petaj

I find Optimum Macronutrient Profile excellent. It was so concentrated I had to switch from normal adult mix to healthy weight management, as my border collie was still slightly above ideal weight even on less than a cup a day (which, while being very affordable, didn't suit me as I wanted her tummy to be better filled and I was worried it wasn't enough bulk to keep her gut healthy and express her anal glands). I wouldn't at all call it substandard especially since they work with Waltham to bring some of the newest health benefits into the nutrition, and it has been tested complete and balanced. I've also never heard of questionable research techniques such as The Iams/Eukanuba company have been accused of (yes, I know that was by PETA and I have read IAMS rebuttal page, but I still find the response unsatisfactory IMHO). I have never tried Hills and do respect them (one of the companies that spoke out against some of IAMs research methods), but I also hold a lot of respect for Optimum for bringing a higher quality kibble into supermarkets affordably, after all not all pet owners know they should ordinarily be going to a vet or specialist pet store to pay $10/kg if they want their dog to be healthy. But then I also found PAL Pedigree Performance to be quite good nutritionally as well, which some might disagree on. I have tried a range of super premium foods trying to find something high quality with high palatability, and these are the two kibble choices best accepted by my dog. Apart from training treats etc I do feed my dog solely on Optimum kibble, and she does have heaps of energy when appropriate (she is a lovely, quiet dog in the house when I have to study). I have just started her on an essential fatty acid supplement because she has mild atopic dermatitis (which incidentally was most likely her reason for scooting, not anal gland probs like I thought the small amount of kibble was causing) and the vet/lecturer said that any diet would be lower in EFA levels than what would be better for handling her condition. If she needed a prescription diet I would obviously change to Hills as this is their area, but for now I am more than happy with Optimum. ;)

wow, so jealous. I'm studying vet at the Uni of Qld and everyone complains that there is not enough behaviour stuff in the course. I think behaviour and training is one of the most important things and I can't understand why we don't do more of it when a major reason that dogs get dumped and put down is behavioural problems. We also don't do a lot of first aid. We do the basic bandaging stuff but I'd bet that if a dog choked away from a clinic/surgery most new graduates wouldn't have a clue what to do. Maybe one day after I graduate I'll make it to the course, 'til then I'll just have to glare all green-eyed! lol

Stevie'sGreat: Like I said in my post above, marrowbones can get dangerous once the cartilage ends have been chewed off and dogs with bones should really be supervised. There are a few things you could try to slow down the progress your dog makes on the bone before you get home, for example in summer you could freeze it in a block of ice and let the dog entertain and cool itself by licking until the bone is freed. Then of course there are the other usual suggestions for entertaining dogs eg kongs, reward balls, other chew treats/toys etc. You can get marrow treats if you don't want to deprive your dog of the taste. I would say the limit on the number of bones to be fed would depend on how well you are able to incorporate them into a nutritionally complete and balanced diet for your dog that maintains it at the right weight (ie don't let their appetite be spoiled before good quality dinner and don't let it get tubby on the meat etc - include it in the daily ration allowance). Also watch the state of the teeth for excessive wearing or chipping.

Vets usually don't recommend bones that have been chopped. The best kind are whole bones, preferrably marrowbones/femurs as these have rounded cartilage ends. The teeth-cleaning action comes from the dog digging its teeth in and tearing at the meat - it acts like floss. The bones should be removed once the cartilage has been chewed off the ends as dogs can go fanatical trying to get to the marrow and can really slice their gums up. If your dog takes too long to eats fresh bones this way and they spoil and become expensive, you might want to check if you can find these bones at your pet store - sometimes you can get them dried so that flies don't want to lay their eggs in the meat, etc. There doesn't have to be a lot of meat on there. This stripping action is the best way to clean high up on the canine tooth. My dog eats all kinds of teeth-cleaning chews but since the butcher we go to has been insisting on only suppling chopped bones her canines have become rather grubby. Note that no actual bone material is ingested when given the way I've described.

