
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by dogshome9 on 22 June 2010 - 11:06
2 different vet practices wanting to perform JPS surgery,
blood test to see what kind of infection a puppy had because it looked as if it had spinal problems : These were done and the puppy was found to be normal _ No infection and No HD but at what cost for the tests and stress to the puppy, owners and me the breeder.
overbite of very small amount 1.mm. on a 5 month old puppy.
One puppy had CFS fluid drained as the vet thought he had a spinal infection : the puppy walked into the vet hospital and never walk again after incompetence during the procedure he was left paralyzed and was later PTS.
Now all of my puppies leave with a warning for owners to call me first before allowing a vet to do any procedure.
by noddi on 22 June 2010 - 11:06

by kesyra on 22 June 2010 - 11:06
You are absolutely right Alyson. I now have a very good vet, although I have to travel 40 minutes to get there. It is worth it as they put the welfare of the animal before all else, they do not overcharge nor do they 'fix it if it ain't broke' and they also respect my years of experience.
My owners always leave with extensive information, but unfortunately some will believe all that the vet tells them, even if it is not correct, nor in the dogs best interest. I do feel that something needs to be done to stop this, as it is happening with increasing frequency. I have spoken to a friend of mine, who is a vet and he agrees that what this owner was told is appalling and to report the vet to the RVC, but I doubt whether they will do much about it.
by SitasMom on 22 June 2010 - 13:06
by trac123 on 23 June 2010 - 11:06
When I was working at a vets, I was told to always ask new clients if they had health insurance and mark their records with this fact - then, of course, the poor animal was subjected to far more tests and examinations to bring in the money!
Unfortunately for breeders, vets are 'GOD' in the eyes of the public.

by VomRuiz on 23 June 2010 - 13:06
You speak the truth there trac123! Well said!
One of my grooming clients had her rottweiler spayed recently (an early spay thanks to our city's newly passed madatory spay/neuter ordinance) They must be altered by FOUR months of age!!
My client called me at home because she had to cancel her grooming appointment. She explained that her dog was urinating on herself in her sleep so her vet took her in did the bloodwork and sent her home with $200 worth of antibiotics and $60 worth of incontinence pills! They started the antibiotics before the lab results came back, I believe it was two days. My client explained that she caught all four of her dogs eating a raw pack of chicken that was defrosting on the counter, and she had told her vet this... I suggested it may have to do with the early spay, and to ask if that may be the cause, since her vet promised her that if the pup's bloodwork came back fine, they would reimburse her for the very expensive antibiotics and assume the incontinence was from the early spay. However the vet never once mentioned this could be the problem until my client brought it up.
Well, the vet called as promised a couple of days later and told her the dog got some rare type of salmonella, and Boy, was it a good thing they gave her the strongest antibiotics they had!
What I found odd was that:
1) All four of her dogs apparently ate the small pack of chicken, and since they were caught the owner took most of it away
2) None of the other dogs showed any sign of illness
3) The puppy urinating on herself in her sleep showed absolutely no other signs of being ill whatsoever!
I am certainly no vet myself, I just found it strange. My dogs eat 100% raw diet and have never wet themselves or contracted salmonella ... So the puppy has finished her course of antibiotics, but she is still on the pills for the incontinence, and they are working. It's been about a month, and I am very curious to see how this all turns out a few months from now.
Stacy
by Shepherdguy on 23 June 2010 - 14:06
Maybe those that passed the law should have it done to themselves and at the same time have their bark removed.
by Domenic on 23 June 2010 - 15:06

by VomRuiz on 23 June 2010 - 21:06
Isn't that crazy?! If you're interested here is the link
www.akc.org/news/index.cfm
This is old, it was passed and they are taking it seriously. This part was shocking too
•All puppies or kittens born to dogs and cats that have not been spayed/neutered as required will be forfeited and may be given to the local shelter for adoption
Overwhelm the already overwhelmed shelters and rescues and then pretend to feel bad when many are euthanized!
Stacy
by jayne241 on 24 June 2010 - 13:06
"•All puppies or kittens born to dogs and cats that have not been spayed/neutered as required will be forfeited and may be given to the local shelter for adoption"
Um... aren't ALL puppies and kittens born to dogs and cats that have not been spayed/neutered?
Are there puppies or kittens who are not born to dogs and cats? Or are there neutered and spayed dogs and cats having puppies and kittens???
The miracles of modern science!
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top