Do No Harm

I see Bruce Ferguson with my dog and the immediate results were truly amazing. You can read about him here http://www.ahv.com.au/conference.php Please post if after next weekend you need more suggestions of appropriately qualified vets and I'll ask him if he knows one near you. I do hope you will find a good vet who can really help your dog.

The answers to some of the question being asked in this thread may be found in reports that led to the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines for global application which the AVA has recently accepted in part. All of these reports were to establish vaccination schedules that are based on the latest scientific research - as opposed to manufactuers' label recommendations based on what they needed to do in order to have their products licensed/registered for public use. The reports give detailed information on duration of immunity following successful vaccination and, of course, there are graphs on the issue of determining immunity via serology vs challenge. The Canine Vaccination Taskforce Report 2003 may be a good starting point for a background to this (new recommended vaccination protocols) review process. The report is available here http://www.dogsports.com/aahavaccinereport.pdf On page 18 and in relation to the value of measureable titers it states:- 2. Piercy comments: “The value of revaccinating dogs whose antibodies have declined to a low level, however, is not in doubt.” Indeed, it is in doubt! Dogs with a CDV antibody titer, no matter how low when challenged, may become infected if antibody levels are below titers which provide sterilizing immunity (i.e., resistance to infection), but they will have protection from clinical disease mediated by an anamnestic humoral and CMI response. However, if after vaccination no antibody is detected in the dog’s serum, then there is no doubt,as suggested by Piercy, that revaccination will be of value in boosting the animal's immune response. (That's just one example of how some old beliefs have been succesfully challenged)! The AAHA Canine Vaccination Guidelines were revised in 2006 and that Report can be found here http://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocuments/Vac...es06Revised.pdf There's some more here http://www.i-love-dogs.com/forums/dog-chat...ding-light.html Kris is well informed and keeps good company. She works with Jean Dodds on the Rabies Challenge Fund. Schultz covers Titers here http://www.synbiotics.com/Products/PDF_lib/96-0460e.pdf I do have a paper by Schultz entitled "What everyone needs to know about Canine Vaccines and Vaccination Programs". I'm afraid I do not have a link but it was given at the 2007NATIONALPARENTCLUBCANINEHEALTHCONFERENCE• OCTOBER19, 20& 21 and is largely a Q & A style paper. It may be available online otherwise I'm happy to send a copy to anyone wanting it if they PM me. Schultz does though in this paper have little to say about titers. It is really just about vaccines and immunity.

Sorry, I had asked where the threat is not which town you are in, but thanks for the information about the range - which is enormous. I yesterday met another regular at our local dog park who happens to be a truck driver who makes frequent trips "up north". He takes his dog along with him so I naturally mentioned this (distemper outbreaks) to him. He'd heard nothing about it and said that truckies mostly know each other through arranged meetings at truck stops along the road or roadhouses for meals etc. Apparently most have their dog with them. He said that none had mentioned anything to him but that he'd let them all know about the risk up there. His own 6 year old dog was vaccinated as a pup followed by a first year booster and nothing since which happens to be the recommendation of Ronald Schultz for long term and probably life long immunity. You had said in an earlier post "The only reason we are disgnosing more is because we have many more families moving up this way to work in the mines and they are bringing their beloved pets with them." so I thought you may have been implicating them in some way of being a contributing cause of the situation. Sorry if I misunderstood you. In any event it sounds like you have a terribly difficult and probably hearbreaking situation up there, so I do wish you well in coping. It's not an enviable task by any means, so Good Luck.

Please are you able to be specific then? Precisely where is this threat and how extensive is the range? You have indicated you are in the NW of WA and both the Kimberly and Pilbara are very vast regions in that part of the state. My neighbor works in the mines up that way (two weeks away and two weeks back) and he's heard nothing about it. He has three dogs of his own which he leaves here, but is passionate about dogs in general and always has his ear to the ground picking up bits of information. Obviously dogs that lack immunity are at risk should they be exposed, but perhaps you can also clarify what you mean by "completely up to date with the vaccinations .....". A Post Script here.... Someone has just sent me this link to the WSAVA wesbite http://www.wsava.org/SAC.htm If you scroll down the page there's a further link to the VGG 2007 which is perhaps the most authoritiative and up to date scientific thoughts on vaccinations and the more important matters, in my own opinion, of establishing individual and herd immunity. It looks like the Sydney Morning Herald article that appeared early last month has been taken on board by the WSAVA because there's a link on its website to that article. Anyway, its all being shared here for anyone reading this who is interested enough to ask questions and seek the answers.