I know this is gross and I have never tested the theory myself, but I read in what I considered overall to be a fairly reputable training guide that you can gain the leader of the pack position non-physically using urine! Male dogs especially like marking their territory, and I read that if NILIF technique isn't working then maybe you could try putting your own urine in a spray bottle and marking points in the yard at a higher level than the dog can mark. Dogs can somehow associate the scent of urine to people they haven't even met yet apparently, I have heard stories where trainers have gone into yards of dogs they haven't met yet when they were absent and sprayed points, allowed the dogs to smell the yard when he wasn't there and when he arrived a few days later the dogs treated him as top of the hierarchy (I think they were usually very aggressive or something). Perhaps the dog respects you out on the lead but not in "his" territory? Or because you are better able to be consistent on the lead, or perhaps a combination. I wish I could remember the name of the author of the training book, a lot of what he wrote about pretty well describes your dog. The techniques I tried on my dog didn't really work, but I think that was just because my dog doesn't learn that way and had very little experience with any form of training when we got her. Best of luck.

You have nothing to apologise for, Abergavenny! I never took offence to anything you said I was just saying that I am worried about how I'll do when I graduate, because I don't feel that the course is really preparing us very well, and I can definitely understand that pet owners would have similar concerns. And you can get people in the course that for instance are solely interested in treating cattle etc, but employment may lead them elsewhere and they can still end up handling everything like cattle! The stories I could tell so far ... I never meant to make everyone feel like they had to walk on eggshells!

I know this does not contribute to the topic at hand, I just wanted to say that I never meant to offend anyone with the comments I posted. I'm sorry if it came off this way, it is hard to always express things properly on the net and I would hate for people to feel that I am at all contributing to unfriendliness in a community. I must obviously have a habit of taking comments the wrong way so I just wanted to apologise I would say teenagers don't make good vets, since it takes 5 years to complete the course, lol! Like noisymina said, manner is definitely important in judging experience as we have only about 4 highschool-leavers and several 30 and 40+ year olds in third year that are gonna be just as inexperienced. I honestly wouldn't want to take my pet to a new graduate - I've heard lots of horror stories (probably why the people telling them are now lecturers, lol)! The pet owners really suffer from the current vet curriculum - instead of doing more useful things like studying behaviour to try to prevent so many dogs getting dumped etc, they make us sit exams for important things like farming economics Apology and rant done! Cheers

I agree it seemed inflammatory like the vet said noisymina I also hope I didn't come off as the know-it-all gal though either. It just worries me occasionally when people on the forum give confidence in a diagnosis with very limited history. I appreciate that people on here often are incredibly knowledgeable and very helpful to other owners, I was just trying to say that diagnosis is tricky and probably best done by someone that can see and investigate the lesion further etc. We had one girl in college get sick and when people told others what her symptoms were everyone was certain it was meningococcal infection. It turned out to be a bladder infection! Glad the new vet is working out.

Howdy! Just came to wish best of luck for your dog. Did the vet insert a needle into the lump, or prepare a smear or anything to look at under the microscope? I would have thought cytology would have been pretty routine for a skin lump (but then I just learned how to do it so I'm probably super keen, some vets may not do it because you can't always get a proper diagnosis and it can leave you feeling a bit dumb!). I wouldn't be too quick in deciding what kind of cells could be causing the growth if it wasn't entirely inflammatory though, even if this sounds like a common presentation for a histiocytoma - but then I am still in uni and have no clinical experience in dermatology. Best of luck. Also a bit off-topic: Just wondering if it was known why potato is bad for dogs' stomachs? I haven't researched this at all, I was only honestly wondering because it is one of the carbohydrate sources recommended in our nutrition lectures to give dogs when they have upset tummies. But then I have heard other people say that it was bad also, just wanted to know if people knew why/what was bad about it. Would look it up myself but I shouldn't even be here now - exam Saturday

Just had a chat with a vet that seemed pretty on the ball. Apparently Proheart 6 in America has a different slow-release mechanism than the Proheart 12 used in Australia (despite being from the same company), and that no ill effects have been reported to the control board in Australia. 500 deaths in the US (albeit out of millions of dogs), and it is yet to be seen if the Australian version is truly safer or if it just hasn't been administered to such vast number of dogs to gauge similar reactions. He feels safe using it on his dogs.

well, something of other companies that I do know about is that Hills and Purina are both against a certain protein test using chicks that Iams does use. Both claim it to be needless and cruel and dispute the relevance to the GIT of dogs and cats. Hills instead has some kind of computer analysis system in place. I'm not sure if your link gave that info, I didn't check it out yet as I've already heard about Iams from another source. So, IMHO boycotting Iams is well justified.

