Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Welcome to the official podcast of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association, where we bring you conversations with leading veterinary experts from around the globe. Each season spotlights one WSAVA committee, sharing their knowledge, research, and insights through short, accessible interviews.
Every fortnight, we speak with two experts on a shared theme, offering concise, engaging discussions designed to spark curiosity and guide you toward WSAVA’s extensive library of educational resources, webinars, and events. Hosted by WSAVA President Jim Berry, the podcast delivers focused conversations that connect you with the latest thinking in small animal medicine worldwide.
You can find more educational resources from WSAVA here: https://wsava.org/education/
Welcome to the WSAVA podcast.
This episode, From Genes To Traits,
explores the fascinating journey from DNA
to the features, behaviors, and health
conditions we see in dogs and cats.
While you listen, ask yourself,
how do the traits we value today
shape the animals of tomorrow?
This episode includes two conversations,
Becky Murphy with Dan O'Neill, followed
by Yaiza Gómez-Mejías with Petra Černá.
Let's get started.
How would you define breed in dogs?
Where has it come from?
Breed is a human concept
invented in the last 150 years.
One of the myths for a lot of the
public is that breeds exist in nature as
something that have always been around.
Dogs evolved maybe 10 million years
ago and for the vast majority of
their history, they've just been dogs.
We've started inventing this concept
called breed that really just came
into the fore in the late 1800s.
There then was a mad scramble among humans
to generate as many breeds as possible
because there was money in it, there was
status in it, there was kudos in it, there
was prizes to be won at shows, so people
went out actively selecting for mutations,
diseases in dogs that were genetic and
that they could breed into future
generations and create new breeds.
So we started pushing what was a typical
dog over the last couple of hundred
years into multiple different shapes
and creating new entities called breeds.
So breed really is a human concept.
It's not biological.
We can change it.
It's not set in nature.
We can reinvent them to make them healthy.
I see the creation of breeds as being an
interesting thing because we are fixing
traits such as temperament and behavior,
or do we want them as a companion?
Do we want them as a working dog?
And so forth.
So do you think that there's enough
diversity out there to actually
fix some of the issues that you
see in some of the breeds?
What a wonderful question because
intrinsic in that question is the sense
of falling back into the same mistake that
we have made over the past hundred years.
Humans breed French bulldogs with French
bulldogs to create French bulldogs.
We have over 800 different dog breeds.
They're all distinct.
They're all recognizable by
the public and we only allow
them to breed with themselves.
There's loads of diversity.
It just doesn't have to
be within that breed.
We can bring in genetic diversity from
other breeds and when you think about
it, every single one of the breeds we
have today is a cross breed generated
by crossing some previous dogs.
Biology would say that we can
and should be bringing in genes
externally into breeds if it's needed.
As a veterinarian, we don't see
people for pre-purchase consults.
They come to us with the puppy that
they've already fallen in love with and
we can look at it and think, crickey, this
is going to be a lifetime of difficulty.
So do you have any advice to veterinarians
on that first puppy consult on how
to actually approach the discussion
of extreme conformation and what they
can do moving forward from there?
I moved from general practice in 2009 into
the Royal Veterinary College in academia.
I thought once I had the evidence,
within three or four years
the world would react, right?
It has not happened.
This is a long game.
We
have had a century of cultural
brainwashing of humanity into
believing extreme conformation is good.
It will take many years to change
the public zeitgeist to realize that
extreme conformation is suffering.
The vet profession has a huge role
to play, but it really isn't all
down to that single point of contact.
When the puppy first arrives,
it's too late for that puppy.
All the vets can do is try to provide the
best healthcare advice and direct
healthcare to keep that puppy above
the cut point for a life worth living.
Sometimes they'll go below that.
If they go below, that euthanasia
has to be discussed, but the wider
role of vets can still influence.
It is a long game, non-judgmental
and empathic conversations with those
owners may help them not get the
next dog, which might be 5 years,
10 years down the line, or maybe
they're planning to get a second dog.
So there is benefit in honest,
empathic conversations from
the client's point of view.
The second thing we can do
is speak as a profession.
Most practices have social media, so
we can use that to educate clients
hopefully before they get the dog.
They're not going to pay for a
consult in most situations, but they
will see our social media messaging.
Thirdly, we can help show
owners by what we do.
