vetrg

The drops (tropicamide) that are used to dilate the pupils for examination are not known to have any effects on pregnancy. Due to the topical administration the amount systemically absorbed is minute

I worked with police dogs in the UK while the local force was trialling Belgian Shepherds. The officers commented that because they were smaller, although great at their jobs, they felt that they had less "threat value" (than say a 40kg long haired GSD) so were forced to actually commit to sending the dog in to attack more often, which would often lead to counter claims from the offender for bite wounds! Having said that, their best display dogs were all belgians because they felt they were better able to turn it on/ off in the appropriate situations. They used to come and do a display at the charity dog show I was involved with and their control over the dogs was amazing.

I will wait for the brickbats to be thrown however: here it goes. There has been no large scale study to show that vaccination causes disease. The greatest step forward in medicine and disease prevention was, and still is, vaccination. We live in a smug post vaccination world and enjoy its benefits. I have watched dogs die from leptospirosis, parvovirus and distemper- all of which were in unvaccinated dogs. If you titre test your dogs then you can chose to vaccinate or not. Otherwise vaccination schedules should be adhered to as per manufacturers guidelines. Had this dog been vaccinated yearly- was it due a vaccine? This was a 17 year old dog- it is going to die from something. Why blame vacciantion- might have stolen some grapes, might have drunk antifreeze, might be old and wearing out. Older dogs have reduced active immune response, there is some debate about whether we should increase the vaccine schedule in older dogs for some antigens. Give me a break and speak to some of the older vets (not many left now) who have dealt with parvo and distemper outbreaks prior to vaccination and ask them how many think vaccination is a bad idea.

Dry eye in most dogs is a due to an immume mediated destruction of the tear glands. It can also be neurological in origin (loss of nerve supply to the tear glands) or congenital. There is believed to be an inherited component in the predisposition of some breeds to develop dry eye. The treatments of choice are cyclosporin (as made up drops or Optimmune ointment) or Tacrolimus. These will stimulate the glands to produce more tears and also help to reverse the immune destruction of the glands (if caught early enough). These may be supplemented by topical lubricants and false tears. Redirection of the salivary duct from the mouth is used in cases which have failed to respond to medical management. Untreated dry eye will lead to corneal scarring, opacity, irritation and possible ulceration with evential blindness resulting. Dry eye is an extremely uncomfortable condition so effective treatment should be instigated as soon as possible. Long term managment with just lubricants usually fails as they are not applied frequently enough to keep the cornea wet. Treatment in all cases is ongoing.

Yep. Why don't they want to go via the ACES eye scheme? any testing is good but if the data is not in a nationally collated scheme with some guaranteed level of consistancy applied, then the benefit is limited to the tested dog, not the breed. Just interested in why you don't like the scheme.

The data that I have seen from ACES gives the disease as a percentage of submissions so that should aim to give a prevalance. This may be skewed by who submits dogs for testing, as some breeders are very keen on testing while others are not, so some bloodlines may be over represented but this can only be overcome by a greater take up of the scheme.

To answer questions like this we would encourage yearly screening under the ACES (australian canine eye scheme), even in breeds with few eye issues. This allow trends to be monitored and emerging diseases to be identified. Some breed societies use the data generated well, others appear lacklustre in this area. ACES is due to go online soon to allow the data to be more easily used.

I use the results of drug testing on animals every day in my practice. Working in a specialist branch of the profession where drugs are rarely specifically licensed (and therefore safety tested in animals) the 'byproduct' of human testing is that it does provide useful safety and efficacy data enabling me to use human drugs 'off label'. Careful what you wish for- no animal testing means no safety data for these drugs in animals (however useful or not that data is for human extrapolation).

Bruce has retired from clinical work but is doing a FANTASTIC job as liason and organiser for the ACES (Australian Canine Eye Scheme).

Having had a run of glaucoma dogs my cunning plan is to find a cure by christmas and get a Nobel prize- will that do?