Cavalier 'Agro', 'defensive'??? No! I was (and remain) simply stunned by what you have claimed. It is a matter of concern, from the perspective of epidemiology, that dogs in the NW of WA are being diagnosed with distemper (and adenovirus). It brings in factors like clinical assessment and systemic involvement, the criteria for a definitive diagnosis, statistics and monitoring. That is all, but it sounds like the situation where you are is so bad it perhaps warrants some input and involvement from elsewhere. We have a National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance for humans but regrettably there is no equivalent for our companion animals! You may have no way of knowing this, but only last Tuesday there was a vet speaking on the radio here in Perth. He stated he has been in practice for 41 years and remembers seeing distemper ‘in those (long ago) years’. Modern day vets apparently have not seen actual cases of distemper and he feared that should we all become complacent about vaccinating then deadly diseases like distemper "will come back again”. Then, only 4 days later, you posted that you see distemper “quite regularly”.

What research is this??? Prior to parvo vaccinations huge numbers of dogs died from parvo virus infections. It is now preventable.... I'd be very interested to know about this research also. A US trained veterinarian whom I saw recently told me of research done in the US to check rabies titer levels of veterinarians practicing there. Because of exposure risk US vets are vaccinated against rabies and have an option to 'boost' their immune status through re-vaccinating at intervals. He told me of research published in a US veterinary journal which showed that titer levels in 'unboosted' vets remained stable whereas titer levels in vets who were revaccinated decreased. A normal immune response following exposure to an antigen in the environment is for titer levels to rise in response to that challenge if the exposed animal is immune. For this reason it is often recommended that prior to drawing blood for titer testing dogs are taken to places where recently vaccinated dogs have been so that they are exposured to the vaccine virus shed by the other dog/s. The exposed dog's immune system responds by increasing levels of antibodies (titers).

[quote name='Cavalier' date='30th Aug 2009 - 11:56 PM' post='3939822' All our cases of distemper up here have been confirmed. In all cases the dogs were unvaccinated, came from multi-dog households and were allowed to roam the streets. No claim of endemic disease can be treated lightly. Given what you claim to have knowledge of, it's remarkable that even if the diagnosis was only 'suspected' it isn't making headline news throughout the state and possibly the whole country. You say all the cases were 'confirmed' but you don't say how! I think under the circumstances one is entitled to ask "HOW?" You didn't refer to 'possible' cases of canine distemper. You stated as though it has been established as fact when you said "we still see distemper quite regularly in the remote North West of WA". Therefore, I believe it is incumbent on you to substantiate that statement otherwise you risk leaving yourself open to claims of either sensationalizing or scaremongering. The fact is that vets can and do make mistakes even with very commonly encountered conditions. My own dog was diagnosed as having cataract by 5 different (regular) vets over a period of almost three years. Then we recently saw a specialist veterinary ophthalmologist who said the dog has no signs of cataract at all. She has nuclear sclerosis! If regular veterinarians see cataracts when none exist, then how can we accept a diagnosis of canine distemper without laboratory and probably post mortem proof of that diagnosis?

This surprises me I'm afraid. I worked in the NW of WA for several years from 1969 and my employment involved field trips over extensive areas to work on aboriginal reserves, missions, settlements etc as well as town work. I'd just acquired my first dog as a pup and as there were no veterinarians around in those days I had his vaccine flown up on the RFDS plane then gave it to him myself. He was not vaccinated after that until we moved to Perth many years later. While in the NW, he accompanied me on my field trips and was exposed to the aboriginal camp dogs and town dogs even though he was not himself a free ranging dog. The aboriginal camp dogs typically were very malnourished. Mange was very common and infestation with internal and external parasites was always present. However, in my own expereince and that of my colleagues throughout the state there were no known outbreaks of distemper or canine infectious hepatitis among the camp dogs or town dogs in those days. The population of the whole of WA was then less than 1 million. There were no vets in most WA regions let alone isolated areas and certainly none of the aboriginal camp dogs had ever had a vaccination. Whatever herd immunity existed was not the result of vaccination! Also, I understand that the distemper virus, once outside the body cells of the host, is easily destroyed by sunlight or even exposure to room temperature for 4 days. Obviously, against all this I cannot help but be skeptical about claims of distemper cases in the NW of WA. Also, what ever happened to the beneficial sunlight up there? The timing of these distemper outbreaks co-inciding with the AVA's new recommendations that adult dogs not be vaccinated more frequently than every three years (based on WSAVA guidelines and knowledge that immunity following successful vaccination lasts a minimum of 7 years) is a little suspicious particularly when combined with the results of an industry survey reported in 1995 showing that "91% of (Australian) vets felt a change from annual vaccinations would have an adverse effect on their practice turnover" (Ref Virbac Newsletter August 1995). I cannot help but wonder what is really going on here. It does seem rather odd!