Vets and vet professionals should
think seriously about the animals they
own and the message we give even by
walking your dog through the park.
I've learned humans have a wonderful
way to deal with cognitive dissonance.
We can accept, if I own one a dog with
extreme conformation, I can accept
that extreme conformation is really
bad for the dog and the dog may well be
suffering, but I will reframe it in a
certain way that means that it's okay.
And that means I would say there's a
lot worse Bulldogs, he's one of the
better ones and he's got a little
bit of a tail and he's a rescue.
I took him from a charity so
it's all fine and I give him
lots of love, therefore it's
okay.
And trying to get around that
is to try and put some objective
measures that help the general public
and the veterinary profession to
understand extreme conformation.
There are still lots we can do,
but unfortunately by the time
the puppy arrives in the consult,
it's too late for that puppy.
Absolutely.
So that conformation versus inherited
disease, I think of things like BOAS,
like IVDD, things that are a direct
result of the conformation of the dog,
the structure of the dog and then we've
also got the inherited genetic diseases.
So we are looking at things from
simple mendelian traits, such as
some of the progressive retinal
atrophy, the blindness, to some
more complex, multifactorial hip
dysplasia that aren't necessarily
related to conformation.
You go through the recommended
tests for each breed, and it will
list the DNA tests, the physical
testing, the hips, the eyes, the
respiratory function, and so forth.
But we do often miss
the point that they're
only testing the inherited
disease components of it.
They're not necessarily looking at
the conformational problems related
to it, because we probably don't have
a test for those things specifically.
What advice can you give to veterinarians
when trying to consider those two
issues as being reasonably distinct, but
also having some similarities as well?
How would you suggest that
vets try and view them?
I have a very contrarian approach,
which means I disagree with
everything, absolutely everything,
until I've really tried to attack it.
It's like pinata, I'll try and get
whatever the concepts are, beat the living
daylights outta them and if I
can't get the sweeties, I'll
accept the donkey exists.
I disagree intrinsically with the
whole inherited disease concept.
My PhD was called 'Acquired And Inherited
Diseases In Dogs And Cats.' It, it
covers everything in two species, right?
It took me about six months to realize
that every single disease in dogs and
cats is inherited, every single one.
You might say, if a dog is hit
by a car, that's an accident.
It absolutely is not.
It is an inherited disease,
and we've published papers on
this.
Certain breeds are more likely to be
hit by car, maybe because the people
who own those dogs choose them and
keep them inside because the dogs have
less recall and maybe because the dogs
have a greater tendency to wonder,
all of those factors are inherited.
So every disease has an inherited
and non inherited component.
So the first
thing is I disagree with boxing off
disorders as inherited or not inherited.
They're all inherited.
Second thing is that I started this
podcast with you by chatting about
breeds and that we invented breeds.
The only way that we could invent
breeds and keep the future generations
looking like the previous generation
is if breed itself is inherited.
So we breed two French bulldogs, they're
not going to give birth to a Jack Russell
puppy, they're going to give birth to a
French bulldog puppy or something that we
define as looking like a French bulldog.
If that puppy itself, because of
its conformation, is associated
with severe health issues,
those are inherited diseases.
The sad thing with that is that
the world accepts standard diseases
like diabetes and cancer and
osteoarthritis is a bad thing.
Everyone disagrees, it's a bad thing.
When it comes to conformational disease,
we have humans actively desiring to
own animals with conformational disease
and that's why as veterinary surgeons,
we have a really important role in
trying to explain to the public that
brachycephaly, inflexible spines and
skin folds are every much as a disease as
diabetes or some of the other examples.
And that's why I said we've slipped
into a century of getting it wrong as a
veterinary profession and as humanity.
We have a long way to go but we do
need to start that conversation and
groups like the WSAVA Inherited Disease
Group can play a key role in starting
to break the old way of thinking.
We are the veterinary profession,
if animals can't rely on us
to stand up for them, who
can they rely on?
Yeah.
And I absolutely agree.
Is there anything that we haven't covered
that you wanted to wrap it up with?
Let's deal with the outcrossing issue.
So outcrossing is another one of
these generic holistic terms, but I
often feel that they're not helpful
as a broad term because for certain
communities, outcrossing is taboo.
So certain breed communities and
people that have been breeding over
the past 50 years, when outcrossing
was not allowed, obviously it is now
starting to be allowed, but it's hard
for people to change their mindset.
