Best Nick Ever?
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
That was my point though. Wouldn't it be more appropriate that with age they're at higher risk for environmental damage as opposed to genetic damage? Genetic damage implies that there's something dormant in the genes. A build up of toxins over time is not a genetic issue. It's an environmental one. The negative variables are absorbed not inherited.
It's semantics really, but that's what threw me.
It's semantics really, but that's what threw me.
It's genetic damage in the sense that it's damage to the genetic material.
"What happened is merely a sample of what might have happened, weighted by probability."
http://www.venturageoscore.com/
http://www.venturageoscore.com/
- Patuxet
- Grade III Winner
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:36 pm
- Location: New England & Florida
"Aging And Genetic Deterioration" by Jay Leimbach
http://www.pedigreepost.net/archives/Ag ... mbach.html
http://www.pedigreepost.net/archives/Ag ... mbach.html
eggs
Mahubah, your post on this thread are very interesting
However just wanted to let everyone know, that is now suspected, with lots of studies, that is the older male semen, in humans at least, that is respnsible for MANY of the birth defects in children born to older females, esp. Down Syndrome. Long thought to be affecting children because of the moms age, it is now actually proven to have as much, if not more, to do with the age of the man "donating" the semen, not the age of the woman producing the eggs
The percentage of children born with birth defects from an older woman, is FAR less when her partner is a younger male, when the male was older the percentage of birth defects increases significantly, hence the reason they started seriously looking at the semen, sorry, guys, it IS your fault after all 
Re: Best Nick Ever?
llbean wrote:Check it out, just about the highest VGS for a cross with multiple SWs I've ever seen:
With Approval/Bonne Not has a VGS of 505.78 (!) based on 3 SWs incluing the G1 Winning Breeder's Cup Turf Champion Better Talk Now and the G1 Winner Bien Toi.
-llbean
Im sorry what are you refering to (505.78)
Last edited by ireneinwa on Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: eggs
walaa wrote:Mahubah, your post on this thread are very interestingHowever just wanted to let everyone know, that is now suspected, with lots of studies, that is the older male semen, in humans at least, that is respnsible for MANY of the birth defects in children born to older females, esp. Down Syndrome. Long thought to be affecting children because of the moms age, it is now actually proven to have as much, if not more, to do with the age of the man "donating" the semen, not the age of the woman producing the eggs
The percentage of children born with birth defects from an older woman, is FAR less when her partner is a younger male, when the male was older the percentage of birth defects increases significantly, hence the reason they started seriously looking at the semen, sorry, guys, it IS your fault after all
Actually, the "fault," if you want to call it that, is on both sides. But you are correct in that they've finally figured out that age of the male is also implicated in birth defects.
I am only speculating here, not having any veterinary background, but I suspect that one reason older mares have more trouble carrying foals to term regardless of racing history is just general wear and tear on the system -- anything that compromises uterine/cervical tone, blood supply to the uterus, or nutrition to the foal has the potential for causing loss of the pregnancy or compromise of the foal. The latter could, of course, result in a birth defect that has nothing to do with genetics. And loss of immune system function could also be a factor; a minor illness that a younger mare might weather easily could, I suppose, increase the chance of abortion or miscarriage in the older mare, especially if other compromising factors are present. Have we got any vets that care to weigh in on this?
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher...You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse." C. S. Lewis
George Smith once said somewhere that he noticed a pattern where colts that were trained by certain Trainers did worse at stud than you would've thought they would do based on their pedigrees and race records.
He speculated that this was due to those trainers using PEDs, which made the Colts run beyond their natural genetic ability.
Perhaps George would care to comment on this finding of his?
He speculated that this was due to those trainers using PEDs, which made the Colts run beyond their natural genetic ability.
Perhaps George would care to comment on this finding of his?
"What happened is merely a sample of what might have happened, weighted by probability."
http://www.venturageoscore.com/
http://www.venturageoscore.com/
- George William Smith
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 756
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:48 pm
- Location: Edmonton, Alberta
- Contact:
llbean wrote:George Smith once said somewhere that he noticed a pattern where colts that were trained by certain Trainers did worse at stud than you would've thought they would do based on their pedigrees and race records.
He speculated that this was due to those trainers using PEDs, which made the Colts run beyond their natural genetic ability.
Perhaps George would care to comment on this finding of his?
Happened by chance to see this as I am forced to stay in during out Western Canadian -30 days.
Yes I have data that indicates that some trainers with lots of quality stock and high performing full colts who later fail miserably when sent off to stud with high quality books of mares.
It must be stated, however, that most well bred colts with good race records fail to make a significant stallion so a trainer is not to be faulted in individual cases. However, with today's trainers responsible for so many horses year in and year out having their best runners being given top opportunity at stud, fail time after time is suspicious.
For example, if a colt with a great race record retires to stud, I always look to see who was the trainer and what other colts he trained had gone off to stud and their subsequent record at stud.
Making the task even more difficult is that some young trainers have not been around long enough to see their colts succeed or fail at stud.
For your own research I ask you to check back quite a few years to find the leading trainer in terms of high quality runners and the best of opportunity had almost all of them fail at stud and fail badly. I won't mention the name, but it is not too difficult to discover. Checking the pedigrees of today rarely find their names except through a couple of horses. Well back to work,
Merry Christmas All
- George William Smith
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 756
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:48 pm
- Location: Edmonton, Alberta
- Contact:
Re: eggs
walaa wrote:Mahubah, your post on this thread are very interestingHowever just wanted to let everyone know, that is now suspected, with lots of studies, that is the older male semen, in humans at least, that is respnsible for MANY of the birth defects in children born to older females, esp. Down Syndrome. Long thought to be affecting children because of the moms age, it is now actually proven to have as much, if not more, to do with the age of the man "donating" the semen, not the age of the woman producing the eggs
The percentage of children born with birth defects from an older woman, is FAR less when her partner is a younger male, when the male was older the percentage of birth defects increases significantly, hence the reason they started seriously looking at the semen, sorry, guys, it IS your fault after all
Hi: Could you please give me the site that gives the data and research papers so that I can examine the data myself. With the Global warming hoax getting so little coverage with scientists selling their souls for government research grants and I as a scientist with taking a dime of government money; one has to be very cautious about what they read. Not doubting, whatsoever, the possibility exists but seems prudent to check the data and width of the research. So much today is based on one paper that is quoted by another scientist and then subsequently quoted by other scientists who quote the other scientists and then it is quoted that hundreds of scientists have found the same when really it is based on one research paper. LOL
Thanks in advance for finding me the site.
best, George