Are Greyhounds particularly susceptible to CDV? There were other cases affecting Greyhounds in Victoria earlier than that. I found the following in an article by Ian Tizzard BVMS PhD and published in JAVMA, Vol. 196, No. 11, June 1, 1990 "In Australia, in 1968 and 1970, the use of certain batches of ML-CDV in dogs was associated with the development of clinical distemper. Dogs were administered a combination modified-live attenuated CDV/canine adenovirus type-1 vaccine produced in canine kidney tissue culture. Eight to 18 days later, the dogs developed anorexia, listlessness, fever, ocular discharge, and diarrhea. The vaccine was especially virulent for Greyhounds, and up to 50% of vaccinated Greyhounds became sick. Development of nervous system lesions was reflected by observation of signs of aggression, which eventually progressed to incoordination, prostration, convulsions, and death. Dogs survived from 11 to 24 days after onset of signs. At necropsy, eosinophilic intranuclear and cytoplasmic inclusions were found in large neurons, along with nonsuppurative encephalitis and malacia in the ventral pontine gray matter. Electron microscopy revealed nucleocapsids indistinguishable from those of CDV lesions."

Yes. The Shop at the CAWA grounds stocks Ziwipeak. It is open only on Fridays for a couple of hours from 12:00 noon. If you do purchase there, be sure to check the Best By date. I went there in February 2009 and the flavors I wanted were all marked 'Best by June 2007. When I checked with the manufacturer in NZ I was told the product is only good for up to 2 weeks past the Best By date.

I don't understand homeopathic remedies myself. The remedy I gave to my dog was given to me by a holistic veterinarian. I don't know how dosage of homeopathic remedies is determined, but I don't think it's by age or according to weight. In any event the dose given to my (27/28kg) 14 years old dog is Arnica 30C. Either it worked or she didn't need pain relief anyway.

My first dog had a carnasial tooth root abcess at the age of 15. That required extraction of the offending tooth. He had no pain relief. It was an older male vet in 1985 who did that surgery!!!

I used homeopathic arnica when my dog had surgery (to her eye). See http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=174636 The tumor had been removed twice before and regrown because the vets had 'leveled' it instead of excising it properly, so the latest surgery involved trauma at a deeper level of tissue. Both vets referred to in my earlier post felt some pain relief would be needed. The local vet proposed using Tramadol and the (specialist) vet who ended up doing the surgery was going to use Rimadyl. My dog didn't have either. All she had for pain relief was homeopathic arnica given twice daily from the day before surgery to the day afterwards (both days inclusive). Had there been any indication at all that she needed something stronger then it was easy enough to quickly obtain it for her, but she didn't.

I see there are occasional requests on this forum by members seeking recommendations of a good vet in their geographical area. Is it OK to post a recommendation without it being in response to a request by another member? I’m hoping this information will be a helpful ‘comparison’ reference for owners in Perth whose dog has an eye problem. My aged dog had an eyelid tumor. A local veterinarian quoted to remove it but I was subsequently advised by another dog owner to see a particular veterinary ophthalmologist. I’m so glad that I did! The tumor, a sebaceous adenoma, was removed three weeks ago. Described as ‘large’, it required two layers of sutures after its removal. The surgery was done around noon. After the IVI was removed less than an hour later, the dog was moving around and showing interest in her surroundings. By 7:00 pm she had recovered sufficiently to jump up onto our bed and the following morning there was nothing to suggest she’d been subjected to anything out of the ordinary on the previous day. There is absolutely no disfiguration. She never had swelling, redness or discharge and there was no evidence at any stage of any discomfort. If anyone reading this needs the services of a veterinary ophthalmologist, then the one who did the surgery on my dog is Ziggy Chester. She consults at Murdoch Veterinary University and also works at the Swanbourne Veterinary Clinic. She also charged less for doing the surgery than I had been quoted by the local general veterinarian who proposed giving Tramadol for pain. My dog gave no indication at any stage that she needed pain relief although I had given her some homeopathic arnica. Ziggy Chester is one of two specialist veterinarians we have consulted recently and my only regret is that she “only does eyes”. Thank you for allowing me to share!

