When purchasing a Maine Coon, either as a pet or as a breeder, you should ensure that the animal is either tested themselves for HCM, SMA and PK Def. Many breeders ignorant of Maine Coon health test for PKD, which is not present in Maine Coons; rather, it is in Persians.
PK Def is a recessive illness; that is it requires two copies of the gene to affect the health of the cat. Whilst it is broadly inadvisable for breeders to used PK Def carriers, it is possible to use them safely in a breeding programme provided that all cats mating with the carrier have two clear PK Def genes. Any PK Def carrier status in the parents should be clearly explained to the owner of the carrier’s offspring, particularly in offspring intended for breeding.
Testing for these genes in the UK is largely done via Langfords Diagnostic Laboratory (Langfords). The institution is well respected, with a high rate of accuracy in their test results.
Rudycats, as recently as 18th March 2022, states that they breed with cats tested for HCM, SMA, PKD & PK Def. We can use the Wayback Machine to see this.
How interesting, then, that now on the girls’ page on the more up-to-date website, there is no mention of PK Def at all.
And yet on the boys, it remains as both PK Def and PKD.
How strange. We move on.
When Dotty had kittens with Rudycats, her Langford testing results were sent to the new kitten owners as expected. We can see this below.
Note: PK Def is listed as normal, i.e. no PK Def genes present
I wish to draw your attention to a number of discrepancies, notably the falsified TICA registration number, the empty red box where the issue date of the document should be, and the dates on the tests for PKD and Dilute Coat Colour: 20 February 2020.
Firstly, the falsified TICA registration number. Registration numbers from TICA are always written in the following two formats: SBT MMDDYY XXX or SBV MMDDYY XXX. The XXX are always three numbers and not, as this test demonstrates, a singular letter.
Speculation abounded that Dotty’s testing was falsified, and so upon retirement her new owner requested the test be reissued, with very different results.
Note: PK Def is listed as a carrier
Note the false registration number in this document is consistent with the first. The swab numbers are also consistent.
Note that the dates for PKD and Dilute Coat Colour are in fact from three weeks later. It’s not necessarily uncommon to opt for additional testing later on, but why are the dates different between the first document and the second?
Note too the missing date in the first document in comparison to the first.
For you ease, you can see them side-by-side here.
One can see clearly in red, black and white – Dotty is a PK Def carrier. Could Langfords have made an error? Surely not!
The following screenshots indicate Rudycats’ use of PDF-editing software.
Rudycats admits that her actions are illegal and she is happy to forge a disabled child’s official government documents from the Department of Work & Pensions to skip a queue at Disneyland.
Given that Rudycats’ website has removed all mention of PK Def negative status from their breeding girls, the evidence suggests that they are breeding with PK Def carriers. Once more, that in itself is not necessarily problematic. The issue lies in the obvious falsification of veterinary medical documentation.
There was no error by Langford.
Rudycats has been knowingly and actively forging health test results.
I think the individual who was asked for their child’s DLA documentation sums up the situation perfectly:
This author urges any breeder with a Rudycats kitten to conduct their own health testing through Langfords as an urgency.