Mum to Emma

Thanks very much for the suggestion..I think I came across recommendations for the Monash vets on some previous threads I looked at as well. Cheaper is good also Don't go looking for them there - all you'll find is McDonalds! The clinic has moved to the south side of Dandenong Road between Clayton Road and Huntingdale Road (next to the football oval). IMHO, I wouldn't call them cheap. A standard consultation was $58 about 12 months ago. My guess is that it's around $60 now. They do, however, work long hours (they're there from 8 in the morning to 8 at night) but unless you can make an appointment a week ahead, you'll only see the junior vets after hours.

But having said that please don't listen to the food Nazi's. If the wallet and lifestyle necessitates your dog having a supermarket diet, then go for it. As long as you include regular bones for their teeth, you'll both have a loving, long-lasting relationship.

One time I opened a can of Nature's Gift which had "missed out" on the garlic which is obviously used to disguise the smell. Believe me - it would put you off Nature's Gift for life! It was vile! It smelled like rotten cooking oil. My dogs love the Coles brand Banquet with chicken and salmon. Other than that, the (expensive) Hills prescription diet is excellent. It has the texture of a loaf and the ID variety in particular is a great alternative to the old 'chicken and rice' diarrhea diet. As an emergency, I keep a tin of Pedigree natural tinned with vegetables in the pantry with the Banquet. Any supermarket tinned food I would only give as a last resort. Particularly the tinned varieties directed at larger dogs. The smaller foiled "My Dog"(?) varieties may be OK.

I was at Pets at Home, Chadstone, today. They had big bags but no small ones. Apparently (according to Pet Stock in Ormond), there was a problem with shipment from the US several weeks ago, so it is in short supply across Melbourne.

I have been dispensed medications from both a veterinary specialist and general vet that have passed the use-by date. In the case of the vet specialist I only found out by accident when they showed me the larger bottle they dispensed them from (Trental - a "human" medication) and with the general vet, I asked for fresh medication to be ordered despite their protestations that it would still be OK even though the expiry date had passed. (Considering what I was paying for it....) And, no, these weren't "hack" vets. In both cases, many on this Board would know them well.

I TOTALLY agree. If your vet doesn't resolve a problem after 2 (at most 3) consults - and when I say 'resolve' I mean the dog is starting to show signs of improvement - ask for a referal to a vet specialist. I have had this happen to me 3 times, most significantly with my whippet who had to be PTS late last year. My vet thought the collection of fluid under the jaw was allergies, in fact it was a tumour. Consults at specialists cost twice as much but you'll have an answer, and appropriate treatment, in half the time.

The vet did say he x-ray'd it.

Thanks for your replies. Do you think the best approach is to keep the pad soft (if not with a poultice, perhaps with vaseline) with no pavement walks for at least another day? We tried a slow walk around the block yesterday, but the pad seemed sorer later in the day.

Last Thursday my whippet had a small piece of glass removed from from his front toe pad and has been left with a 3mm fine cut and small hole where the fragment of glass was. It didn't bleed during the surgery and the vet didn't bandage the foot (this dog doesn't like having coats on, much less foot bandages!). The vet said just to leash walk him for a few days before letting him run. But it's now Saturday and he still limps slightly on hard surfaces. How long should it take before the pad is painless? There's certainly no sign of swelling/infection and I rinse the pad after he's been out in the backyard. An x-ray was done at the time to make sure that all glass fragments were removed. Am I being impatient with the healing process? The cut reminds me of a paper cut - and we all know how painfull THOSE are!