I suspect you won't get many replies as it's rarely done in dogs,more in horses but still uncommon. We'll talk when you are next in or give me a bell.

Small animal vets won't keep tetanus antitoxin as it would go out of date. Horse vets will have some. Dogs are relatively resistant to tetanus however, the risk of tetanus depends in part on soil type and how long it can survive. Some soil types (and my vague recollection is that clay soils are the worst) have a MUCH higher tetanus contamination rate than others. All the dogs I have treated have done well (n=2) compared to horses.

"Of greater concern, the misuse of antibiotics is morally indefensible because of the risk of bacterial resistance." Thank you Dazla! I have made this point before about Angel Eyes only to have people saying it's the only thing that works. I spend a lot of time at work explaining why I won't give antibiotics randomly for diseases I do not believe are bacterial. Rational use of antibiotics is use of the correct drug, appropriate for the condition, at the correct dose, for the correct duration. I can't understand why people would chose to have their dog in long term, low dose antibiotics to counter a cosmetic issue. Many of the show animals will place and win and get used at stud while on Angel Eyes thus perpetuating the problem. Perhaps we should attemp to breed lines with more functional tear ducts?

We certainly see affected ACDs in Melbourne also

www.aht.org.uk They also have a useful section on the website of frequently asked questions

Definitely a good time to go, especially if the ulcer is deep enough to see with the naked eye.

If he has distichia (extra eyelashes) some will be present all the time but these rarely cause ulceration just irritation. If he has an ectopic cilia (single hair/ clump of hairs that comes out on the inside of the eyelid these pretty much always cause ulcers. Just like any hair they grow, sit there for a bit, fall out, rest then regrow. If there is not irritation and the ulcer has healed I would hang fire to take him to the specialist until he is sore again as they won't see the hair if it isn't there to be seen! Any ulcer that hasn't healed in 7 days either has an underlying cause that is still present or is "indolent" and may benefit from specialist examination. Indolent ulcers woiuld be REALLY uncommon in a 2 years old dog, they are associated with middle age. I would definately be looking for the ectopic cilia/ FB in this dog

Acorns in small dogs are just big enough to cuase an obstruction. In large quantities they are also toxic and can cause GI signs and renal failure. Best avoided.

In an older dog we can see corneal infiltrates of lipid/ calcium as part of the ageing process or a evidence of a systemic disease such as Cushing's disease. They would rarely be calcium alone unless the dog has had a previous parotid duct transposiion for dry eye treatment. They can be irritant in the cornea and they can rapidly degenerate leaving a large, deep ulcer. We would routinely put these dogs on long term cyclosporin which can help control the lipid deposition and generally promote corneal heath in these aged patients. In the event of an ulcer doxycycline is useful for its multiple corneal effects but especially for its calcium binding properties.

If she does it again it would be worth comparing the pulses in both her hind legs: cats and horses with arterial blockage looks similar to that. Would be very unusual though.

Cherry eye is a prolapse of the nictitans gland (tear gland of the third eyelid). This gland produces between 30-50% of the aqueous part of the tear film (depending whose paper you read). The gland is usually held in position by a ligament and in some dogs the ligament is slack/ absent allowing prolapse of the gland. On no account should the gland be removed- Cherry eye will often occurs in breeds with a high incidence of dry eye and removal of the gland means that there is less glandular tissue a. to produce tears in the first place and b. respond to treatment. While tha gland is prolapsed it is under some stress and inflammatory changes may occur that will damage the gland. If the gland just pops in and out and is easily manually replaced the surgery may be avoided. If the gland prolapses and stays out it sould be surgically replaced to maintain glandular function. This should either be done by an ophthalmology specialist or an experienced surgoen as it is a fiddly surgery with potential complications. The giant breed dogs with droopy eyelids typicaly have the highest complication rate due to their poor lid support/ conformation