DEC does have a wide safety margin for toxicity, but if dogs have circulating microfilariae and DEC is administered it is possible for for them to develop hypovolaemic shock. Dangers are possible with any drug, especially since these studies would probably only cover correct administration (ie after veterinary tests for microfilariae), which may not be the case as the tablets can be acquired from a supermarket without any advice being offered. I am not trying to sell one method over another, as I have not researched the dangers of monthly dose forms and nothing of the sort has been mentioned during my parasitology course. I just think each person has to decide based on their lifestyle which will give the best overall protection. Obviously many people here are dog enthusiasts and will take the responsibility to ensure that the tablets are given daily (even if left for carers to do during a vacation, etc). However not all people that choose to own pets are this responsible or fully understand the implications of skipping treatments, etc. In these cases monthly and other treatment options may be the best option for the dog's welfare as it ensures a higher likelihood that they will not become afflicted with the disease. I also would have thought the relative affordability of daily treatments would make this option appealing and so it would still have a consumer niche, but it is bitter as a syrup and not all are capable of administering tablets to their dogs. As I said before, I have not researched the reports of the dangers, nor has it been raised as a concern in my vet school, but the event (eg death) only has to occur once in one patient for it to be listed as a possible side effect. This may or may not include any unique individual reactions. Now this may be enough to convince anyone (for the obvious reason that they love their dog) that dosage forms other than daily are just not worth the risk, but on a wider public scale there are many factors that would influence choice of dosage form, not the least of which being owner compliance to proper administration. I do agree that it would be a pity for any heartworm preventative options to be removed from the market, because the more opions that are made available hopefully corresponds to the likelihood that an owner will find an option suitable for them. However all treatment forms have their merits and downfalls, and in my opinion there probably isn't one option that is more responsible than another. I am not saying that this is what you were trying to imply, and I think you are right that this treatment form is one which is valid for consideration. I just wanted to offer the information that I was aware of and some possible reasons that people choose the options they do, that may not be just for convenience.

Do you know if there is anything similar for Qlders?

well, the brain is a tricky thing. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Yeah, seizures can happen in many different conditions but the brain lesion that may have resulted from the condition is what causes the seizure. Unless the neurology professors were wrong (not necessarily being a smartass here, I don't always agree with my lecturers). Just in case that comment earlier was aimed at me.

Yep, seizures indicate a neurological lesion in the brain (supratentorial) - this is a problem that needs to be dealt with by a vet and not here ;) hope things work out

The daily heartworm tablets kill heartworm larvae at certain stages in the life cycle only, and so if there has been a period for which you have not been consistent with the treatment adult heartworms could establish and you would need to get your dog tested. If adult heartworms do establish they will start shedding microfilariae after 6 months. The drug in the daily tablets will kill the microfilariae and if this drug is given approximately 25% of dogs that have microfilariae can go into hypovolaemic shock. Other than that, I have no clue why they would say it would slowly poison dogs. Exelpet's intestinal worming tablets contain drugs sufficient enough to kill each type of intestinal worm, but some brands like Drontal combine two chemicals for the treatment of hookworm instead of one, and these drugs are synergistic so that when used together they produce a greater effect than if either drug was used alone. Vets often use this improved efficacy to sell the more expensive tablet and give you a reason to buy from them. In many cases it is beneficial to go to a vet to ensure that you are treating for parasites in the most beneficial way and not in a way likely to either harm your dog or cause drug resistance in the parasites. That said, I use Exelpet! But, in relation to what Steve said, the frequency of treatments has a little more to do with the life cycle stage that is affected and not so much to do with how long the treatment stays in the system, although this is true of some drugs. Only those that kill the mosquitoes are insecticides as heartworms are helminths, and no drug is really any more "natural" than another.

I'd be cautious about vets that say to feed your pets as you would yourself - I am a vet student and something that gets stressed in class is how different their feed requirements etc are and how this is one of the most common mistakes owners make.