I highly recommend Animal Eye Care in Darling Road, East Malvern. Even before I (or should I say Emma) became a client, they gave me over the phone emergency advice on an Easter Saturday evening and have been wonderful with her treatment for lens luxation. Your dog is young and Optimune is a very expensive ointment, so DEFINITELY get advice from a specialist before consigning the dog to a lifetime of treatment. General vets often have little experience with eye conditions and don't have the equipment to accurately diagnose a condition. (For example, my vet - who has 20+ years experience told me Emma's eye cloudiness/inflammation was due to a scratch. In fact, when I took her to the specialist the next day, her lens had luxated which is an emergency situation.) And another experienced vet had years earlier said my other whippet was showing signs of early pannus. But another vet a couple of months later couldn't see any sign of it! BTW, increasing distress when applying eyedrops in an otherwise placid/compliant dog can mean they are causing discomfort. Which is another reason to see a specialist as they may have alternative treatments. It won't be cheap - but you'll get a quick and ACCURATE diagnosis, which is best for you and your dog. Feel free to PM me for more information. Good luck!

AVA only has control over paid up members. More than 2/3 of the vets in this country refuse to join that organisation. So here's another novel approach - only use the services of an AVA member. Goodluck finding one. That's interesting. I wonder why? Because vets don't like being told what to do? Perhaps because the AVA doesn't approve of hidden charges and supports full cost disclosure? you're kidding right? I still don't understand what the problem is. What you guys are asking, if for vets to reduce the mark up on their products they sell. The mark-ups have been calculated to ensure they earn a profit. Lose this profit, and your local vet goes out of business. If this thread hasn't gone kaput by tomorrow, I'll let you know what the REAL mark up is on certain things first hand, not from 'your mates'. I'm genuinely curious - why is it that GPs, lawyers, builders, plumbers, electricians etc etc are keen to join the relevant governing body that endorses their work and in return requires that some guidelines be followed, whereas vets are NOT willing to do so? because it costs them a fortune to join and they don't get anything out of it! Isn't membership of professional associations tax deductible? Hmmm ... maybe the AVA should advertise that their members don't price gouge on medication!

AVA only has control over paid up members. More than 2/3 of the vets in this country refuse to join that organisation. So here's another novel approach - only use the services of an AVA member. Goodluck finding one. That's interesting. I wonder why? Because vets don't like being told what to do? Perhaps because the AVA doesn't approve of hidden charges and supports full cost disclosure? you're kidding right? I still don't understand what the problem is. What you guys are asking, if for vets to reduce the mark up on their products they sell. The mark-ups have been calculated to ensure they earn a profit. Lose this profit, and your local vet goes out of business. If this thread hasn't gone kaput by tomorrow, I'll let you know what the REAL mark up is on certain things first hand, not from 'your mates'. I'm genuinely curious - why is it that GPs, lawyers, builders, plumbers, electricians etc etc are keen to join the relevant governing body that endorses their work and in return requires that some guidelines be followed, whereas vets are NOT willing to do so?

AVA only has control over paid up members. More than 2/3 of the vets in this country refuse to join that organisation. So here's another novel approach - only use the services of an AVA member. Goodluck finding one. That's interesting. I wonder why? Because vets don't like being told what to do? Perhaps because the AVA doesn't approve of hidden charges and supports full cost disclosure?

That's a novel approach, Paula. I was thinking exactly the same thing. So owning and caring for an animal should be a privilege only offered to the wealthy? The pensioner who lives from one pension cheque to the next isn't entitled to the company of a pet because they can't afford the inflated medication charges that vets think are their due "because they have a university degree"? We are not arguing here about the consultation fees of vets and vet specialists. They should be (and are) on par with GPs and specialist medical practitioners. We are debating the justification of charging inflated prices for medication simply to shore up the bottom line. If nothing else this leaves vets wide open to accusations of over medicating our pets. If some vets can't make the living they aspire to by such back-door methods, perhaps they should think of getting out of the business. After all, at least in the cities, there seems to be more vets than GPs. Unfortunatey Mum to Emma this has been stated several times and they just done get it. Charge the true cost of the service, I have said this numerous times. I do not have a problem with vet bills, and was about to have my dogs cateracts removed costing $4000. I had the total costing of the procedure prior and the drugs were a minor component. You failed to comment on the people who have a consultation, and then return for repeat prescriptions. Why should Joe Blow pay more for his consult, to pay for the many clients that come back each month to stock up on arthritis treatments, or their atopy meds? We have the mark up on the drugs, to keep the consult fee down. As has been said before, not everyone that comes in for a consult goes away with drugs!! Actually, 9 times out of 10 you do! If vets didn't dispense medications (or couldn't - as apparently is the case in the UK? Pls correct me if I'm wrong) in the same way that GPs can't, they would be justified in charging a higher consultation fee. Why do you think it is that GP's can't sell you medication themselves? Because they would be seen to be profiting from dispensing often unjustified medicines. This means that we only take medicine when it is necessary. Of course this doesn't apply to all vets, and probably only a small number of rogue money-hungry ones, but it is the duty of the Australian Veterinary Association to protect patients (of the four legged kind) from profiteering practices who tip their scales in favour of money over animal welfare.

