Staranais

Happy birthday Mandela

Okay now I'm stumped. Who took any of my comments on this thread as offensive?? I couldn't be bothered reading through the 7 pages of it but am very surprised it was taken this way (if it was). Oh damn, I meant Kavik. I didn't find Kavik offensive. Some people did. I didn't find you offensive either, of course.

Of course it is, but it was just the way in which some of the comments were said that some of us were particularly "sensitive" to. There are plenty of dogs I don't want to own for various reasons, but I wouldn't go and tell the owners those reasons as I'm afraid it would be quite offensive to them! I just reread my first comment in this thread and could see nothing to be sensitive about? I said very diplomatically that I liked a dog at work tht was not a breed I usually considered (there are many breeds I would not own btw, not just Labs!). Kelpie-i I'm sure they will be very happy with his progress I also didn't think Kelpie-i's comments were very offensive. Try owning a bull breed for a while, then you'll get a thick skin about people insulting your dog. Incidentally, Rubystar, where did you get your signature from? It's really nice.

Were these bad reactions as in allergic or autoimmune type reactions to the vaccine, or as in the vaccine not working and the dog getting parvo etc within 3 years? And do you know if they are reactions he's personally seen in practice, or ones that showed up in a trial?

All I can suggest is to try get hold of the package insert for the new and old vaccine, it may tell you how much virus is in your vaccine (it will probably be given in units of TCID50). I suspect the three year licensed vaccine won't have more antigen than the old one, but I don't really know. Also, I'm not sure how much it matters, since live vaccines are designed to replicate in the body anyway (that's why they are so effective at stimulating the immune system), so your dog's immune system is generally exposed to more virus than you actually inject anyway. Edited to add: yes please Stormie, I'd be interested too.

I thought you were training Mandela to do that?

Hi Staranais, I believe that to be the case. Unfortunately when I took him in to have it checked out the vet that did his surgery wasn't working that day, however, the vet I did see said that it is most likely that the anti-inflammatory was injected in that spot. She did say that she has never seen a reaction like this before though. You think this might be the cause?? I don't know, I'm not a real vet yet, and even if I was I wouldn't like to hazard a guess without seeing him in real life. But if the injection was in exactly the same spot as the reaction, that does seem rather suggestive to me that it could be the cause? Glad he's feeling better anyway.

That's not a good response from either vet IMO, because the symptoms do sound similar to GDV, which is a medical emergency - they should have referred you straight away if they had any suspicion it could be that serious. Sounds like the specialist clinic did a good job, though. I too have never heard of liver torsion before. Would be interested to hear what you find out from your research! Good luck to Ruger for his recovery.

Was the wound as big Arty?? My uncle (who is a nurse (for humans though!)) did say that if an injection is given too shallow under the skin or if it's still being injected as the needle is coming out may cause a burn like reaction so it is possible I suppose. Moose is pretty small (only 1.8kg) so I imagine it might be a bit more difficult judging needle depth than in a larger dog. But what do I know??? Glad to hear your boy recovered well. I need to hear these encouraging stories at the moment! The patch on my dog was much bigger than the area on your fella, it would have been 2cm x 4cm easily. It had to be covered because it irritated him so much he licked it which made it worse. At lease your boy's patch is in an area he can't reach! Some anaesthetic drugs have a very high pH so do burn the skin if accidentally injected outside a vein, but I can't imagine they would have been injecting those into his back? They're normally injected directly into a vein on the front leg or hind leg, and that's where you see the reaction if you miss the vein. Is the burn spot in the same place that the vet gave the anti-inflammatory injection, Moosepup?

Yes, that does sound strange. How about a third (specialist's) opinion? Could work out a lot cheaper than an unnecessary operation.

That's great news.

I think many of the replies here do not reflect the true feeling in the general community. I posted this thread as I had a number of people in the general community raise issues with me. Most of the members of this forum have a relationship with their Vet and hence do not have an issue, but there is a greater number out there in the general community that only visit a Vet occasionally and the charges are not transparent. I can see why some people would be confused, but then again you can always ask your vet how the costs break down, if you're confused. Most are happy to explain (you get grumpy bastards in every profession). I had to take my boy cat into the vet late last night, and got charged about $110 for an NSAID, antibiotic shot, and some antibiotic tabs to take home. About half of that was drug cost, which is a large markup. But on the other hand, I thought the appointment charge was a bargain for getting the poor vet out of the house and down to the surgery at that hour (she was cheerful about it too!) So it's swings and roundabouts, I think. You prefer to be charged a minimal mark up for drugs, and a large consultation fee. Others (like Cosmolo) prefer it the other way round. But on average, I'd guess you both pay about the same.

Funny how the real vets/ people in the vet industry in this thread have commented in the same vein then. They do care about treating animals but, and it may come as big surprise to you, that they cannot do this if they can't stay in business. Perhaps I'll go tell my doctor he's not a "real doctor" and he doesn't care, because I know he makes a profit.

