Hey /an/ I have a friend who wants a munchkin cat. Do you know

why do they want one, becides to be a special snowflake

if they really have no other reason then just a DSH cat from the shelter is perfectly fine. buying a cat from a breeder is ridiculous

Health wise, they're not so bad as pugs. They actually don't even appear to have the issues short-legged dogs have with spine. All and all, they're very nearly as healthy as other breeds and quite healthier than some, such as persians.

Ethically, they're actually really problematic. You see the mutation is heterozygous and so this means only 50 percent of all of the kittens will be short-legged in a breeding between two short legged parents. 25 percent of the kittens will die in the womb due to gene lethality. The other 25 percent will be totally normal long-legged average ass cats. You know who wants average cats? Rights we are killing millions a year. Every munchkin breeding produces regular-ass cats that no one wants BUT these breeders want money so they will try to sell them to people as "non-standard munchkins" and these retards try to breed them thinking they may carry the genes but they don't and it creates this whole dearth of normal cat births and we already kill shit tons of those a year. All for a few overpriced squatty legged cats.

So it depends on if that kind of thing bothers you. Just buy an overpriced snowflake pet, well fine, they're perfectly healthy. But if you don't like contributing to shitty breeding practices then do not, just get a normal cat. Adopt some one-eyed shelter cat and get it a nifty creepy devil-eyed prosthesis if you want to be unique. It will cost less and be more unique.

>>1996665
>>1996682
Thanks for the advice, I'll be showing them this.

As far as intentionally deformed cats breed for cuteness goes, they're not the worse, but they do have a couple issues. The first is that they really should be an indoor only cat. All cats should be, but that old wank aside, seriously if you shove this thing outside its gonna die. They can't defend themselves very well, they can't run away or climb very well, they're sitting targets. Secondly they do have some health issues, mostly with their chest and spine. There's also reports of osteoarthritis and joint damage, but these are hotly disputed.

>>1996663
Friendly reminder that all dogs are deformed inbred fucks and your favorite breed is no better than pugs from an objective point of view.

>>1996665
>buying a cat from a breeder is ridiculous
wanting a pet that doesn't have questionable genetics sure is ridiculous.

did you make up this excuse just because you're too poor to buy a breed cat?

>>1996785
Uh, you do realize "mutt" cats don't usually have as many disorders as mutt dogs, right.
And that even feral/stray cats can be divided into subcategories containing certain traits.
That certified cat breeds have in fact a higher disorder/disease probability than strays.
That unlike dogs that look mutt-ish, you can get cats in shelters that, aside from genetics, hold the exact same characteristics as a pure one.
That nobody gives a fuck about your cat's papers as long as it behaves like an internet cat.

>>1996795
your entire argument was debunked before you were born.

'mutts are healthier' is a myth.

>>1996795
Sorry, I don't read responses that start with weird stuff like uh, um or some other speech impediment that somehow carries over to the internet.

>>1996797
>b-b-b-but why do pure breeds get disorders more often!!!
because mutts are carriers, they have the bad genes, they're just less likely to develope into the actual disorder.

pure breeds have a limited genepool, they have far less disorders they can develope but the disorders they can develope develope more often due to it.

while mutts can develope virtually any disorder at random depending on their genepool.

mutts are a genetic gamble, pure breeds are not.

>>1996797
I chose my words poorly. What I meant is: Most cat breeds (not talking about obscure/rare/ancient breeds, but the breeds the regular person would buy in a modern city) have a higher incidence of genetic disorders as a result of breed manipulation.

>>1996800
You're welcome, I didn't ask anyone to read my post.

>>1996811
> have a higher incidence of genetic disorders as a result of breed manipulation.
amount of disorders they can develope is limited, that of mutts is not.

breed cats are very unlikely to develope disorders that aren't related to their breed.

>>1996812
Ammount of disorders: yes, restricted to breed.
Incidence: Much higher and usually way more intense.