That's a novel approach, Paula. I was thinking exactly the same thing. So owning and caring for an animal should be a privilege only offered to the wealthy? The pensioner who lives from one pension cheque to the next isn't entitled to the company of a pet because they can't afford the inflated medication charges that vets think are their due "because they have a university degree"? We are not arguing here about the consultation fees of vets and vet specialists. They should be (and are) on par with GPs and specialist medical practitioners. We are debating the justification of charging inflated prices for medication simply to shore up the bottom line. If nothing else this leaves vets wide open to accusations of over medicating our pets. If some vets can't make the living they aspire to by such back-door methods, perhaps they should think of getting out of the business. After all, at least in the cities, there seems to be more vets than GPs.

Seriously - how many people shop around for the cheapest prescription? You spend the extra couple of dollars driving to the suburb 6 suburbs away. I agree PPS. Value the relationship with your vet and it is reciprocal. They are not so worried when I see another vet for anal glands though! And there are always going to be people who whinge and moan and focus on the dollar figure and not the service that comes with when they should be grateful that they have that person on their team doing everything they can to help your dog get better including leaving their family during the night several times to go and check on your dog, going to lectures in their personal time to learn more about your dog's condition and spending time just hanging out with your dog when they're seriously ill just so they're not alone. You're just SO missing the point of this thread! Vets should disclose what they charge. If they're such brilliant vets and have such good relationships with their clients, 9 times out of 10 those clients will stay with them regardless of the cost. You honestly believe I should have been supporting a vet specialist practice to the sum of $550 year because of their inflated medication prices? When their high re-examination fees already takes into account their specialist expertise? Oh, and if you're not interested in walking 100m to save 100% on a medication, good for you. Perhaps you should buy it at the cheaper pharmacy and then give the cost difference to an animal charity.

Assuming the drug is also prescribed for human use and available at a pharmacy (and that's all we're discussing here - as far as I know chemists don't sell animal remedy only medication), why don't you just give them a prescription and tell them to get the drug themselves? Not all animal medications are available through a pharmacy, youmay be surprised to know that some are only registered for animal use, your fix it all plan has holes, try again. That's absolutely right. I said that. Read my quoted post again. This debate is about medicines that ARE available outside a veterinary practice ie that are NOT for animal only use.

Good to see where your priorities are (not)! Forget the animal, eh? And the people who only consider costs when seeking treating for their pets are thinking of the animal Did anyone here who is questioning vet medication charges, say their only consideration is cost??? Would I have spent about $1800 for an MRI for my dog if my only consideration was cost???

Actually, supermarkets do charge more in wealthier suburbs. That's a well known fact. Shopped at the Toorak Safeway lately??

Assuming the drug is also prescribed for human use and available at a pharmacy (and that's all we're discussing here - as far as I know chemists don't sell animal remedy only medication), why don't you just give them a prescription and tell them to get the drug themselves? Would people pay the costs of medication if it was not covered under the PBS ? Fido Jones is not on anyone's medicare card and medications would not be available to Fido at the same rate as you would expect to pay for youself. I paid the pharmacy price for Trental (it's not on the PBS), Maxidex is below the $32 threshold, as is Trusopt which Emma is on for the rest of her life.

