For those in breeds that do certificated health screening e.g hips ,eyes, some DNA tests. What do you use as the ID I understand the DNA profiling is the  best to use ,others are saying microchiping is needed in addition to this. Are there any drawbacks in only doing the DNA profiling? Must I do both?

As I understand it,

If you only DNA profile, how do you link that profile to the exact dog profiled if you don't microchip or tattoo? 

Unless the dog which has been DNA profiled can be permanently identified all you have is a piece of paper with a result on it, a pedigree certificate and a dog, which may, or may not be the right dog   

> Unless the dog which has been DNA profiled can be permanently identified all you have is a piece of paper with a result on it, a pedigree certificate and a dog, which may, or may not be the right dog &nbsp;&nbsp; <IMG class=qButton title="Quote selected text" height=10 alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" width=20>

Yes Dill I agree with you there, so much of the dog business has to be taken on trust alone.
Maybe its just me having bad thoughts but I was discussing this with a friend the other day and we were surmising that anyone could for example take a previously hip scored dog to a vet that didn,t know the dog
and have it scored again with a different set of papers.
Then there would be two dogs with acceptable hip scores (on paper that is )
My girls are microchipped before being hip scored. in answer to the original question

Disadvantage of DNA profile alone is that the technician without taking a DNA sample can't verify the dogs Identity there and then, with the Tattoo they can read it right there,a and if they have a scanner they can read the chip.

At eye testing sessions they always ask to scan the dog if it is chipped.

ON Hip Scoring I have always had both included on the forms submitted.

I am about to get an Optigen test for PRCD-PRA which has just been found as one cause of PRA in the breed, and tattoo and chip details have been put on the test forms for the technician taking the blood to verify.

The DNA profiles I don't see as being that useful, as all they are good for is ID, and anyone trying to confirm the ID that way would have to test the individuals involved and/or sample their offspring to confirm their parentage.

For example puppy buyers have false security when the parents are DNA tested, as unless the pups are also profiled they could still not belong to said parents, so again only useful if a challenge to ID was made.

Hello Brainless
   Sorry for being woolley headed about this but but I just want to be clear about this. If I DNA profile and this is linked to a dogs regs and name before testing , when a health test is done and that test result is then linked to that name also.  If later a doubt was cast about the dogs identity the DNA would prove weather name and tests applied to that dog. Is DNA profiling not completely individual? Or are you saying which I do appreciate microchipping is  quicker instant proof. 
      I suppose because I am not planning to be devious or dishonest I'm struggling to get my head round why this would not be enough.

> If later a doubt was cast about the dogs identity the DNA would prove weather name and tests applied to that dog.

Exactly it would only prove something if it was challenged, with a tattoo, or chip the id can be verified there and then.