(Other forum closed: this is a response to the person that commented on his disgust to Pugabulls)

Actually I thought I coined the breed Pugabull after adopting mine 3 years ago in NYC (the only other ones I found were called miniature bulldogs). Cannot tell you how disgusted I was to see one being sold in a pet shop here a month ago but in reverse, Pug mother and Bulldog Father. I made up the name as joke to Puggle owners... which were super hot here at the time.

If you missed the designer dog article in the NYtimes 2 years ago check it out. I myself was surprised to see evolution take care of the breed problems. Mutts tend to be much healthier than purebreds... "PURE" bred dogs are actually the same genes being bred over and over again. My Pugabull is bigger, stronger, faster and twenty times more athletic than a Pug or an English Bulldog. Dogs have a plastic gene function that changes them from generation to generation faster. Designer dogs are just fancy names for mutts. I don't think any yo yo should breed them. But I also think the AKC has it's head up it's you know what. Along with horse breeders, just take a look at the demise of the TB breed. All of them used to approve outside breeds to breed back in years ago. To keep the health of each breed up to par.

Also all 8 of the puppies from my dog's litter don't have pushed in noses... so no breathing issues. He fetches tennis balls... goes running. By far the best dog I have ever had. Of course he wasn't bred intentionally and not every combo is going to produce the same results. Just like every human pairing is also gene dependent.

So what came first the designer dog or the Purebreed? My point is it's the same crap with another name, and varying degrees of class assumed. Any douche-bag can breed dogs, only God can save them.

DON'T BREED OR BUY WHILE SHELTER ANIMALS DIE!

xo Remi & Alex

Purebreds came first, look at the thread titles ancient dog breeds.

If you knew anything about the ancient history of dogs, you would know the answer to this question. For your information hybrid vigor is a myth, proved over and over again. There are plenty of bloodlines to pull from for purebred stock, and the only reason we have sick, or dogs with poor genetics, is because of unscrupulous, ignorant people, who don't care about the dogs, but only the almighty dollar...BYB's and puppy mills.
I'm sure your dog is a great dog, but don't kid yourself that because it's crossed with a Pug and a Bulldog it's healthier. All the diseases that afflict both breeds are in your dog's genes. Hopefully they never appear.

***Edited By: Pen2 on 11/22/2008 12:22:19 PM***
Reason: inappropriate posting.

I LOVE IT. The good old mutts are healthier than purebreds. Can you please point me to the data base with this information. Oh yeah, can't do that because there isn't one. People who own mutts do not do genetic testing. SO HOW CAN YOU MAKE A STATEMENT LIKE THAT WITH NO DATA TO SUPPORT IT.

edited by Pen2.

***Edited By: Pen2 on 11/22/2008 12:18:22 PM***
Reason: post inappropriate

Is fetching and running what you call a test for your healthy new breed called the pugabull? Purebreds were bred for a purpose whether it be hunting, retrieving, guarding or companionship. Good breeders strive to keep their breed to standard and avoid any health problems BEFORE breeding their dogs. I'm sure your litter of puppies are cute and all but did you ever think of what will happen to their body structure as a result of mixing a small breed with a large breed? Ever wonder why the English Bulldogs of today have to have Caesearean sections to whelp? Ever wonder why there are more mixed breeds than purebreds in shelters and rescues?

Windy:
"I LOVE IT. The good old mutts are healthier than purebreds. Can you please point me to the data base with this information. Oh yeah, can't do that because there isn't one. People who own mutts do not do genetic testing. SO HOW CAN YOU MAKE A STATEMENT LIKE THAT WITH NO DATA TO SUPPORT IT."


I found one study, but the OP is not gonna like it, ENJOY :

Genetic-epidemiological study of defined diseases in dogs - comparison between purebred dogs and mongrels



..