Major international law firm - did not realise there were any of those (jurisdictional/ different legal system issues and all). What you tell clients is part of your professional obligation on costs disclosure. You are required (by law) to disclose your costs. The client can still instruct you to do the work or go elsewhere. No comparison between lawyers and vets... To clarify (since I obviously need to) an international law firm has offices in a number of countries <sigh>. The people I'm taking about are those who get the firm's name from the phone book and call up unannounced. That's long before the engagement letter stage which includes full cost disclosure and estimate of total fees. Clients only receive that once we agree to take on the matter. Perhaps vets should be forced to disclose their costs and charges too, eh? At least make them readily available without the client having to ask. oh for goodness sake. So you think we should have a folder in the waiting room stating all our fees, costs of foods, drugs, surgery etc etc etc? Or when I greet people at the door, should I have a mini consult with them so I can give them a rough quote of how much their visit is going to be? The answer to all of this is simple. Vet fees are what they are. If you think its too expensive, then don't have pets. People really are becoming so obsessed with themselves. The 'need to know' everything is just insane. You should be greatful that your vet is a 'one stop shop' where you can get a consult and treatment all at the same time. It's not different to taking yourselves to the doctor. You don't know what script the doctor is going to give you when you see him. Nor do you know how much it's going to be when you then have to go to the pharmacy to get it filled. Yep, your antibiotics might be cheaper than your dogs, but that's not the vets fault, that's the drug manufacturers. But YOU have the chance to shop around for the cheapest way to fill that prescription, or not get it filled at all. Whereas the vet gives you no option (hence the suspicion over the high prices). Any why shouldn't vets be open to the disclosure obligaions that are imposed on other professions? Where not talking here about cortisone injections, IV fluids etc etc. We're talking about medication that is to be used after the pet goes home and is available on prescription from a pharmacy. When Emma was on Trental I was paying about $1 a day for the chemist medication. The specialist was charging the pills at $2.50 a day. That's about an extra $550 a year! And do you know what an annual check up with the specialist involved (required for a repeat prescription)? A quick glance a her ear tips, and a $85 bill. I had no problem with the consultation fee. I'm paying for his specialist expertise. I DO have a problem with the way the hidden extra charge of $550 a year they tried to impose until I insisted on a prescription.

If that was what was needed, then I'd be fine with that, because I needed to call an electrician to use his skills and expertise to do a job that I was unable to do myself. Poodle - can I ask what you are basing your mark up examples on? Are you comparing the cost of the same eye ointment from a chemist and a vet, and concluding a huge mark-up on the vets side? Without working in the industry yourself, where are you getting this information from to make these assumptions about massive mark ups? Or is it all second or third hand information? As stated in an earlier reply I have friends in the industry. I note that no one has disputed the quoted cost price figures to Vets. which cost price figures??? still waiting?? I am not disputing the cost vets pay for the medicine. But where it is available to the patient at a cheaper price (such as a chemist) vets should make that option known and available, and not profit from people's ignorance.

Good to see where your priorities are (not)! Forget the animal, eh?

Assuming the drug is also prescribed for human use and available at a pharmacy (and that's all we're discussing here - as far as I know chemists don't sell animal remedy only medication), why don't you just give them a prescription and tell them to get the drug themselves?

Major international law firm - did not realise there were any of those (jurisdictional/ different legal system issues and all). What you tell clients is part of your professional obligation on costs disclosure. You are required (by law) to disclose your costs. The client can still instruct you to do the work or go elsewhere. No comparison between lawyers and vets... To clarify (since I obviously need to) an international law firm has offices in a number of countries <sigh>. The people I'm taking about are those who get the firm's name from the phone book and call up unannounced. That's long before the engagement letter stage which includes full cost disclosure and estimate of total fees. Clients only receive that once we agree to take on the matter. Perhaps vets should be forced to disclose their costs and charges too, eh? At least make them readily available without the client having to ask.