So outcrossing is a term that, that
probably should be used carefully and we
should be using it in a qualified way.
Outcrossing could mean within a
breed, crossing between a working
line and a shoreline, and that may be
acceptable to some breed communities.
Outcrossing
could mean that we're, let's say we're
in the UK, Becky, you're in New Zealand,
that we're crossing between breed
lines within the UK, breed lines within
New Zealand, that may have diverged,
may genetically be different, make
conformation be different.
Those are ways to introduce
new genetic diversity.
Outcrossing can also mean going outside
the breed, crossing with another breed,
and then back crossing with the original
breed trying to recreate the original one.
That was done, let's say, with
Dalmatians where they had their
uric acid problem, they were
outcrossed with a Pointer and then after
several generations crossing back with
dalmatians, you have dogs that look
identical to the original Dalmatians,
but without the uric acid problem.
Outcrossing can be designed for
genetic diversity issues but
also for conformational issues.
So we can outcross, let's say English
bulldogs or French bulldogs with other
breeds or lines, or with variants from
other countries to reshape how they look.
So with the Dalmatian example,
the idea was to get it back
to how it looked originally.
With the French Bulldogs, if we're
following innate health, we're trying to
breed French bulldogs with long noses,
tails, flexible spines, no skin folds.
So we're trying to breed
a healthy French bulldog.
Less about genetic diversity and more
about actively changing how the dog looks.
It's outcrossing to improve genetic
diversity.
It's outcrossing to move conformation
towards less extreme, or in fact it
should be towards a moderate conformation
and then you can define how you do it.
So
almost when we're using outcrossing as
a broad term, it's too broad, it's too
non-specific and probably isn't helpful
unless qualified by more information.
Yeah.
People like the breed types, don't they?
There are banned breeds around the world.
In New Zealand, we have five or six.
The, the whole concept of banning or as
we call it, retiring different breeds, do
you think that's a concept that will work?
Or do you think that outcrossing
whatever variation, it will
be more successful over time?
Banning or retiring breeds
doesn't seem to work.
It's a really good question
because these are policies tried in
different places at different times.
The issue is humans.
The issue isn't biology.
The issue is humans.
I personally don't feel
that banning breeds help.
Breeds
don't exist, going back to
my very original comment,
they don't exist in nature.
The issue is the conformation, and I feel
it is much, much better and it will be
socially more acceptable if we approach
it from a conformation point of view.
The public don't like breeds being banned.
In the UK we had an XL bully ban
because there was a high rate of people
being killed by that breed, and it has
been hugely problematic over the last
two or three years, both from a human
social point of view, but also a legal
point of view trying to enforce it and
even the big organizations, welfare
organizations, disagreeing with each
other as to whether a ban is good or bad.
But nobody will disagree with moving
away from extreme conformation because
extreme conformation by definition
equates the suffering, either
current and or future suffering.
We should go with the line of
least resistance and most gain.
That's
conformation.
It's really interesting.
What is one message that you'd like to
take away from this podcast in terms of
their role in safeguarding canine welfare?
From a veterinary point of view,
the big message is that breed
is flexible and can change.
It's a human invented concept.
Change, ideally should be within the
domains that we physically, as humans,
can change without necessarily doing
lots of tests and lots of expense.
They've allowed the pedigree dog
brand to be tarnished by the extreme
conformation conversation, and it is
a huge issue, but it's the minority.
It's less than 50% of the breeds.
It's probably only 10 to 15% of
the breeds and basically we have
not started to celebrate the
breeds that are physically healthy.
We keep looking at the
ones that are extreme.
There are lots of breeds.
Labrador, Schnauzers, Greyhounds,
Whippets, there are lots of breeds
that actually innately are pretty good.
Even though we have invented them as
humans, we haven't actually got it
that wrong in a lot of those breeds.
So from a vet's point of view, we can
celebrate the good breeds and instead
of constantly maybe having to bad mouth
or talk down the bad breeds, we can just
promote the good breeds, innately healthy
breeds, and encourage owners to get them.
Be positive in our
messaging on social media.
Be positive at an
organizational point of view.
For extreme breeds, as a profession,
we can say your option is a moderate
version of a French bull dog with a tail.
Currently in the UK, within the pedigree
community, for example, the ones that
happen to be born with tails tend
to be neutered because they're, I'm
using inverted commas, they're wrong.