The aim of this study was to examine in an epidemiological study whether or not the common opinion that mongrels are in general healthier than purebred dogs - thanks to their higher heterozygoty - was correct.
For this purpose the medical records of 5382 dogs (4070 purebred dogs and 1312 mongrels) of a Viennese small animal clinic were analyzed. The following data of the individual patient’s and case histories were recorded: age, gender, diagnosis, therapy, development of the disease, age of death. As a measure for determining the difference in prevalence between purebred dogs and mongrels the odds-ratio was used. The significance tests were carried out with the 95% confidence interval of the odds-ratio. A significant difference in prevalence was assumed when the confidence interval did not include the value 1. Age and gender were checked for confounding effects. If a confounding effect was found a stratifying data analysis was carried out.

The results can be summed up as follows:
Mongrels were overrepresented in the age group of the ten-year-old and older dogs, and showed a higher average age of death. Euthanasias were performed more often on mongrels, and surgeries were performed less frequently. Male mongrel dogs were more frequently neutered than purebred dogs. A hint at a lower proneness of mongrels to illness, which could be explained by an effect of heterosis, was found only in a limited number of diseases, like enteritis, gastritis, pancreatitis, pharyngitis, stomatitis, tonsillitis, abscesses, atheromes and pyometras. This possible effect of heterosis was found only in mongrels of higher age.

Purebred dogs showed a higher prevalence of the following diseases: an elongated soft palate, intervertebral disk disorders (discopathy), hip dysplasia, cranial cruciate ligament rupture, Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, panostitis, patellar luxation, distichiasis and entropion. This difference was either explained with the higher proportion of extreme body shapes in certain breeds or a selection bias in the data used resulting from, among other causes, the higher willingness of owners of purebred dogs to accept costly veterinary interventions.
Furthermore the importance of taking into consideration confounders in such a study was clearly visible, as in many diseases a difference in prevalence could be identified before the stratifying data analysis was executed, but was not there anymore after this analysis had actually been carried out.
Thus the assumption that mongrels are generally healthier than purebred dogs could not be validated.

I think when this poster said something about 8 pups in his dog's litter, he meant that his dog came from a litter of 8 puppies. Not that he'd bred the dog (which is a male) and it had a litter of 8 puppies.

Minniyar, I was just getting ready to point that out as well.
Ruffian thanks for sharing, that was an interesting read.

I personally have nothing against mutts, I have owned many of them over the years. But what I am against is the intentional breeding of them.

Sorry for the mistake, it sounded like the dog had 8 pups to me. I've read and re-read the post, and apologize for my remarks on that subject.

Oop I misunderstood too. Sorry. But still, a pugabull....

A great place to read up on hybrid vigor
http://home.comcast.net/~NoPuppyMillsVA/Poo-dogs___Designer_Mutts/Genetics_and_Hybrid_Vigor/genetics_and_hybrid_vigor.html


http://home.comcast.net/~NoPuppyMillsVA/Poo-dogs___Designer_Mutts/Genetics_and_Hybrid_Vigor/genetics_and_hybrid_vigor.html

I know Mastiffs are an ancient breed. Designer dogs are just putting $$$ in the pockets of people in it just for the $$$. I bet the poodle has been crossed with everything out there so the breeders could add "poo" to the name the make up. As you stated, yours was an accidental, unintentional mating. Big difference from putting dogs in a pot and stirring it up on purpose.

Sorry, but I think well bred pedigree dogs are here to stay and I cannot wait to watch the National Dog Show on Thanksgiving. And I love my Pugs, Griff and Mastiff. And my little Chihuahua!!

Sorry I have not checked back sooner to this topic. I do not breed dogs, I adopted mine. I only called him a Pugabull in response to getting stopped EVERYDAY to ask what he is. I think breeding them is appalling. JUST AS appalling as bashing mutts (can't we all get along). They were not born by C-section as their heads were not big like a bulldog.

Ruffian- I am not a purebred basher I owned them for growing up years too. But what I am trying to make a point of is that all dogs are essentially MUTTS - all have descended from WOLVES. Engineered by people. Purebred is a social concept kept in place by a governing body. It has produced some amazing dogs and horses. The problem today is we are not practicing it the way it is supposed to be. The Thoroughbred horse used to have finely selected Arabians, and other fast sires, approved to breed in. It was overseen by the breed registry. This lack of fresh genes seems to have weakened the breed and there are marked attempts to correct this.