The 'so far in advance' angle was introduced by another poster. In the context of my own experience the 'use as needed' basis involved a period of 3-4 months. I think this aspect has become an unfortunate diversion and I'm not sure it has relevance to the real issue of vets not being required to provide the Expiry Date and Batch Number of the medicines they dispense. I'm pleased that some here have not overlooked that point. Perhaps consideration of the purpose for which a particular medication is prescribed together with knowledge of its characteristics, HOW it is to be used and the quantity of tablets dispensed is what is really relevant to the safe use of any drug sold on a 'give as needed' basis.

The only purpose of starting this thread was to try and raise consumers' awareness of a particular issue that they have probably never even thought about before. I understand access to these topics is not limited to those who participate by posting or even restricted to DOL members, so hopefully there are other dog owners reading this thread who have been given some food (preferably more healthy than McDonalds) for thought.

I believe the answers are in my earlier posts. May I now ask a question of you, please? Can you explain why the Expiry Date and Batch Number information should not and need not be provided to the person who purchases the medicine to give to their dog, please? Thank you. I never said it should not, but more that I don't think its essential to be there. As I said earlier (and yes, this is in my earlier posts, but because you asked, I will take the time to explain it all in full again) all our medication is regularly checked on arrival from our supplier for their expiry dates. Also, when the medication is dispensed, it's also checked, particularly if it's not something that's ordered regularly. When a pet comes in to see the vet for a consult, its because the animal is unwell. The owner doesn't know why or what's wrong, because unlike people, pets can't explain!! Vet decides that the pet needs a course of antibiotics. Because the weights of pets vary so much, antibiotics and other medications often come in bulk packaging, to then be distributed by the vet. A cat may only need 3 antibiotic tablets to last a 6 days, where as a giant breed dog might need 18 tablets. Vet is not going to give the cat owner the full box of 24 tablets, as this would just be ridiculously expensive and wasteful. It would also be irresponsible of the vet to prescribe more medication than is required, as it may encourage the owner to self medicate. So in this case, there is no need for an expiry date as the vet knows the pills expire in 2 years, yet the course goes for 6 days. I guess what I'm trying to say, is that generally speaking, vets are not going to (or should not) dispense more medication than what is required by the pet at the time. If the pet doesn't get better from the medication, it should be seen again for further work up. In instances where medication is going to be ongoing, such as NSAIDS, then generally a full box/bottle is given, so the batch no. and exp. date will be printed on the box, but also, because the medication is continuing, it will still be used up by the time the medication expires. I really can't think of an instance where any of our vets would dispense any medication that an owner might keep for longer than 12months and then actually suddenly use it again without consulting a vet first. It's important owners seek vet attention first, hence why medication is only dispensed on an 'as needed' basis. It looks like postings got a bit muddled, LOL. Sorry if I did anything to cause that. I thought I hadn't properly posted my reply and possibly we were answering at the same time. These forums are weird but I guess one does get used to pushing the right buttons! The bottom line is that for reasons of proper regulation the Expiry Date and Batch Number information of veterinary medicines should be available. The federal authority which regulates the safety of veterinary medicines relies on end users to provide it with information which it needs for its regulatory role and I do not believe veteriarians or their staff should thwart that process by withholding the information from consumers. From feedback I have had from the AERP they have taken seriously my concerns about this issue, but wheels of change move slowly. So until the system is improved then consumers of veterinary medicines can help themselves by being aware. For more information you could go to the website http://www.apvma.gov.au/qa/vetaerp.shtml and check the fields that need to be completed on the Report form. When my dog suffered a severe adverse reaction to a booster vaccination I only then discovered I did not have the information needed to complete the form. I had to go to the vet for this information - but the vet hadn't recorded it so didn't know (this was two days after the event). The vet's stated reason (or excuse) for not providing that information on the dog's vaccination certificate was "the manufacturer didn't give us sticky label". The vet didn't cover for this by entering the information in the dog's veterinary record and they couldn't determine with any certaintly from the supplies they had in stock. This is a little O/T, but another example of why we need to always check Expiry Dates on products we purhcase for our dogs.... I won't identify on this forum the retailer concerned. However, I was wanting to get some ZiwiPeak treats for my dog. I learned of a sockist nearby and went there in April of this year. The retailer showed me their range of ZiwiPeak and there was plenty of my preferred flavor, but guess what (again)? It was marked with a Best By date of June 2007. It was almost two years out of date! I drew the retailers attention to this detail and he said "We sell plenty of it" Shrugging his shoulders he added "I'll take it home and give it to my dogs". Now if anyone reading this is interested in the risk involved out dated ZiwiPeak to their dog then just check with the manufacturer. I did, and what they told me is that the product would be good for no more than 2 weeks after the Best Before date because there are no artificial preservatives - and yes they intended to follow this up through their Australian distributor. We, as consumers, DO need to be alert to these things!