I sort of think you are missing the point. Ethical breeding, protecting bloodlines etc etc etc. All of this is stated all the time but - please bear with me because I do understand all of those points of view, and accept them as valid- if you consider the point of view of the general public, do you not see that all of this comes over as a closed, elitist, self protecting "club". They think- Why should I not breed from my dog because you tell me I can't? I can breed my horse, my cow, my sheep. How do you get to stop me doing what I want from a decision you made several years ago on an 8 week old pup? I have asked for advice and I just get told- you aren't well educated enough to decide on whether you can breed a dog? Why should I have to BUY a pup from the repeat mating when I want to breeed one from my dog and give them free to my friends? I don't want to do it for the money not to turn my dog into a puppy mill. This is not encouraging someone to be interested in the breed. Please try to restrain the vials of vitriol that you are now planning to throw at the screen. I am trying to present the thoughts of a non showing/ non dog breeding member of the public. I have been asked this in my clinic, and having just examined a dog that I felt was a fit healthy specimen of the breed (no idea about "breed standard" though) I had no answer. Especially as the breed standards in some breeds hardly encourage the breeding of healthy stock in the first place (although hopefully that is changing). Please don't also post how healthy YOUR breed is- we all know the breeds that have ingrained issues.

Playing devil's advocate.......... As people have said, what makes a good dog is somewhat a personal opinion. If it was not discussed at length at the time of purchase (please bear that in mind) when I buy a pup, and it turns out a nice dog, great at its job (being a pet), good conformation, no health issues BUT is on the limited register, why should the breeder get to say I can't have a litter from my dog. I would like a pup, a couple of my friends would like a pup so I can get homes for them all. I would like to mate it to a pedigree and register the pups. I am asking the dog's breeder for advice for a sire.I am being reasonable in all my requests. If the breeder IN THEIR OPINION doesn't think "it's good enough" to be on the main register and refuses to change it, are you not encouraging me to say "nuts to the lot of you, I will mate it to the unregisterd dog down the road!" Pedigree dog breeding is the ONLY animal where the original breeder gets to dictate the use of the animal after its purchase. I suspect it is actually on dodgy legal ground as the dog is a possession, legally, of the owner and unless there is a signed contract stipulating no breeding I suspect you cannot refuse to change the register status of the dog. I also wonder even if there is a written contract that a good lawyer couldn't challenge it on the grounds that noone can know at 8 weeks old what the dog will turn into. Just a thought.

"Desensitisation to animal suffering goes a long way to explaining the attitude of vets who would rather see a dog dead than bred." John Davey Really? That would explain the high suicide rate, the alcoholism rate (that runs second only to pub landlords) and the 80% divorce rate in vets then. They are all compensating for being such callous, heartless desensitised bastards.

I qualified in the UK and there is no non-recovery surgery practical done in the UK (to my knowledge) and there hasn't been for some time. Most of us wehn students gathered out surgical experience when seeing practice with vets in the university holidays. You picked your practice with care and hoped they would let you do lots of stuff (under supervision). When you graduated you selected your first job with care in the hope that you took a job with a supportive practice that would allow you to develop your skills with help available if needed. Would everyone in my year have given their eye teeth to have access to non recovery surgeries to practice? Hell yes! We were all very jealous of the amount of surgery time the USA students get. Were we bad vets on graduation? No just inexperienced. Some people will never be good surgeons, some people are naturally talented, all get better with practice. The people on this forum who "wouldn't let some new grad loose on my dogs" must appreciate we all started out as needing exposure to surgery. Vets in the UK have the highest rate of suicide of any profession bar none (I can't speak for other countries). Reducing the pressure on new graduates by allowing them to be confident at basic surgeries at graduation can only help to reduce this awful statistic. Every vet I know knows someone who has comitted suicide. These dogs are not beloved pets with all the added pressure that entails. They are anaesthetised, operated on and then euthanased. Theye were going to be euthanased anyway- let some other animal benefit from the death of these poor dogs.