And in response to a Bulldog and Pug being a crazy cross: All the research I have come across points out that the English Bulldog, as we know it today, descended from a Pug and Mastiff mix. According to Historians Bulldogs used to be the size of Pits or Mastiffs (in order to fight bulls). Not the small dumbed down version we have as pets today.

If the AKC wants to help it's breeds it should limit how many litters are bred each year and require genetic testing on approved studs and bitches. There are more than enough dogs in rescues in shelters. NYC put down over 1400 animals in July.

My opinion. Support if you insist:

"1835 - In 1835, Parliament passed the Cruelty to Animals Act and bull baiting disappeared. No longer needing the powerful dog for fighting, but cherishing its loyalty and courage, breeders began crossing bulldogs with pugs. The hybrid dogs kept the bulldog name. Concurrently, breeders still wanting a fighting dog ramped up the practice of crossing bulldogs with aggressive terriers, leading to the pit bull terrier" - From The Dalles Chronicle Local News

"Most researchers agree that the Bulldog is a cross between a Mastiff and a pug. These dogs, who first got the name Bulldog in 1568, were originally bred for blood sports known as bull-baiting and bear-baiting. The blood sports were the popular pastimes of the masses that can be traced back to the year 1209. However, this sport was finally banned, but not forgotten, in 1835 in England."

hmmm looks like Pugabulls are as old as other purebreds....

From Wikipedia.Org -

Breed History

The term “bulldog” was first used around 1568 and might have been applied to other various ancestors of modern bulldog breeds before adorning the breed we recognize today.

It has been theorized that bulldogs were bred in England as a cross between the Mastiff and the Pug, though their genetic origin is debated[2]. Since the pug did not arrive in Europe until the late 16th century, it is unlikely that the breed is an original progenitor of the Bulldog. The Bulldog and the Mastiff are widely thought to have common roots in the ancient Pugnaces Britanniae of Great Britain[3].

In the 1600s, bulldogs were used for bullbaiting (as well as bearbaiting)–a gambling sport popular in the 17th century with wagers laid while trained bulldogs leapt at a bull lashed to a post. The bulldog’s typical means of attack included latching onto the animal’s snout and attempted to suffocate it.[4]

However, the bulldog’s early role was not limited to sport. In mid-17th century New York, bulldogs were used as a part of a city-wide round-up effort led by governor Richard Nicolls. Because cornering and leading wild bulls was dangerous, bulldogs were trained to seize a bull by its nose long enough for a rope to be secured around its neck. [5]. The use of dogs for fighting with other dogs or other animals was banned in the United Kingdom by the Cruelty to Animals Act 1835, but Bulldogs as pets were continually promoted by dog dealer Bill George[6].

In time, the original Old English Bulldog was crossed with the PUG. The outcome was a shorter, wider dog with a brachycephalic skull. Though today’s bulldog looks tough, he cannot perform the job he was originally created for, as he cannot withstand the rigors of running and being thrown from a bull, and cannot grip with such a short muzzle.
Champion Rodney Stone.

The oldest single breed specialty club is The Bulldog Club (England), which was formed in 1878. Members of this club met frequently at the Blue Post pub on Oxford Street in London. There they wrote the first standard of perfection for the breed. In 1891 the two top bulldogs, Orry and Dockleaf, competed in a contest to see which dog could walk the farthest. Orry was reminiscent of the orginal bulldogs, lighter boned and very athletic. Dockleaf was smaller and heavier set, more like modern bulldogs. Dockleaf was declared the winner that year. Although some argued that the older version of the bulldog was more fit to perform, the modern version’s looks won over the fans of the breed because they proved they were equally as fit and athletic in the walking competition.

At the turn of the 20th century, Ch. Rodney Stone became the first Bulldog to command a price of $5000 when he was bought by controversial Irish-American political figure Richard Croker.

