• pan_troglodytes@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    LOY-001 is designed for healthy dogs over the age of seven and above 40 pounds

    hopefully they can work on fixing that so all dog breeds can benefit. I would have gladly paid any amount of money to extend my lil guy’s lifespan. the 10 years we had were the best years of my life.

    • holycrap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      According to their site LOY-002 is for all breeds. LOY-001 and LOY-003 are specific to large dogs.

      I really hope these drugs pan out!

  • And009@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    My dogs are still young… If it’s something that can be real in few years then I’d be so grateful. I wouldn’t want them in pain for longer though so it depends how the drug works.

  • CryptidBestiary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    My best friend passed away early this year, and while I believe in the quality of life over the quantity, I can’t deny what I would give to be able to be with him just a bit longer…

    • holycrap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The drug described here is supposed to improve quality of life in later years, and a few extra years is a side effect of that.

      Assuming it works as advertised. I hope it does. I want some for my dogs.

  • mriormro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    The actual solution is to adopt smaller dogs and reduce the demand for larger dogs as they don’t have the levels of the growth hormone that larger dogs were selectively bred into having. Which is the cause for such shortened lifespans as compared to small dogs.

    Not to develop a hormone therapy that just continues to perpetuate the practice that we now know causes these reduced lifespans.

    At this point, this is just further enabling designer dogs.

    • vivadanang@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I mean, this may prolong lifespans but Quality of Life is a lot more important that raw lifespan. I doubt this does much for those issues so it’s kinda moot.

  • ElcaineVolta@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    11 months ago

    how many dogs are currently in kill shelters? we need to stop breeding animals into existence for no reason, and we definitely do not need to be extending their lives.

    • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ok, usually I’ll just stfu and ignore something like this, but I woke up in pain so yeah.

      Why the fuck are there still kill shelters?! that’s a way bigger issue than breeding imo, there are a shit load of shelters who have a constant flow of drop offs and adoptions that never kill, so why are we killing dogs that will find a home.

      Onto your last comment, the one that hit me, I’m watching my best friend, the sole fucking reason I am alive today, reaching her last leg, I would give everything I own and my legs to have way more time with her, I’m having a hard time trying to imagine what my life is gonna be like with out my one constant for the last 14 years, the first thing I see in the morning and the last thing I see at night… so I wholeheartedly disagree that we shouldn’t extend their lives, fuck I want to still have my girl 30 years from now, just 2 old longtime companions riding into the sun, purposely pissing each other off for the lolz.

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        There are kill shelters because shelters that never kill won’t take or pass on to kill shelters the dogs with broken legs that’ll live in pain, the dogs with health issues nobody wants to pay to treat, the dogs that have been mistreated to the point of fearful aggression, the dogs that are aesthetically undesirable, the old dogs etc

        Nobody working in a rescue wakes up and says “gee golly! I sure am looking forward to killing a dog today”

        Hell I have a rescued greyhound next to me right now, and no matter how many I adopted there would still be mass graves of them because they only race fast when young.

      • ElcaineVolta@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        11 months ago

        sorry, breeding dogs that live to their 40s or 50s is incredibly self-centered and short-sighted.
        this is a terrible idea.

        • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Kk, cool.

          We’re on polar opposite sides of this, I don’t want to ruin either of our days, so have a good one.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      They’re separate issues, many dogs in shelters shouldn’t have been born in the first place (fuck puppy farms), but not all dog owners see their dog as being replaceable and they would gladly own the same one longer, losing it wouldn’t mean they would adopt one that’s in a kill shelter.

    • Rusticus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Replace “dogs” with “humans” to realize how big of an asshole comment this is.

    • Froyn@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      Exactly, pull the funding from canine and put it into feline research!!!