We're fighting against nature.
If you give nature a chance, nature
will regress to an innately healthy dog.
If you, not that I'm advocating
everybody gets a street dog, but if
you look at street dogs, they look
the same long tail and a long nose
and flat skin, and their eyes sit in
and their leg proportion is correct.
That's what nature will regress
to, and it'll do it within
two or three generations.
So vets can be positive, non-judgmental,
empathic about getting innately
healthy breeds and then within
the breeds that have severe
issues with extreme conformation.
Again, without judgment, we can say
yes if you want to buy that breed,
move towards the healthy versions,
and we can do that and within a couple
of generations, that can be done
After Becky Murphy's discussion with
Dan O'Neill, the conversation continues
as Yaiza is joined by Petra Černá.
Before any planned mating, vets can
perform several types of exams to
identify potential health issues
and prevent hereditary diseases from
being passed on to the offspring.
These assessments generally
fall into three main categories,
clinical, phenotypic, and genetic.
Genetic screening was
discussed in previous episodes.
Now, following Dan and Becky´s
conversation on how to move towards
healthier breeds, we´ll explore
how veterinarians can help ensure
that breeding cats are fit for
reproduction, through phenotypic
exams and clinical screening.
Clinical exams focus on the animal’s
overall health and function, whereas
Phenotypic exams assess the observable
traits, what we can actually see.
These include features such as
coat colour, body size, ear and tail
shape, conformation, and structural
soundness, such as healthy hips or a heart
free of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy [HCM],
the most common cardiomyopathy in cats.
When we hear the word screening in
a health context, we generally think
of tests and what type of tests
does phenotypic screening involve?
When we look at phenotypic features
in pedigree cat, we actually do not
have tests for absolutely everything.
So one of the tests we would look at, for
example, would be doing an echocardiogram
for HCM in cat or radiographs to
assess for hip dysplasia in cat but
there are a lot of phenotypic features,
bigger ears, for example, and these are
things you just can't really test for.
So I think these are very often things
where we have to use some common sense
and just really make sure that the cats
we are using for breeding are healthy
cats that have good quality of life.
So heart ultrasound, radiography.
Just from the physical examination, we can
gather some useful information as well.
And compared to genetic screening,
what are the strengths and limitations
of this type of phenotypic screening?
So I think one of the strengths
with phenotypic screening is
that we do not need to have a
known gene for that condition.
But I think one of the biggest limitations
will be that these are things where
we cannot just do a simple swab or
saliva collection to get results.
So big, probably limitation will be
access to care because not every person
is in the same kind of location, and
then there will be a difference in which
people can access what type of testing.
So I feel very lucky and privileged
living in the United States, working
at the huge university, and really
having an access to any possible
test that exists in the world.
This will not be true for people that
live in other places in the world.
So this definitely could be a challenge.
And then I think another big limitation
is interpretation of these tests because
it's great when we know this is the
gene and then we do that genetic test,
but I think analyzing or interpreting
genetic testing can be much easier.
The cost can also be challenging.
So you know, repeating echocardiograms
annually can definitely be quite
an expensive cost, even if you have
access to board certified cardiology.
So unfortunately, when it come
to phenotypic screening, a lot
of the things are very limited.
What advice would you give to
those general practitioners that are
willing to do screening, but they
lack of the confidence to interpret
some tests like heart ultrasound or
perhaps they don't feel confident in
interpreting a, a hip x-ray in a cat?
Interpreting feline hip radiographs
can definitely be much more challenging
than in dogs because of course, cats
are not small dogs and their hips
will look very different even when
they're healthy compared to dogs.
So what I would strongly recommend
that before you even sedate the cat
for radiographs, you actually check
either the PawPeds or OFA website.
Look for guidance because you can
send the radiographs for assessment to
either PawPeds or OFA, and those can
be read out by specialists who are very
comfortable with grading feline hips.
But I think it's very important
that we would have a good
quality radiographs for this.
Our biggest challenge here is
that if those radiographs are not
good enough quality, then nobody
will want to actually assess them.
So before you spend the client's money,
before you sedate those cats and put
them through all of this, maybe just do a
little bit of research on those websites.
If you are not sure, you can reach out
to them or some orthopedic specialist
or some of your colleagues who have
experience with this and just get some
guidelines on what radiographs you exactly
need, how the cat should be positioned.