Windy Valley wanted research- I was just writing my opinion- my comments came from owning both pure (my family had Boxers, Mastiffs, Dobermans, Corgis, Labs and Newfoundlands (over 15 pures in thirty years- not one outlived the six mutts by at least 3 to 5 years.

Also from riding and training horses for 22 years, working at vet clinics, animal shelters and zoos. But if you need it:

Some reference you can get to read up on.

Most the scientific studies in this area have found that the average mutt is healthier and will live longer than the average purebred. Here are a few references:

(once again every dog is different- coming from different strains and environmental factors)

1) B.N. Bonnett, A. Egenvall, P. Olson, . Hedhammar, Mortality in Swedish dogs: rates and causes of death in various breeds, The Veterinary Record, 12/7/1997, S. 40 - 44)
"Mongrels were consistently in the low risk category" (S.

41)

2) P.D. McGreevy & W.F. Nicholas, Some Practical Solutions to Welfare Problems in Pedigree Dog Breeding, Animal Welfare, 1999, Vol 8, 329-331
"Hybrids have a far lower chance of exhibiting the disorders that are common with the parental breeds. Their genetic health will be substantially higher." (P338)

3) A. Egenvall, B.N. Bonnett, P. Olson, . Hedhammar,Gender, age, breed and distribution of morbidity and mortality in insured dogs in Sweden during 1995 and 1996, The Veterinary Record, 29/4/2000, p. 519-57
"Mongrel dogs are less prone to many diseases then the average purebred dog." (S. 524)

4) R. Beythien, Tierarten- und Hunderassenverteilung, Erkrankungshufigkeit und prophylaktische Manahmen bei den hufigsten Hunderassen am Beispiel einer Tierarztpraxis in Bielefeld in den Jahren 1983-1985 und 1990-1992, 1998, Diss., Tierrztl. Hochschule Hannover
Mongrels require less veterinary treatment

5) A. R. Michell, Longevity of British breeds of dog and its relationship with sex, size, cardiovascular variables and disease, Vet. Rec., 27 Nov. 1999, S. 625-629
"There was a significant correlation between body weight and longevity. Crossbreeds lived longer than average but several pure breeds lived longer than cross breeds, notably Jack Russell, miniature poodles and whippets" (S. 627 - thus only small and toy breeds, as to be expected)

The truth is, it's not fair to compare all purebreds to anything. There are those purebreds that come from dedicated breeders, who health test and research pedigrees, and there are the ignorant and greedy breeders who don't. It's not right to put both types in the same catagory. Like someone else already said, people don't health test or keep track of illnesses in mixed breeds. Hybrid vigor is most certainly a myth, why else do so many "doodles" have HD? Also, mixed breeds are more likely to get dumped or PTS when they get sick. Purebred fanciers are usually the ones that contribute to health research and innovative technology.

I wouldn't consider Doodles or Puggles a random hybrid if people or crossing them intentionally that would make them on their way to becoming a purebred (like the Jack Russel). No fresh genes. I am not trying to lump together all purebred. Some are still very healthy overall. The point is changes need to be made within the AKC or nationally to breeders.

The whole point of me even writing on here was the critics of the name Pugabull. It was a JOKE for God sake I gave to my little mix. Which people on here (purebred owners) are criticizing without getting their historical facts right. To each his own but don't think a piece of paper makes a dog any less or more than the next. Their are plenty of AKC registered dogs coming out of puppy mills just as their are designer dogs (and mutts in shelters). It boils down to pretension.

This is certainly a jumpy board. I was mainly pointing out that my Pugabull ended up being a great dog. Why does this have to threaten the purists on here. Also to generalize that hybrid owners are less inclined to donate money to research is another unfounded claim. Dogs are like religion everyone has there own preference to the same basic wolf ancestor.

Penn2,

The conclusion of the article you listed doesn't match its contents. Inside the article there, it says that mongrels lived longer and had fewer health problems..

Agentsmith-what article are you referring to? Pen hasn't responded to this topic since 11/08, and I don't see where she supplied a link to any article.