer of bile ducts in spayed

Increases risk of patellar luxation in small+medium sized dogs

Increases risk of adverse vaccine reactions

Increases risk of myasthenia gravis in spayed bitches

Increases risk of aggression, fearfulness

Increases cognitive impairment in aged dogs already showing signs of

Increases risk of peri-vulvar dermatitis, vaginities, cystitis, and
recurrent urinary tract infections in early age spayed bitches.

Increases risk of benign perianal tumors in spayed bitches

Increases risk of cranial cruciate ligament injury


Longevity, cancer and obesity: Healthwise, Canine Companions for
Independence (provide trained assistance dogs) found that early age
neutered dogs had increased incidence of osteosarcoma,
haemangiosarcoma, and obesity [8].

Not early age neutering specifically, but related to neutering at a
young age and resultant increased height and/or weight; in Golden
retrievers, “Both bitches and dogs neutered at < 1 year of age were
significantly taller as adults than those neutered at > or = 1 year of
age or intact animals.” Further, “Among bitches and dogs, the taller
the animal as an adult, the shorter the lifespan.” [65].

Now when the extremists keep telling us that ALL dogs need to be
altered (whether by MSN, to allegedly “save” the shelter dogs, to save
the “feral cats” or just to do whatever the radicals TELL US they are
doing—WHY should any of us believe anything they say?



As I have outlined for years, the extremists among us have no real
desire to actually save or keep animals as pets. They don’t even
believe in pet ownership (ONLY guardianship) Just look at the
following quoted verbiage from an AR, below pic………………………………..

“It doesn’t take any kind of grey matter to let two animals mate and
result in more unwanted babies to make $$$ off of…” that was a
response received,when it was pointed out that the majority of dogs in
shelters are NOT from breeders of dogs, but rather from owners of dogs
of medium-large breeds which engaged in unplanned ties, not breeding
purposely done as a livelihood or hobby.

”We just won a MSN here (mandatory spay/neuter) – we’ll continue
EVERYWHERE until the “male, juvenile mixed breed dogs, or old dogs,
handicapped dogs, scared dogs, skittish dogs, unsocial dogs, and
maligned breeds etc.” as you so lovingly call them find loving homes
from people with a soul and a conscience and have LOVE to give them”

That was the response received when it was pointed out that dogs
not readily adoptable (dogs with issues, behavior problems, biters,
severe separation anxiety, overly skittish, etc) are pushed onto
people, or such dogs are made readily available on forums like
Craigslist pets, while they flag off normal dogs that need homes. It
was also pointed out that rescued, re-homed/shelter dogs only make up
15-18% of all dogs but are involved in 50%+ of the fatal attacks
against people.