fbaudry Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Snap Trifecta! Was about to post the link... Whilst I have the utmost respect for the profession, I agree there should be a higher level of disclosure... Yes, it was enlightening, but I was disappointed the lady shown at the end feeding raw had two seriously overweight dogs I know.... Agreed with her views but gosh, they looked terribly unhealthy. I wish they'd picked someone else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boronia Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Maybe, in this case, a Hills weight loss diet :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denali Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Snap Trifecta! Was about to post the link... Whilst I have the utmost respect for the profession, I agree there should be a higher level of disclosure... Yes, it was enlightening, but I was disappointed the lady shown at the end feeding raw had two seriously overweight dogs Very interesting! but yes. SO fat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 Isn't that all just a very US thing? Seems to happen with Drs and human drugs too. Or at least that is what is shown on US medical shows Given the often unfortunate tendency for trends to spread from the US to Oz, I don't think this stuff should be ignored. In the years I spent in Oz I went to a lot of vets. The older ones tended to stick to pretty basic meds and were ok with home remedy stuff like vinegar for yeasty ears . . . the younger ones seem to be more influenced by big pharma, and would recommend Epi-Otic rather than the home-made version. Some of the veterinary chain practices seem to have heeded advice from practice managers to sell as many products as possible, thus increasing profits. Display counters with everything from (overpriced) flea and tick meds, to sequined collars. Also important to keep in touch with what is being taught in vet schools, and how much influence big pharma has on the curriculum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulesP Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 I am going to ignore it. Whether a vet is going to try and sell me a wormer is simply not a concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rappie Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 (edited) Isn't that all just a very US thing? Seems to happen with Drs and human drugs too. Or at least that is what is shown on US medical shows Given the often unfortunate tendency for trends to spread from the US to Oz, I don't think this stuff should be ignored. In the years I spent in Oz I went to a lot of vets. The older ones tended to stick to pretty basic meds and were ok with home remedy stuff like vinegar for yeasty ears . . . the younger ones seem to be more influenced by big pharma, and would recommend Epi-Otic rather than the home-made version. Some of the veterinary chain practices seem to have heeded advice from practice managers to sell as many products as possible, thus increasing profits. Display counters with everything from (overpriced) flea and tick meds, to sequined collars. Also important to keep in touch with what is being taught in vet schools, and how much influence big pharma has on the curriculum. I have started replying to this topic many times then just given up. However, I think your example of young vs old vets is making an assumption about the reasoning behind decision making when there are a number of factors involved other than whether the vet will get a massive kickback from big pharma (delivered on the back of a unicorn). What kind of infection is it? (Young vets are more likely to do cytology to find out). Will an acidic cleaner help? Is an aqueous cleaner appropriate? Is the tympanic membrane intact? Do I think the owner is capable of following instructions, can they do basic maths and determine a concentration of solution for their home remedy? What is the potential for harm? Is this treatment evidence based? Is there a registered veterinary product available to do this job? Can I defend my decision to use this treatment the Veterinary Practitioners Board, if this seemingly lovely client who has declined all my treatment recommendations decides to submit a formal complaint when things don't turn out the way they had hoped? To imply that the decision to use a certain ear cleaner is the result of either being young or in the pocket of a pharmaceutical company is really giving vets very little credit for being responsible for their own opinions, decisions and further education. The vast majority of vets are just trying to help you and your pets. Edited November 13, 2015 by Rappie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danois Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 (edited) Well said Rappie Edited November 13, 2015 by Danois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulesP Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 Actually last time ear cleaning come up at my vets I 'sold' them baby wipes. :laugh: They thought that was a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willem Posted November 14, 2015 Author Share Posted November 14, 2015 Isn't that all just a very US thing? Seems to happen with Drs and human drugs too. Or at least that is what is shown on US medical shows Given the often unfortunate tendency for trends to spread from the US to Oz, I don't think this stuff should be ignored. In the years I spent in Oz I went to a lot of vets. The older ones tended to stick to pretty basic meds and were ok with home remedy stuff like vinegar for yeasty ears . . . the younger ones seem to be more influenced by big pharma, and would recommend Epi-Otic rather than