I'm the manager of a government-licensed cat sanctuary/shelter, and I've yet to see mutts develop disorders as fast and as intense as pure breds (yes, we get pure cats all the time, last one was a persian with all papers).
Of course, mutts get old and sick like any living being, but that said, the extension of the damage of breed-associated illnesses is just mindblowing. Take the persian I mentioned, at 1 and a half year old it was developing breathing problems so severe (due to breed-standard nose deformity) that it needed to stay in absolute retreat forever. If it ran a small distance it got lightheaded.
Yet, people keep on breeding and selling these biologically damaged felines for the sake of looks or "biggest dick syndrome" (aka "my cat has papers and yours doesn't")

>>1996817
>Much higher and usually way more intense.
most of the genetic disorders associated with them aren't so bad.

>>1996818
To anyone interested, I suggest giving this a quick read
http://icatcare.org/advice/cat-breeds/inherited-disorders-cats

I for one, don't think theres anything wrong with wanting a specific breed of cat, I myself own a british shorthair and 2 scottish folds. I do believe you need to search into a reputable breeder. And please dont get a cat only to instagram it, your friend should get it for theirself.

Munchkins usually dont have problems deriving from their short legs, in fact they are healthier than other breeds, like persians o sphynx cats.

>>1996826
the antifreeze banner made me laugh.

>>1996817
>I'm the manager of a government-licensed cat sanctuary/shelter, and I've yet to see mutts develop disorders as fast and as intense as pure breds

The purebred cats you are seeing are from bad breeders. Cats from reputable breeders rarely end up in shelters. So you are looking at the worst of the worst. Of course those cats are going to have more health problems; they were bred irresponsibly.

>>1996836
That specific one came from one of the breeders that supply to the biggest petstore in my country. Not saying that it isn't bad, it's the opposite: it's easier to find bad breeders than good ones.
Unless you get an "organic gluten-free cat" (you know, from ultra-protective breeders that don't do it just for the money, that feed raw and don't inbreed) you're most likely gonna end up with a sick fluffball.

>>1996785
>implying 99% of cat "breeders" don't just have inbred little shits for looks
>"b-b-but that 1% is reputable!"

doesn't change the fact that you're more likely to have a serious complication with a purebred than a mutt. it's extremely hard to find a decent breeder for anything

>>1996845
Of course purebred from shitty breeders are easier to come by. That true with many species.
But that doesn't mean that no one should seek out healthy animals from reputable breeders.

>>1996833
NO ONE ASKED YOU FUCKING RETARD

They have a lot of issues they're the dachshund of the cat world but they've been bred in a much shorter time so there's a smaller gene pool.

>>1996853
>doesn't change the fact that you're more likely to have a serious complication with a purebred than a mutt.
that depends on the background of the mutt, which you don't know.

if it's a purebred, you know, there might be 10 specific disorders it can develope but a mutt can develope pretty much every single disorder that exists for all you know.
>>1996918
properly bred dachshunds are healthy dogs.

>>1996927
bugguy confirmed wincest fetish

>>1996918
The Munchkin is actually a pretty healthy breed. Their short legs do not cause back problems like with Daschunds.

>>1996682
That's not quite right. The normal cat progeny of two munchkin parents is still het for munchkin and so can be used to breed more munchkin kittens.

>>1996934

It's a dominant heterozygous gene and it's lethal when homozygous, meaning they can only have one copy and it's always expressed if they carry it.

Try to re-rail this thread

While it is true there is not much documented genetic issues with this cat (chest and spine IS an issue, as with the 25% DOA kittens), there also hasn't been, by any means, extensive research into it, not even by the biased cat fanciers. Absence of proof is not proof of absence, as they say. I personally don't believe any effort was taken to ensure these cats are healthy at all, because it's a cash cow, and there are known issues with this breed that the cat fanciers try to falsify. In theorem, their structure would logically cause spine, hip and joint issues. If you do research on it, some websites will even say shit like 'miraculously' or "somehow" these cats are healthy, because every other animal that has that back-to-leg ratio is fucked.

However any research that does pop up regarding the munchkins should be taken by a grain of salt. It could be similar to the the biased and misleading case with Siberian Cat breed; a laboratory does experiments and finds the Siberian breed to produce less allergen proteins than average. But not until months later was it discovered that the people who paid for and did the experiments were Siberian cat fanciers, and the study was done on a total of 25 cats.

>>1996934

If it is het it is a munchkin, if it is hom it doesn't ever live and if it is normal cat it doesn't carry the gene at all and is a totally normal cat.