I definitely recommend doing
some research on this topic.
That's great advice, thank you.
When it comes to more hidden things
like cardiac disease or hip dysplasia,
at what age do you start talking to
the owners about testing for this?
I think it very much depends if the kitten
is completely subclinical and they just
want to use the cat for breeding, once the
cat reaches that age of about 12 months.
For echocardiograms, I usually recommend
that, especially in those breeds that are
predisposed to HCM and we have no genetic
testings available, such as British Short
Hairs, Persians, and exotics, for example.
But those breeds like Rag Dolls and Maine
Coons that are predisposed to HCM, we know
only about the one gene that is available.
So the cats could still get probably HCM
even when they do not carry that mutation.
So I would strongly recommend getting a
first echocardiogram before the mating.
So, and around that 10
to 12 months of age.
So we know the heart is
normal before they go on.
But the biggest issue with phenotypic
screening is that especially with heart
disease, things can really change.
So then we recommend screening
ideally annually or at least
every other year for these cats.
For hip dysplasia, this is a
little bit more challenging.
I've seen horrible hip dysplasia in
kittens as young as about five, six
months, so it can start very early.
Again we would want to make sure we get
clear hip radiographs without severe
hip dysplasia before the first mating,
but some breeds like Maine Coons, they
really can take a long time to develop.
So ideally we would do those
radiographs again around 12 to
14 months, but some cats might
already need to be mated by then.
So if we had done them in younger cats
before the first mating, we might want to
consider repeating those in the future.
Would you still perform heart
scans in those cats that have
been through the genetic testing?
Absolutely.
At the moment we still dunno enough about
the HCM in cats, and I think even though
they do not carry that one mutation,
we know that of course those cats could
potentially still develop heart disease.
It's less likely but there is
still a chance because there could
be other mutations causing that.
I think until we have a more idea on
actually how these genes show in terms
of what age they would show the disease
at, I really would recommend before
any mating that we screen these cats.
You are forever responsible for what you
have tamed, and I do believe that we are
responsible for the kittens we breed.
So if you wanna be a cat breeder, you
really should do your very best to make
sure you are breeding healthy kittens.
How can phenotypic screening them help
differentiate between inherited disorders
and non inherited conditions in cats?
I always think that there are a lot
of conditions in cats that they might
not be fully inherited, at least in
that way, that they would show in the
parents and then show in the offspring.
Some of these can skip generations, right?
Especially when it comes to hip dysplasia,
heart disease, so the fact that the
parents have been screened doesn't
mean that the kitten will not have it.
There is definitely this
environmental factors and
genetic factors to hip dysplasia.
There's probably some incomplete
penetrance, or the hereditary
conditions of the hip dysplasia
are not a hundred percent clear.
For the hip dysplasia the phenotypic
screening really needs to be done in the
parents, but also even in the offsprings.
I wish everything was as simple as the
recessive or dominant traits because
then we know that if my cat does not
carry the mutation, I know I don't
have to continue testing all of the
offsprings because there's no way when
it comes to phenotypic traits, this
definitely is a much bigger challenge
test for at the moment.
I think maybe someday we'll have a easier
way than just test for at the moment.
I think maybe someday we'll have a easier
way than just doing a CT of the skull
on these cats and deciding which ones
maybe could be used in mating or not.
But I think just looking
on a physical exam in those
cats and making sure that the cat
doesn't have too narrow nostrils.
So BOAS is, in my opinion, a little
bit simpler probably in cats than
in dogs because most of it we can
see actually externally, right?
So I do not have to put the cat,
like I have to do with the dog, under
general anesthesia, really check
the soft palette and all of that.
Most of it I really can see on
my just basic physical exams.
So talking to the clients when the cat
has too narrow nostrils, that this really
should not be a cat that should be used
for mating or if they have a chronic
ocular or dental issues, because we
know there is a lot of overcrowding of
the teeth in these brachycephalic cats.
And just discussing all of these
conditions and external kind of things
we do see in these brachycephalic
cats and making sure that people try
not to using these cats for breeding.
So, yeah, even if you weren't
sure that the trait you've got in
front of you is not inherited or
is inherited, would you encourage
the person not to breed from the cat?
Absolutely.
