A greyhound thats found a home is one of the lucky ones. Live each day as it comes and fight the battles you have. Don't brood over what might not happen.

The greyhound is by and large a healthy and long lived breed. Average age of death (UK) 10 years but this figure like most averages is meaningless (most people have more than the average amount of feet - think about it)

A reasonable approximation of life expectancy is 12 years. Sure there are instances of young dogs getting cancer and other illnesses but just like in people these are the exception not the norm, its still tragic when it happens but with most dogs its more likley than not that they'll reach a good age.

All this talk about cancer causes and cancer genes is looking for something that doesn't exist the statistics simply don't back it up.

Lets face it greyhounds are healthy creatures which don't drink, smoke, or eat chocolate and cakes, so in comparison to humans will suffer less cardiac heart disease, diabetes etc. so the default cause of death is likley to be cancer mostly in old age.

There are probably a lot of people with sad stories of their dogs passing away young and these are very sad, but only tell a small part of the story. When a young dog dies its news when an old dog dies its expected so which one do you expect to get the most coverage.

Death is a fact of life for every person, every dog and every insect. Forget about him until he comes knocking and when he does make sure you can look him in the eye and say "I had a bloody good time whilst waiting for you"

Primary bone neoplasms are common in dogs. Most primary bone tumors in dogs are malignant, in that they usually cause death as a result of local infiltration (e.g., pathologic fractures or extreme pain leading to euthanasia) or metastasis (e.g., pulmonary metastases in osteosarcoma). Neoplasms that metastasize to the bone are extremely rare in dogs; some malignant tumors that occasionally metastasize to bones are transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract, osteosarcoma of the appendicular skeleton, hemangiosarcoma, mammary adenocarcinoma, and prostatic adenocarcinoma.

Osteosarcomas (OSAs) are the most common primary bone neoplasm in dogs and the most common tumor in Greyhounds in the United Kingdom, where it accounted for 50% of all tumors, and for 22% of the deaths in the breed (www.gurk.demon.co.uk /ghsurvey). Cancer in general (44%), and OSA in particular (22%) were the leading cause of death in the breed. They can affect either the appendicular or axial skeletons, and occur primarily in large (and giant)breed, middle ageto-older dogs. Preferential locations for OSA include the distal radius, proximal humerus, and distal femur, although they can occur in any bone or location.

Their biologic behavior is characterized by aggressive local infiltration of the surrounding tissues and rapid hematogenous dissemination (usually to the lungs). Although historically it was believed that OSAs of the axial skeleton had a low metastatic potential, it now appears that their metastatic rate is similar to that of the appendicular OSAs.

It wasn't a huge study, but other than showing a high incidence of the disease (though mostly bone tumours), it didn't 'prove' that any one 'line' was more prone.

Having frequently discussed it with an orthopaedic vet, he simply pointed out that there never used to be the number of greyhounds adopted as pets as there are now, so not as many lived as long as they do now. The longer-boned breeds all seem to be equally susceptible.

Little comfort, when yet another of our 'adopted-out' dogs was euthanased at age seven a couple of weeks ago and another one on Tuesday, both with bone tumours. Another sad thing is how insidious it is; how often it is not seen/recognised on first Xray and some vets (understandably) don't see the need to Xray again soon enough. By that time the dogs has had insufficiently strong analgesic to cover the pain in the last weeks before euthanasia, which I still believe is the kindest option.

Alternatively, it is then often too far advanced for those who decide to relieve pain and prolong life by amputation.

If you took a the human population of western europe and gave them the same incideces of heart disease and stroke which you find in greyhounds what do you think the leading casue of death might be?

Dr Couto's study based the cancer incidence rates in UK dogs on a survey of just 142 animals which by its own admission was unscientific.

EXTERNAL LINK
Taking the results of the above survey at face value still tends to show that cancer in general and O/S in particualar are predominantly diseases of elderly greyhounds.

O/S is not specifically a greyhound disease but a common condition in most large boned dogs with rottweilers and St Bernards being particularly prone

One interesting quote from the survey is "The proportion of deaths from heart disease and cancer together is about the same in humans and greyhounds, but greyhounds have less heart disease and more cancer than humans." I suspect that the reason for this is not because of greater cancer risk but lower heart disease risk as would be expected in an animal as athletic as a greyhound.

We are fortunate to have a good vet practice and when a dog goes a bit lame, we are now 'conditioned' to, firstly, suspect a corn etc etc rather than a tumour! Your dog is the first to know and be adversely affected if you are frantic with worry.

Pete Wakeling wrote:

Death is a fact of life for every person, every dog and every insect. Forget about him until he comes knocking and when he does make sure you can look him in the eye and say "I had a bloody good time whilst waiting for you"

Yes, good quote, as long as we can get adequate pain relief for them when needed.

Do all humans have cancer in them? - Put simply no

Is there a link between trauma and cancer (human and dog)? - Possibly but very tenuous (O/S in greys no more common in offside or nearside limbs)

The sun is shining, we've got a long weekend ahead of us. Why not stop worrying about the future until it comes, put the lead on the dogs and go for a walk - Thats's what i'm about to do.

Everyone has to make their own decision about their own dog - the better informed they are, the better the outcome. People can choose Chemo for human condition, dogs can't for theirs, and we have to do the best we can for them - hopefully with decent veterinary guidance. But, as yet, I don't know anyone who would choose to go for 'chemo' a second time, for any of their dogs.

It is understandable to opt for biopsies to get a true diagnosis, but many also find that the biopsy wounds don't heal well and sometimes seem to 'speed things up'. Each to their own, but we still prefer to treat with adequate pain/symptom relief so they can have as many good days as possible before things advance too far. It should be a really precious time - if it's bad, the memory doesn't go away.

For those who have not seen on dog on chemo treatment, her first week consisted of constant vomiting, week 2 large boil like sores appeared on every inch of her body which were extremely painful and all I could do for her was bathe them. Week 3 she could not even look at a meal and was just laying about in a vegative state along with the other symptoms. Vet said things should improve by week 6, and after all this would have extended her life by perhaps 4 months if she was lucky. I chose to end her life then and there, perhaps some would judge but she had no life by this stage.

Had I realised the effects of the chemo treatment prior to starting it she would have lived her last weeks much happier on pain medication and when her quality of life was no longer I would have called the vet out to home to have her pts. Yes we live and learn, but hard lessons are very painful.

regards
Robynne

Over the years, though, we have found that greyhounds can respond in a different way to pain. They are often said to be 'wimps' - and if, for instance, they catch an ear on a bramble, and produce a scream that could be heard 5 miles away, one can understand the 'theory'.

But we need to recognise when they are in deep pain, because many will 'retreat into themselves' and emit a deep 'groan' if movement etc. is really bad. For this reason, I am sure that many do not get adequate pain relief in their last weeks. So what, if the analgesic is going to harm the liver/kidneys! So often, the downhill spiral is rapid, hence they are not going to need those organs much longer - so there is no point in withholding it. Better that their last weeks/days are pain free.