Please refer to my previous posts for my answers to your questions. Now may I ask you a question, please? Can you please give consideration to the health, safety and (APVMA) regulatory aspects that are involved and then offer one reason why the Expiry Date and Batch Number information should not be given to purchasers of veterinary medicines? (Please bear in mind that Expiry Date and Batch Number information is required to be on the labels of all worming tablets, all heartworm preventatives, all flea and tick products and all shampoos as well as all commercial pet foods)Thank you.

I believe the answers are in my earlier posts. May I now ask a question of you, please? Can you explain why the Expiry Date and Batch Number information should not and need not be provided to the person who purchases the medicine to give to their dog, please? Thank you.

If you are meaning the now deceased veterinarian I identified in a previous post. No. My opening post (and start of this thread) was intended only to draw attention to an exisiting situation that, from my perspective seemed to not be good policy because it lacks normal safeguards and, after discovering that every dog owner I know bar one shared my concern when I drew their attention to it. I was merely raising the issue here to see whether other dog owners might agree. I had anticpated that those on this forum might be surprised and say they'd never even thought about it, because that was the inital response when I mentioned it to those I know (129 at last count). I sure didn't expect the responses here that resulted!

I think you'd find that almost all drugs prescibed and dispensed by veterinarians for owners to take home are covered by the Poisons Act. Also drugs routinely used by veterinarians 'in house' (sedatives, anesthetics etc come readily to mind) are all classified as Scheduled drugs because they are poisons (and therefore are covered by the Poisons Act). A pharmacist I spoke with recently was alarmed that vets are not required to provide the Expiry Date and Batch Number of drugs they supply to clients. With regard to the supply of these items there clearly is a double standard and, to my mind at least, drugs are drugs and whether they are supplied by a veteriarian or a pharmacist they are still handed to a person who from that point has control over them. It does appear that our legislators do not consider this from the fundamental perspective of scheduled drugs reaching the general public. They (legislator) seem to view it only from the perspective of drugs supplied by pharmacists being intended for human use and drugs supplied by veterinarians being intended for animal use - with the latter having less protective regulation. Some scheduled medication/drugs are used both by humans and animals. They are identical! They have the same compostion, the same manufacturer and the same product name. So, why do different rules apply (based only on who prescibed them) given that safety is supposed to be the primary consideration? It doesn't seem to make any sense!

Since you ask, this one http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21...5007222,00.html ........................ I do enjoy these funny little icons, LOL. Seriously though, I have to add with regard to that link that the media did provide very emotionally charged and sensational coverage of the accusations made against this vet and the fact remains that the claims/charges against him were never subjected to challenge and scrutiny in a court of law. I discovered that he was very compassionate and caring as a vet. He did do a tremendous amount of work for refuges and rescue agencies as well as attending to injured wildlife. He had a soft spot for 'strays' - animals and seemingly humans as well. I know from when I initially sought his help with my own dog that he was (perhaps too) trusting in that without even recording my contact details he refused any payment of 4 consultations - including treatment and supply of additonal medication - until he was satisfied she was OK. I've also been told of an incident where he was woken around 1:00am because a dog had been very badly injured and instead of suggesting the dog be taken to the emergency section in the teaching hospital not far away, he attended to it himself - and the dog fully recovered. Don't take too much notice of his expression in the photo accompanying the article which was obviously taken by prying media. He often smiled, was quick witted and had a wonderful sense of humor. He told me of an occasion where he had once trained an Afghan Hound to Guide Dog level, and accompanied by that dog he boarded an aircraft in Adelaide to come to WA. With the dog in cabin beside him he waited until the plane started moving then took off his dark glasses and started to read the newspaper. Now, a bit of O/T. I've just noticed something in the left column as I type this so I'm going to try a little experiment. Let's see if it works..... Oh, surprise, surprise, it DID, LOL!