I think a brachycephalic cat that
struggles to breathe on its own, it's
probably really not a cat that should
be put through the stress of pregnancy
and having kittens and until we know
little bit more how brachycephalism is
inherited and how it develops, there
is plenty of cats out there everywhere.
So really breeding cats that have
some defect that really is severely
affecting their quality of life and
health and welfare is a huge problem.
So we really should not be using those
cats in mating and just generally
supporting the breeding of these cats that
are struggling with health and welfare.
So I do love all the cats in the world.
Anytime I see a cat suffer, it is causing
me severe stress and breaks my heart.
So I definitely do not want to
see any cat out there suffer and
we already have enough diseases
that cats can just get as they age.
So why would I already breed a kitten that
will struggle for the rest of its life?
You are a judge as well at breeding
shows, but you've been judged as
well because of being a breeder.
And what tips would you advise?
Because we have this tension in clinical
practice where as general practitioners,
we feel frustrated about not being able
to do anything about this whole cascade
of events that come from this systemic
problem of a society that breeds abnormal
cats and that we are shaping the body of
these species and up to an extent that
sometimes these shapes wouldn't enable
them to survive in a natural environment.
So I understand where the frustration
comes from, but at the same time,
we need to collaborate with other
groups and professional groups
and non-professional groups.
What would be your main advice
when it comes to communicating with
the people who may not be aware
of the severity of these traits?
I always try to presume that when people
have cats or breed cats it's because
they do it because they really care
about the cats and they love the cats.
We definitely have those backyard
breeders where they could be
doing it for financial gain.
In 20 years I've been breeding cats.
I've never made a single penny,
with actually every litter I
feel like I lose money and it's
a very expensive hobby to keep.
So I would always try to presume that
people do what they do because they love
cats and they care about cats deeply.
Very often I come across the fact that
people just don't know any better.
So when we know better,
I feel like we do better.
So I try positively educating the
clients, trying to really tell them and
explain them that what they didn't know
is really important and that this cat
really has an impacted quality of life.
And then health and welfare of the
cat is of course, an issue because as
a veterinarian, but also as a breeder
and as a person that loves animals,
and the cats, of course, very deeply,
those creatures cannot speak for
themself, and we are their advocates.
We are very much responsible for raising
those health and welfare concerns because
those animals cannot do it themselves.
So I do really believe when I see a
cat welfare or health being impacted,
I really need to say something.
Otherwise I cannot be able to
sleep with myself at night.
Sometimes I definitely gain unpopularity,
but I don't do what I do to be popular.
I do what I do because I believe
in it, and I do believe that it
is my responsibility to raise
those concerns when I have them.
And so this is what I would
recommend to people as well.
Try being positive about it and of course
then you work with breeders, making sure
that when you are raising those concerns,
that you're trying to educate them.
Because I, again, most of the times they
just don't know this is a problem and
when you educate them positively about
it, they're much more likely to make a
change than when you are very negative
and you feel like you are judging them
because I feel like that's really not
going to lead to any change at all.
Thank you.
Yeah, I think that's very helpful.
I think
there's a place where we can talk
from our love for cats and we share
that love for cats and that shared
understanding of our love for cats is
a good place to speak from, isn't it?
Most of these people may not be aware of
all the traits associated with their cat's
breed, and they just want to be informed
about the dangers associated with them.
One has to be prepared as a vet to, to
give a basic advice on what to do next,
because obviously they've already adopted
the cat and they're not going to give
the cat back and they want to keep it.
And the next question that the client
is going to ask is, what do I do now?
How can I prevent this?
How can I sort it out?
When you tell them you can't
do much to sort it out they're
going to be frustrated.
As a health professional, you have to
give them some, some sort of tools to
cope with that situation and, and try to
gain some agency and at least give them
some tools to monitor their disease if
it appears, and for them to be prepared.
Yeah.
And act when necessary, and especially
assessing their quality of life.
That's a wrap on season
one of the WSAVA podcast.
Our thanks go to the Hereditary
Disease Committee for leading
this fantastic series.
Next we'll be handing over to the
Dental Committee, so subscribe to
the show to be the first to hear
when those episodes are released.
We'd also love to hear your feedback.
If you can spare a few minutes,
please rate and review the podcast
in your app and don't forget to share
it with friends and colleagues who
you think would enjoy it as well.
It would mean the world to us
and help us shape the direction
of our show moving forward.
Thanks again for listening, and we look
forward to welcoming you back next season.