I want to clarify something: my personal suspicion is that when the
adrenal endocrinological work is done -- the missing pieces filled in --
which relate the combination of being neutered (at any age) and being
exposed to too much light I DO suspect that the hypothesis will prove to
be accurate.  That is simply because as more is known there winds up
being an ever tighter picture.  Still, it might not pan out, despite
having so much on its side so far.  It is easy and safe, though, to
provide ferrets with a lot of darkness, so trying it lacks a downside.
 
There are other hypotheses out there with fewer pieces filled in, and
more to learn.  One is the possible connection of starch levels and
other carbohydrates in the diet -- which is in part the brain child of
Dr. Jerry Murray, a friend.  It is an interesting concept.  Yet, JM is
keeping an open mind.  He is hoping that some of the genetic work can be
done in case that has more of an effect or has an effect in conjunction,
and he is following possible instances where -- at least for some
individuals -- there may be such a things as too much protein and too
little carbohydrate, for example in individuals who develop cystine
stones or some individuals who wind up needing some starch intake or
sugar intake or both to better control blood glucose levels.  The point
is that as the old saying goes, "It's not over till the fat lady sings."
and in this case that songstress gives throat to the final piece in very
complex puzzles which may have their pictures change as more is filled
in.
 
At least that hypothesis is being carefully investigated.  There are a
number of things which people too often accept as "truths" which have
nothing or next to nothing behind them beyond a pattern which may be
nothing more than coincidence.  These can sometimes prove a risk to
ferrets and other times turn out to be major wins.  Often enough they
are just in the noise.  So, just remember to use a grain of salt when
you read about these concepts.  There are many reasons; perhaps the
most entrancing and exciting one is discovering new information like
the recent work into fat which has found that it is very active
endocrinological organ which produces an array of hormones as well as
inflammatory compounds and other agents.  Remember that having some
pieces and playing connect-the-dots doesn't necessarily work out.
Remember that reading and writing are vastly different from doing the
needed experimental work no matter how good an idea sounds.  Try
things, yes, but always have a grain of salt handy.
 
Linda writes:
>The mitt and roaning (increasing white with age) patterns are controlled
>by different genetics.
 
Exactly.  When the mitts and is combination is complete, bilateral, and
evenly margined, without white spotting then the cause is a different
genetic one which has not been connected with medical problems.  BUT,
when there is also spotting or the mitts and bibs are non-bilateral or
unevenly margined or incomplete white splotches then think neural crest
genetics and possible related medical disorders.  If you have seen the
ferrets who are the true original mitt and bib ferrets you'll notice a
lack of white spotting, socks which go part-way up and are so straight
around that they look like the margins of our own socks, bibs which
likewise fully and cleanly cover the area there which is darker than
surrounding fur in standard markings.  That kind of marking set is the
one with a different cause rather than a troublesome neural crest
genetics cause.
 
Roaning also is separate from white spotting which is present from
scratch.
 
Dark Eyed Whites, Marked Whites, and Albinos all appear to have other
causes than neural crest genetics, BUT because they are already white
they can hide neural crest markings beneath so some may also be hiding
something.
 
Melissa writes:
>However, I do know some about basic genetics, and it's important, I
>think, to point out that no genetic defects are INTRODUCED by breeding.
>They are exacerbated by breeding, but they have always been there.
 
Exactly!  It is the rate in the population which changes!  The neural
crest variants connected to medical problems (and KIT oncogene may be a
far more likely one than Waardensburg in ferrets) are ancient and you
will find them to some extent not only in other mammals but also in
reptiles (and if memory serves there may be some in amphibians).  What
has changed is that these were selected for artificially so they became
common in the ferret population instead of being rare like they used to
be.  (BTW, the definition of evolution is "The change in proportion of
genetic alleles in a population over time."  Selective breeding is human
created evolution and not all of it pans out well.)
 
>There is NO way to breed deafness out of a population, so we cannot
>possibly breed it INTO one either.
 
But the RATE of deafness can be increased, ditto other health problems.
I am more concerned by the oncogene aspect than others like the deafness
probability increase personally.
[Posted in FML issue 4668]