This is precisely how they trick people into buying normal cats to try to breed munchkins and end up causing a huge problem.

File: Trip fags.jpg (191KB, 1280x1022px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1280x1022px

>replying to autismguy.

>>1996797

It is and is not a myth.

The problem with purebred animals is that purebred=inbred on some level. Think about how breeding works. You have this one random mutation that you want to express. You're not going to scour the planet looking for enough snowflake animals with that precise mutation to form a stable breeding pool. Even if you did, the rate of expression even in their offspring isn't going to be sufficient to provide a stable population. So you in breed or line breed them. Cousin-to-cousin, even brother to sister if you have to. In the end, even if you're responsible you're going to have a breeding population that's pretty homogenous from a genetic standpoint. Now, DNA isn't exactly like a computer code. It isn't neat. The genes for coat color could be wrapped up with the genes for hip structure and the genes for milk production could be tied up with cancer detection. Most of your DNA isn't human, mammal or even vertebrate. It's just one bigassed wad of weirdassed proteins left over from viruses, bacteria and whatever other odds and ends got lodged in there. So if you selectively breed for say, a blue coat in cats, you could also unwittingly be selectively breeding for mammary tumors or some urology defect or whatever. You see this in humans and isolated populations. Like the Fundamental Mormons who take half a dozen wives and kick boys out at 14. They started with a tiny gene pool and kept it tiny and as a result, they've ended up with some really, really weird genetic diseases that you rarely if ever see anywhere else. The reason you don't see those diseases anywhere else is because most people just fuck all willy-nilly with a higher degree of genetic variation.

So, are mutts more healthy? Not really. But they are less prone to certain genetic diseases found in other animals with less cousinfucking in their past.

>>1997190
Doesn't a 'mutt' the result of several established breeds breeding, just have double or more of the risk of genetic fuckery?

>>1997225

No, even the mix of one purebred to another of a different breed has the genetic diversity to reduce the risk of breed specific diseases back to "normal". But mixed breeds can still have problems. But you can learn more by looking into heterosis. When you have animals with high genetic diversity even if one parent has a crap gene there is a better chance of the other parent having a working version of that gene. If they're both purebreds of the same breed they're pretty much inbred so if a skilled breeder didn't breed them there's a much bigger chance of both parents having the same bum gene and the offspring having genetic conditions.

Still, mutts can have other issues like poor nutrition in the womb or having diseases during growth periods due to you have no clue what their origin or how they were raised. Most especially behavioral problems from being a young animal in the streets, in the shelter, or completely unsocialized in shit byb conditions.

>>1997190
> But they are less prone to certain genetic diseases
they're less prone to expressing them, they're often carriers.

if you want me to read that wall of text atleast learn how to write first.

File: 1414871327565.png (130KB, 400x376px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 400x376px

>>1997190
>>1997230

Sweet jesus fuck yes someone that actually understands animal husbandry holy shit.

There needs to be a sticky and this needs to be mandatory for every "Favorite dog breed/what dog breed should I get /guess my dog breed/mutts are healthier/should I get this byb dog" thread ever.

10/10 you made my fucking day.

>>1996784
Friendly reminder no one gives a fuck.

>>1997326

Every multicellular organism on this planet carries thousands of deleterious or potentially deleterious genes. If they're not expressed in the organism or not forced into expression in the organism's offspring through inbreeding, then what the hell does it matter?

Your argument is shit. You are shit. Drop the trip and shut the fuck up. You don't know what you're talking about.

>>1997452
>drop the trip
Fuck that, then I can't filter his dumb ass.

>>1997452
>carries thousands of deleterious or potentially deleterious genes
and almost all of them are harmless, they're also constantly lost and regained.
>then what the hell does it matter?
it wouldn't matter if people didn't breed their shit mutts, but they do, so those carriers of shit genes pass on their shit genes and they might express themselves if they do.

you don't understand breeding, you don't understand genetics, you have no education and you're not intelligent enough to hold a basic conversation, stop posting in general you add absolutely nothing to this board.

>>1997460

Well, I understand basic grammar and punctuation. So there is that.

>>1997474
which doesn't matter when you write in such a manner that it gives people a headache to read.

>>1997383

Good news, we weren't the same person so there are at least TWO such posters on /an/.