the home-made version. Some of the veterinary chain practices seem to have heeded advice from practice managers to sell as many products as possible, thus increasing profits. Display counters with everything from (overpriced) flea and tick meds, to sequined collars. Also important to keep in touch with what is being taught in vet schools, and how much influence big pharma has on the curriculum. I have started replying to this topic many times then just given up. However, I think your example of young vs old vets is making an assumption about the reasoning behind decision making when there are a number of factors involved other than whether the vet will get a massive kickback from big pharma (delivered on the back of a unicorn). What kind of infection is it? (Young vets are more likely to do cytology to find out). Will an acidic cleaner help? Is an aqueous cleaner appropriate? Is the tympanic membrane intact? Do I think the owner is capable of following instructions, can they do basic maths and determine a concentration of solution for their home remedy? What is the potential for harm? Is this treatment evidence based? Is there a registered veterinary product available to do this job? Can I defend my decision to use this treatment the Veterinary Practitioners Board, if this seemingly lovely client who has declined all my treatment recommendations decides to submit a formal complaint when things don't turn out the way they had hoped? To imply that the decision to use a certain ear cleaner is the result of either being young or in the pocket of a pharmaceutical company is really giving vets very little credit for being responsible for their own opinions, decisions and further education. The vast majority of vets are just trying to help you and your pets. I think Sandgrubber wanted to highlight the experience advantage older vets have...30 years and perhaps more of experience in a special realm will mostly allow for a better evaluation than a lot of theoretical knowledge (and information of the pharma industry) together with only a few years of practical experience - that's I guess is the case for nearly any profession. And with the experience comes also more independency from the pharma industry. from a personal point of view regarding experience with vets and human doctors: relocated from Europe 10 years ago I was a little bit surprized about the 'take it just in case' mentality I found here. I admit I have some problems with this attitude (and a lot of discussions with wife and kids) as I believe (a) that mother nature did a pretty good job, and (b) if there are signs that something is out of balance any interference (e.g. administering drugs) should occur very carefully and not just on a 'trial & error base' or 'just in case base'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rappie Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 I do understand the point being made, but at what point is one deemed to have 'enough' experience? I have worked with many vets with 20 or more years of experience and we have a mutually beneficial relationship due to different areas of interest and skills. They are progressive and update their knowledge just like all the 'young' ones. There's also many 'mature' vets who work alone, refer anything that is beyond their (sometimes limited) knowledge base, do the same thing they've always done and begrudgingly attend continuing education events because it's the only way to maintain their registration. There is a great deal of truth in the saying 'you miss more by not seeing, than not knowing' and a keen eye and curiosity go a long way to making up for a shortfall in grey hairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*kirty* Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 There are plenty of older, more experienced vets who are so stuck in the dark ages that they don't know about the most current treatment regimes etc. There are plenty of newer vets who are extremely well trained and up to date with current protocols. I agree 100% with Rappie and get sick of the conspiracy theories about vets doing deals with drug companies and vets rolling in cash. Our clinic (specialist) sells no merchandise, no food, no parasite treatments. Most of our medications are human medications so we give our clients scripts to get them from a chemist. Yet people still complain! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) I know vets aren't rolling in cash, and I can't remember meeting any vet who didn't love animals. Yes, the dichotomy between young and old vets is a gross simplification. There are complaints/situations where newer protocols have much better results than older protocols. There are old vets who don't read the literature; there are young vets who barely scraped through in vet school. There are both young and old vets who are enthusiastic about treatments for which there is very little scientific evidence. But it's not conspiracy theory to say that in a market with a few suppliers who note one another's action and many, independent buyers, price will not be determined by competition but by producer's calculation of what the market will bare. You learn that in Economics 101. Because people are willing to pay a lot to keep their pets comfortable, prices are high. Nor is it conspiracy theory to say that pet medicines are a high-profit segment of the pharmaceutical industry; or that the pharmaceutical industry takes an interest in what is taught in vet schools, and spends a fair amount to try and influence what and how much vets prescribe. Marketing in a big part of the pharma budget. Edited November 20, 2015 by sandgrubber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now