Hmmm, fair enough. Tell you what then, you sponsor me and pay my student loan while I work my arse off at vet school for years and years and years, and when I graduate, I'll treat your dog for free. Oh what? I'm supposed to do all the work and get a huge student loan AND not charge you for my services when I graduate? What dream world do you live in? Seriously, I can understand that some people would prefer a lesser mark up on drugs (although 10% is unrealistic I'm afraid) along with a larger charge for a consultation, although I can't see why people think the distinction is so important - the vet has to cover the costs and make a profit somehow, so you'll end up paying about the same either way, whether through drug markup or through higher consultation charges. But the trend of some posters to whinge because vets dare to charge for their services is just ridiculous. When you have to go to the hospital, do you complain because the doctors and surgeons want to be paid for their time? I certainly hope not. Pay peanuts... get monkeys. Diagnosing medical issues, prescribing drugs, and performing surgical operations are actually quite skilled and responsible jobs, you know. I'll be in that, if you pay me a lot more for my service than it is worth, it has taken me 30 plus years to get my knowlage in my business, and to know all the tricks, but it seems to me vets want it their own way...I would like vets to get the fire back in their belly that they had when the came out of UNI, and remember why they became vets in the first place. So making a fair profit so I can pay my loan back, feed my family and buy a house is more than my service is "worth"? Thanks a lot. I rather suspect you may change your mind about how much my service is "worth" when your dog gets bowled by a car or eats some snail bait and suddenly urgently needs veterinary attention. I'm graduating in vet school in 2 1/2 years, after 9 years total of university (ouch), and although I'm itching to graduate and get into practice, talking to people like you is what takes the fire *out* of my belly. The idea of having to deal with clients who whinge behind my back because I and my boss dare to charge them enough money to cover our overheads and (gasp) allow us to make some profit just makes me feel sick, actually. I can't even imagine being rude enough to tell any other professional that they aren't "worth" the hourly rate that they charge. It looks like you will fit very well into the vet industry. please don't contact me. I dont need a bad day. You will rememeber me. Someone has to put you back on the straight and narrow. Firstly you don't listen, and you seem to be getting that additude just right for the job. Why would I contact you? I don't know you from Adam? Paranoid much?

Hmmm, fair enough. Tell you what then, you sponsor me and pay my student loan while I work my arse off at vet school for years and years and years, and when I graduate, I'll treat your dog for free. Oh what? I'm supposed to do all the work and get a huge student loan AND not charge you for my services when I graduate? What dream world do you live in? Seriously, I can understand that some people would prefer a lesser mark up on drugs (although 10% is unrealistic I'm afraid) along with a larger charge for a consultation, although I can't see why people think the distinction is so important - the vet has to cover the costs and make a profit somehow, so you'll end up paying about the same either way, whether through drug markup or through higher consultation charges. But the trend of some posters to whinge because vets dare to charge for their services is just ridiculous. When you have to go to the hospital, do you complain because the doctors and surgeons want to be paid for their time? I certainly hope not. Pay peanuts... get monkeys. Diagnosing medical issues, prescribing drugs, and performing surgical operations are actually quite skilled and responsible jobs, you know. I'll be in that, if you pay me a lot more for my service than it is worth, it has taken me 30 plus years to get my knowlage in my business, and to know all the tricks, but it seems to me vets want it their own way...I would like vets to get the fire back in their belly that they had when the came out of UNI, and remember why they became vets in the first place. So making a fair profit so I can pay my loan back, feed my family and buy a house is more than my service is "worth"? Thanks a lot. I rather suspect you may change your mind about how much my service is "worth" when your dog gets bowled by a car or eats some snail bait and suddenly urgently needs veterinary attention. I'm graduating in vet school in 2 1/2 years, after 9 years total of university (ouch), and although I'm itching to graduate and get into practice, talking to people like you is what takes the fire *out* of my belly. The idea of having to deal with clients who whinge behind my back because I and my boss dare to charge them enough money to cover our overheads and (gasp) allow us to make some profit just makes me feel sick, actually. I can't even imagine being rude enough to tell any other professional that they aren't "worth" the hourly rate that they charge.

Hmmm, fair enough. Tell you what then, you sponsor me and pay my student loan while I work my arse off at vet school for years and years and years, and when I graduate, I'll treat your dog for free. Oh what? I'm supposed to do all the work and get a huge student loan AND not charge you for my services when I graduate? What dream world do you live in? Seriously, I can understand that some people would prefer a lesser mark up on drugs (although 10% is unrealistic I'm afraid) along with a larger charge for a consultation, although I can't see why people think the distinction is so important - the vet has to cover the costs and make a profit somehow, so you'll end up paying about the same either way, whether through drug markup or through higher consultation charges. But the trend of some posters to whinge because vets dare to charge for their services is just ridiculous. When you have to go to the hospital, do you complain because the doctors and surgeons want to be paid for their time? I certainly hope not. Pay peanuts... get monkeys. Diagnosing medical issues, prescribing drugs, and performing surgical operations are actually quite skilled and responsible jobs, you know.