>>1997478

High five, geneticsbro.

>>1997460
Says the guy who thinks apple trees are inbred.

>>1997544
they are.

they don't even make it to the lowest age class of trees.

you don't know botany like I already said last time, I deal with it daily.

>>1997476

Nobody else is complaining about that.

File: damn_cat.png (168KB, 262x381px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 262x381px

no one should get cats, cat shit gives you schizophrenia and 10-20% of the population of any given country is allergic to them

>>1997550
>they are
Explain to me how that happens in Apple trees. Please, I really want to hear this.

>they don't even make it to the lowest age class of trees.
You are so very fucking stupid.
Apple trees can live a long time. They aren't Redwoods, but they aren't hybrid dwarf maples either.

>you don't know botany like I already said last time, I deal with it daily.
That was my first post in this thread.
There are a lot of people on /an/ that know you're full of shit.

>>1997604
> Please, I really want to hear this.
you wouldn't understand even if I told you.

most fruit trees are inbred, hence why their lifespan is so short compared to the lowest age class of trees that you don't know.


>Apple trees can live a long time.
domestic apples don't live long times.


it's all jargon, which you can't touch with your degree in nothing, we don't even bother telling you because you wouldn't understand.

File: Hugh_body.jpg (27KB, 406x540px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 406x540px

>>1997613
>we don't even bother telling you because you wouldn't understand.
>we

I've had my suspicions for a while now but it finally makes sense.

This asshole's not an autistic sociopath, he's just a borg. Humanity is but a distant memory to him.

>>1997613
>you wouldn't understand even if I told you.
Try me.
I really want to here how a plant that is not reproduced from seed is inbred. And by "reproduced from seed" I do not mean the development/ discovery of new varieties.

File: 900_img_8834.jpg (140KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 900x600px

>>1996784
>Not knowing about pariah dogs

>>1997633
>Try me.
there's nothing to try.

check the average lifespan of the wild ancestor.

>>1997642
I am not talking about lifespan. Don't try to change the subject. I want to know how apple trees become inbred. Enlighten me.

>>1997648
>I am not talking about lifespan
>I want to know how apple trees become inbred
guess how it's measured.

protip: healthy fruit trees last.

>>1997652
>guess how it's measured.
consanguinity by genetic morphology?

>>1997655
the wild ancestor lasts for 80+ year (which is the min age class)

domestic hardly even lasts 35.

really their genes aren't shit?

>>1997656
not the guy you're arguing with.
Just stepping in to tell you how inbreeding is measured since you apparently don't have a clue.

>>1996785
>wanting a pet that doesn't have questionable genetics sure is ridiculous.
Do you also screen your friends and life partners for "questionable genetics"?

>>1997659
you wouldn't know botany if ivy started to climb across your face.

>>1997663
yes.

but I have no baby plans, my family has some hereditary disorders even though they aren't so bad.

my genes are almost pure northern european and I'd like to keep it that way.

>>1997664
yet I managed to ID toadflax, one of the most common weeds in the world, while you failed.

>>1997666
>but I have no baby plans, my family has some hereditary disorders even though they aren't so bad.
>my genes are almost pure northern european and I'd like to keep it that way.

If you want healthy babies you probably be having mixed race babies.

>>1997652
I'm going to ask you one more time.
If you keep dodging the question I am going to assume you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

How do Apple trees get inbred?

>>1997706
>How do Apple trees get inbred?
by inbreeding?

are you that stupid.

>>1996797

Mutts are healthier is not a myth you twat.

>>1997720
they're healthier by expression not by genes.

so they're not actually healthier.

>>1997724

That's some retard logic.

By expression is all that matters for that dogs life. So yes, healthier.

Being a carrier is healthier than having the disease. And you're ignoring the physical abnormalities that pure breeds have that mutts don't.

>>1997730
> is all that matters for that dogs life. So yes, healthier.
it's not what matters for responsible breeding.
>And you're ignoring the physical abnormalities that pure breeds have that mutts don't.
and you're ignoring the physical abnormalities mutts have and pure breeds don't.

pure breeds have a few abnormalities.

mutts have every abnormality in existence for all you know.

>>1997737

>breeding
Different topic, i can argue that in a second, but first.