A veterinarian told me 2 months ago when I specifically asked about this, that when she graduated 16 years ago vets were required to sign for and account for their use of all Scheduled drugs, then added that they are no longer required to do so. This is in WA. I don't know about elsewhere.

Here is some information: "I have since had a discussion with the Registrar of the Veterinary Practitioners Board of New South Wales about your concerns. He informed me that expiry dates and batch numbers are not required to be indicated on the label of dispensed medicines in NSW. Veterinary practices are also not required to keep documentation of the batch number on the patient's record". That is from the National AVA with this link http://www.vpb.nsw.gov.au/managed_code/upl...isons_guide.pdf I have been advised that this general protocol also applies in Victoria and Qld. I did have a link to a pdf file from Vic govt confirming this but am unable to locate it right now. Confirmation of the rules that apply in Qld came from a Qld veterinarian. I have been unable to obtain any information from any source to indicate that any state or territory in Australia has any obligation beyond this general protocol. Then there is this which came from the Pharmaceutical Services Branch of the WA Health Dept: "Under the poisons Regulations 1965 when a veterinary surgeon supplies a scheduled poison to the owner of an animal it must be labelled with the following- 1) the words 'Keep out of reach of children' 2) Name and strength of poison in preparation or the trade name 3) the owners name and species of animal 4) instructions for the use of the medicine or product 5) the date of supply and a prescription (or reference) number 6) name and address of the veterinary practice 7) the words 'For veterinary use only or 'For animal treatment only' and 'For external use only' if the preparation is not for internal use and 8) the total quantity contained" Obviously there may be individual veterinarians who dispense 'above and beyond' the legal requirements, but the fact remains they are not legally obliged to provide the information which I've expressed concerns about being omitted. Most do not go 'above and beyond' what they are legally required to do.

Since you ask, this one http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21...5007222,00.html was quite exceptional as a veterinarian (see the Comments which show the extent of support for him). I was horrified at seeing him on the TV news when this story broke. He'd always seemed rather 'strange' but I attributed this to his 'hippy' appearance and apparent preference for seclusion. Where an animal was concerned he was always available, he would always help, appointments were never needed and there were numerous reports of him transporting the pets of elderly clients home after they'd recovered sufficiently from surgery. Now, after returning from interstate where we lived for some time it's become a case of 'shopping around'. I'm checking out vets by seeing how they perform a 'wellness' exam. Those I've seen so far 'skimp' on the procedure and none have even palpated the abdomen - which should be an essential part of a routine physical exam particularly for an aged dog. Right now, the AVA is 'working on' ways of "helping vets communicate to their clients the importance of annual health check-ups" (see http://ava.informz.net/ava/archives/archive_135431.html) as a change in emphasis after the public becomes aware en masse of the fact annual boosters are not needed. I don't know how they'll manage when, in my area at least, a veterinarian's idea of a health check is limited to looking at teeth, listening to heart and lungs and taking the temperature. So far as the vet in the above link is concerned, this really comes back to the issue which started as the topic of this thread, i.e. veterinarians and drugs. Not providing Expiry Dates and Batch Numbers, and not ensuring medicines are dispensed in appropriate containers is just the tip of the iceberg. We may never know the complete truth of Marcel's case, because he was found dead (believed to be suicide) several hours before his court trial was due to commence. Regardless, if the claims were true, then this veterinarian was freely acquiring very potent drugs which he then gave or administered to young men as part of his lifestyle. The disturbing fact is, too, that were it not for a coroner's inquest into the death of one 17 year old youth then this lifestyle may well have continued undetected. As it was, it did continue for 19 years. If veterinarians were accountable then at least so far as potentially lethal drugs are concerned, they would be required to sign for all that they acquire and account for their use then, perhaps, that 17 year old lad may still be alive as well as one quite exceptional veterinarian.