So you are saying that your friend would have been happy if the medicine had been charged at $22, and the appointment had cost $84? Or did she just want to pay less money overall? If it's the second, your friend needs to realise that vet clinics typically have huge overheads compared to human doctors, and yes, I'm afraid the vets do also have to make a profit so they can feed their own families and pay their own morgages and student loans. The money simply has to come from somewhere, and since the government doesn't subsidise animal health, it's going to have to come from the customer. I think people forget how much medicine and surgery really cost, since our doctors and hospitals are subsidised by the government.

Your car mechanic doesn't do that. Why should your vet? Vet clinics generally have massive overheads, and the vets themselves (and vet nurses) all have to make a decent living off what they do. A vet that only charged 10% on drug mark up would soon go out of business, unless they had extremely expensive consultations. Don't forget that some drugs are damn expensive to administer too. Being charged for a "bag of fluids" for example includes paying for someone to place the catheter, someone to monitor the fluids, the ongoing maintenance on the equipment involved, etc. If you are concerned about what your clinic charges, ask them to break it down for you, or I guess you could shop around to make sure you're not getting ripped off. But expecting any clinic to charge such a minimal mark up on the drugs they've chosen, purchased, stored for you, possibly spent time getting further education about, and then prescribed to you, is pretty unrealistic IMO.

No, they're not always given for surgery - it depends what kind of operation. If it's a clean operation (= surgeon entered clean unbroken skin, operation didn't involve entering gut or urinary tract or upper respiratory tract, there was no break in aseptic technique, etc), antibiotics are now often not given, since if the surgeon did a good job, they shouldn't (fingers crossed) be needed. I'd ring up your vet to check though if you're concerned they might have wanted you to have them but just forgotten.

Good idea From what I know the "grade" of a heart murmur just means how loud it sounds to the vet when listening to it through a stethoscope. The grade isn't necessarily directly related to how serious the underlying condition is - sometimes serious defects can sound quiet, and innocent murmurs can be loud. So it's definately worthwhile getting it properly checked out, IMO. Hope it all goes OK for you.

Ask your vet I guess, or maybe ring a couple of other vets near your local area and ask if hearworm is a problem in your area? I live in NZ and we don't have it, so I'm not much use when it comes to heartworm questions. :rolleyes: Pity you have no closer vets to try out. It's good to get a vet who is on your wavelength.

No worries - I just had to write a fully referenced 2,500 word essay on the companion animal vaccine controversy for my veterinary microbiology paper, so I have dog and cat vaccines on the brain! Glad it was helpful to someone. :rolleyes:

I think it's basically the same product just in a different packet. Manufacturers have recently done clinical trials showing that most dogs remain immune for 3 years after the puppy shots, so manufacturers are now willing to issue a protocol that recommends vaccinating only every 3 years. They weren't willing to do that before the clincial trials since it would cost them big money if it turned out they were wrong. Vet may not be prepared to give you a certificate saying the dog is immune for 3 years unless you use a vaccine that states the manufacturer also recommends vaccinating only every 3 years, although your dog probably still will be immune for this long. Edited for sense & to add: Fort Dodge "Duramune" C3 and C4 are recommended for 3 yearly use in NZ, though the insert also states that the parainfluenza component may need to be given more frequently as a separate vaccine. Possibly the same in Australia?

I only vaccinate for parvo, hepatitis and distemper (that's a C3). Puppy shots, then a booster at one year, then three yearly from then on. If I needed to show proof of canine influenza vacc before going to a kennel etc, then I'd just do it separately with a single shot. I'm not sure about these C6 and C7 cocktails, I don't think they're necessary or particularly good for the dog. Coronavirus is generally pretty harmless unless it's contracted at the same time as parvo. Lepto doesn't occur where I live. Parainfluenza and Bordatella I don't think are necessary for most dogs, unless they're going to a boarding kennel or similar environment. If a dog had a nasty vaccine reaction at any point after the puppy shots, I'd personally not vaccinate any further & would rely on the puppy shots and herd immunity to hopefully keep him safe. Heartworm not an issue here, luckily. Kja, the new 2 or 3 yearly adult vaccines are similar or identical to the old annual ones - the only difference is that the manufacturer has done clinical trials to convince themselves that the vaccine protects for at least 2 or 3 years in most dogs, so they're prepared to stand behind the product for a longer period of time.

Thanks Yellowgirl, that's really interesting. Sounds like they're saying that although antibiotics do kill off the probiotics, the best method is for you to just constantly keep putting the probiotics back.