A carrier is healthier than an individual with the disease.

>pure breeds have a few abnormalities

Pure breeds have abnormalities because breeders force them to. Mutts don't because there's no selective pressure to have those retarded features.

Why the hell do you always have to be such an argumentative dick? Especially when you're flat out wrong and you fucking admitted it.

>>1997709
Confirmed for idiot troll.

>Apples have a genetic property referred to as extreme hetrozygosity, meaning that alleles of a gene can be radically different from each other. Alleles are an alternative form of a gene that arise from mutation, but occur at the same loci or place on a chromosome. For instance, human DNA has three different alleles of the gene responsible for blood type; that for A blood type, B blood type and O blood type. The variation within an apple’s alleles, even if small, can affect everything from the color of its skin, to its susceptibility to a particular disease.
Humans, who also display hetrozygosity, do not show as extreme a difference in alleles, allowing for there to be resemblance among siblings and between parents and their children. This is not the case for apples. Alleles of genes can be radically different and almost always a seedling apple tree will bear fruit nothing like the apple from whence the seed came. Most apples that come from seedling trees are deemed "spitters" meaning one is prone to spit them out upon tasting. However the continual recombination of genes into new possibilities, can yield visually unique if not tasty apples worthy of the cider press, the pie pan or even greater gustatory distinction.
This phenomenon also allows the apple to easily adapt to new environmental conditions. A seedling apple tree may have the ability to thrive in an ecosystem where the parent trees could only cope.

>>1997765
wall of useless text.

wild ancestor
80+ years

domestic
35<

ok we done.

>>1997810
>ignores valid info stating that he is wrong
>I've got nothing
>posts nothing to support his idiotic ideas

>>1997897
I can't even read it.

try not wording yourself like a toddler.

>>1997901
I'm pretty sure that's a quote.

>>1997902
I hope so otherwise I'd feel bad for him.

seedlings almost never resemble domestic ancestors, but you're not going to get quality apples from them which makes it useless.

>>1997908
true, and that's what his quote says.

it does however seem to contradict your claim that they're inbred. A clone can't be inbred, and inbred apples would probably be inedible.

>>1997911
the apples used for commercial purposes are cuttings.

cuttings are always inbred, there are almost no sustainable cuttings.

>>1997913
cuttings are clones.
a clone can't be inbred, particularly if the parent traits don't breed true.

>>1997915
cuttings are crafted,

the rootstock isn't well bred if that's what you're considering.

sometimes they're crafted on top of a cultivar that's grafted on top of a rootstock, neither of which has even decent genes, if they did the cutting would overpower and kill them.

it's how grafts work and why they don't work.

>>1997917
the cutting itself is a clone.
clones can't be inbred because they aren't bred. They're cloned.

>>1997917
>more sidestepping
> garbage about rootstock being inbred

Give it up. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

>>1997918
cuttings aren't planted in plain dirt, cuttings are grafted.

if you'd plant them reguarly you'd still get shit fruit.

>>1997919
> I don't know how commercial fruit works
ok
give it up.

>>1997921
>cuttings are grafted.
yes, and they're clones.

clones can't be inbred.

>>1997918
Which is why we have apple varieties that have been around since the Roman era.

I'm done. He knows he's wrong at this point.

File: 1442788181830.jpg (127KB, 1060x714px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1060x714px

>>1997693
Except races of humans are nowhere near inbred enough to necessitate out-breeding. This is really only ever a problem in extremely remote, isolated populations.

>>1997666
>tfw when closet mongolian

>>1997693
>If you want healthy babies you probably be having mixed race babies.

except not.

>Mixedrace children suffer from more health problems:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448064/

>Migrations causing useful genes to disappear
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1213928/

>Biracial Asian Americans are twice as likely as monoracial Asian Americans to be diagnosed with a psychological disorder.
http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=8732

>A third cousin is the optimal mate (balances inbreeding depression with outbreeding depression):
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080207140855.htm

>Mixed race people suffer from catastrophic shortage of organ donors, leaving many to die of treatable illness:
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1993074,00.html
http://articles.boston.com/2009-05-28/news/29263326_1_national-marrow-donor-program-mixed-race-multiracial

>>1998311
Dude! Celebrate your heritage. The Mongols are an awesome people.