Health Effects of Spay/Neuter
January 29, 2008
Veterinarians oppose mandatory spay/neuter laws
Past president of the California Veterinary Medical Association,
Dr. John Hamil, wrote:
It is inappropriate to mandate a controversial and possibly life
threatening surgical procedure. As CVMA has argued in the past,
decisions of this magnitude should be made after consultation
between the owner and their veterinarian
DVM Newsmagazine reports
that the CVMA withdrew support for a mandatory spay/neuter law
because of opposition from CVMA member veterinarians and the
veterinary community, and:
A poll of regional veterinary medical associations throughout the
state [of California] revealed a majority opposed the
pet-sterilization mandate and CVMA's sponsorship of the initiative
A recent American Veterinary Medical Association report invalidates
the claim by mandatory spay/neuter supporters that pets should be
spayed or neutered for population control reasons, and invalidates
the claim that spay and neuter is always healthy for pets. The
report finds adverse effects from spay and neuter include increased
risks of aggression, prostate cancer, bone cancer, bladder cancer,
hemangiosarcoma, obesity, diabetes, ligament rupture, and
complications from surgery.
After reviewing the risks and benefits associated with spay/neuter
of cats and dogs, the AVMA report concludes:
Pets should be considered individually, with the understanding that
for these pets, population control is a less important concern than
is health of each animal....veterinarians and owners must consider
the benefits and detriments of gonadectomy for each animal... It
behooves us as veterinarians dedicated to the provision of the best
possible care for animals to educate clients and evaluate each
animal carefully when making recommendations regarding gonadectomy.
The recommendation from America's leading association of
veterinarians is that the best interests of each individual patient
should determine whether or when a pet should be spayed or
neutered, because there are adverse health and behavioral effects
that need to be weighed against benefits. This is a medical
decision, to be decided by a pet owner in consultation with their
veterinarian. One size does not fit all, and should not be mandated
by government.
June 21, 2007
The The full version
of the paper summarized below, complete with all references
to the veterinary medical research cited, is available.
This paper
reports some of the adverse behavioral impacts of early spay/neuter.
March 16, 2007
The California UnHealthy Pets Act
California AB 1634 is named "The California Healthy Pets
Act". It is deceptively – and incorrectly named.
Mandatory spay/neuter will not improve the health of pets. This is
not a "health" initiative. The evidence indicates
that spay/neuter, especially early spay/neuter as would be mandated by
AB 1634, in fact hurts the health of many dogs.
An objective reading of the veterinary medical literature reveals a
complex situation with respect to the long-term health impacts of
spay/neuter in dogs. The evidence shows that spay/neuter correlates
with both positive and adverse health effects in dogs. It
also suggests how much we really do not yet understand about this
subject.
On balance, it appears that no compelling case can be made for neutering
most male dogs, especially immature male dogs, in order to prevent future
health problems. The number of health problems associated with
neutering may exceed the associated health benefits in most
cases.
On the positive side, neutering male dogs
- eliminates the small risk (probably <1%) of dying from testicular cancer
- reduces the risk of non-cancerous prostate disorders
- reduces the risk of perianal fistulas
- may possibly reduce the risk of diabetes (data inconclusive)
- if done before maturity, increases the risk of osteosarcoma (bone cancer) by a factor of 3.8; this is a common cancer in medium/large and larger breeds with a poor prognosis
- increases the risk of cardiac hemangiosarcoma by a factor of 1.6; this is a common cancer and major cause of death in some breeds
- triples the risk of hypothyroidism
- increases the risk of geriatric cognitive impairment
- triples the risk of obesity, and with it many of the associated health problems
- quadruples the small risk (<0.6%) of prostate cancer
- doubles the small risk (<1%) of urinary tract cancers
- increases the risk of orthopedic disorders
- increases the risk of adverse reactions to vaccinations
For female dogs, the situation is more complex. The number of
health benefits associated with spaying may exceed the associated health
problems in some (not all) cases. On balance, whether spaying
improves the odds of overall good health or degrades them probably
depends on the age of the female dog and the relative risk of various
diseases in the different breeds.
On the positive side, spaying female dogs
- if done before 2.5 years of age, greatly reduces the risk of mammary tumors, the most common tumors in female dogs
- nearly eliminates the risk of pyometra, which otherwise would infect about 23% of intact female dogs; pyometra kills about 1% of intact female dogs
- reduces the risk of perianal fistulas
- removes the very small risk (<0.5%) from uterine, cervical, and ovarian tumors
- if done before maturity, increases the risk of osteosarcoma by a factor of 3.1; this is a common cancer in larger breeds with a poor prognosis
- increases the risk of splenic hemangiosarcoma by a factor of 2.2 and cardiac hemangiosarcoma by a factor of more than 5; this is a common cancer and major cause of death in some breeds
- triples the risk of hypothyroidism
- increases the risk of obesity by a factor of 1.6 - 2, and with it the many associated health problems
- causes urinary spay incontinence in 4-20% of female dogs
- increases the risk of persistent or recurring urinary tract infections by a factor of 3-4
- increases the risk of recessed vulva, vaginal dermatitis, and vaginitis, especially for female dogs spayed before puberty
- doubles the small risk (<1%) of urinary tract tumors
- increases the risk of orthopedic disorders
- increases the risk of adverse reactions to vaccinations
One thing is clear -- much of the spay/neuter information that is
available to the public is unbalanced and contains claims that are
exaggerated or unsupported by evidence. Rather than helping
to educate pet owners, much of this has contributed to common
misunderstandings about the long-term health impacts of spay/neuter in
dogs.
The traditional spay/neuter age of six months as well as the modern
practice of pediatric spay/neuter appear to predispose dogs to health
risks that could otherwise be avoided by waiting until the dog is
physically mature, or (perhaps in the case of many male dogs) foregoing
it altogether unless medically necessary.
The balance of long-term health risks and benefits of spay/neuter
will vary from one dog to the next. Across-the-board assertions that
spay/neuter will improve the health of all pet dogs do not appear to
be supportable from findings in the veterinary medical literature.
This is especially true of spay/neuter before physical maturity.