Veterinarian responds to woman's criticisms (while doing her makeup!)

This is quite a cool video firstly because the woman is confident enough to criticise vets in general on social media (TikTok) while doing her makeup! Why do it like that? Is he making a statement? I think she is and it is this: it is a feminist statement saying 'I am a woman and confident in my own skin. Listen to me...' Just a thought.

And I like this very erudite veterinarian. He sits in his car to make a TikTok video in responding to the woman's criticisms. I think the vet's only place (space) of privacy while at work is his car! Good idea.

He responds very nicely. The woman is a bit extravagant in her criticisms. He picks holes in them with ease.

Last point: vets in the UK are currently being criticised in exactly the same way. Too expensive. Rip off businesses because they are often owned and run by big corporations who focus on profit first and foremost and it shows. This video is relevant to the UK situation despite it being made in the USA.

Note: these videos from social media sometimes stop working. Sorry if that has happened.

@thejunglevet lets talk, im genuinely curious to hear you guys’ experiences with your vet #fyp #viral #fyppppppppppppppppppppppp #veterinary #veterinarian #vettok #petowner #petparents #vetoffice #vetclinic #vets #vetdoctor #greenscreenvideo ♬ original sound - Dr. Drew | Veterinarian

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also: sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. Also, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable.

Woman still in debt after £8,000 vet bill for bulldog

You don't want to be in this position where you are torn between the love of your companion animal, in this case a bulldog, and the heavy price that you have to pay with almost no end to forking out money, to fix a very expensive pet medical problem. This is what happens: veterinarians know that cat and dog owners will be very likely to fork out thousands of pounds for medical issues because of their tight emotional connection with their pets. The alternative is to euthanise the companion animal which is unthinkable to many people.

Vet bills are increasing and some dog breeds are inherently prone to chronic illness due to irresponsible breeding practices. Image: MikeB

In this instance, Roy the bulldog fell ill in September. His owner, Tracey Higgins immediately took him to the vet and after several trips the final bill has come to almost £8,200. All from savings and credit cards.

She lives in East London with her husband Kevin. Roy is seven years old. He began to vomit and lost weight quickly.

Initial tests cost £180 but the bill snowballed.

The veterinarian recommended that Roy stay for three nights in an animal hospital where more tests, scans and medications were administered. He was discharged from that hospital with a £3,500 bill at which point Tracey began to panic about the escalating costs. There was no guarantee he would get better but she said that: "We couldn't not have him treated. We are responsible for him and love him."

A part of Roy's small intestine was severely inflamed and over the next three months there were further tests and medications administered costing £3500 and after that further veterinary visits and tests racked up another £995.

As I said pet owners have no choice but to go down this black hole of veterinary costs sometimes with no end in sight.

In the UK, the price of veterinary care and other pet services has jumped about 40% since 2020 according to the Office for National Statistics.

It's a huge dilemma and a great worry for many pet owners. Tracey Higgins had cancelled her pet insurance which cost £250 a month. That alone is a very heavy expense. It covered Roy and the couple's other dog Bonnie. She cancel the insurance policy six months before Roy fell ill.

The couple had regularly saved into an account for vet bills which had accrued £2,000 when Roy needed treatment. They raided other savings and used credit cards to pay the bill.

Higgins said that she was "shocked by the size of the bills and concerned by the ongoing treatment as the cost just kept building up. It was very expensive and we still have some of that debt hanging over us. But we are relieved he has come through it. In some respects it was money well spent because we still have Roy."

UK pet insurance. More excluded treatments. Rising cost of cover.

The Competition and Markets Authority are investigating the £2 billion vet industry because there are concerns about dramatically increased costs as mentioned and that pet owners are overpaying for medicines and being kept in the dark about the cost of treatments.

In addition, it's probably fair to say that the bulldog is an inherently unhealthy animal or perhaps I'm being unfair but the French bulldog for instance, is, in my estimation, the most unhealthy companion animal you can adopt. You can read about that by clicking on this link.

It's a double whammy effect with purebred dogs becoming less healthy because of inbreeding and veterinary bills becoming more expensive because they been bought up by big conglomerates who are trying to squeeze more profit out of what were independent veterinarians focusing on and prioritising medical health treatment rather than making a profit.

Source: The Times July 6th 2024 (main story).

-----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Dogs eating cannabis edibles on the increase in the UK

Dogs eating cannabis edibles has hit a new high in the UK according to the Mail on Sunday. Of the cannabis edibles available to dogs, it appears that gummies, cannabis-infused sweets are increasingly popular and are thought to have contributed to a rise in the number of dogs poisoned by dope recently.

A fictional image 😉🐶.

The Poisons Information Service reported that more than 450 dogs have been treated in the past four years including 119 in 2023 compared to 82 in 2020. These figures are probably quite substantially underreported because Nicola Robinson, the head of service of the above-mentioned agency said that, "Not all animal poisoning cases are reported to us, so these are not a completely accurate representation of numbers."

The poisonings are taking place at home or perhaps while the dog is out on a walk.

The dangers to dogs eating cannabis gummies are quite substantial and variable. The RSPCA say that the symptoms include overstimulation and a high temperature. A dog might need intravenous fluids.

Other symptoms include wobbliness, agitation, incontinence, hyper-salivation, a change in heart rate, vomiting, seizure and possible coma according to Dr. Glassman, writing in Dogs Today.

The symptoms can develop quickly within 30 minutes but sometimes after about three hours. Dog owners should contact their veterinarian quickly if they see these symptoms and if they fear that the dog has eaten a cannabis gummy or other edible. 

Or, the owner can administer an oral detoxifier containing advanced activated charcoal. Vomiting should not be induced. Veterinarians can treat dogs at a cost of £800.

Cannabis gummies contain THC which is the primary proactive compound in cannabis. They are illegal in the UK as a class B drug. Although, on a practical basis, I don't think the police ever get involved with cannabis use in the UK. By default and through police inactivity, cannabis in any form is legal in the UK.

In the US cannabis gummies and other edibles are legal for recreational purposes and for medicinal use in more than 20 states. Cannabis edibles poisonings of dogs in the states amount to around 6000 over 5 years.

Some dog owners give their dogs CBD oil which is legal. This does not contain THC and is purely medicinal. It can be used to treat allergies, anxiety and pain.

Around 38% of Danish dog owners regularly give their pets some form of medicinal cannabis i.e. CBD oil with positive effect.

CBD can reduce stress in dogs and treat pain which is useful for those suffering from osteoarthritis. In Britain a vet has to prescribe human CBD oil preparations for a pet.

----------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

NHS in UK makes pet owners disgruntled about private vet prices

Yes, vet prices have surged higher in the UK recently because they want to make more money. It is as simple as that. And they want to make more dosh because the unprofitable, independent vets owned by a partnership of veterinarians have been bought up by big business and big business always has an eye on the profit margin and not so much on the quality of the treatment.

Fictional MRI scan for a dog at a vet clinic. 

Having said all that there is a big obstacle in the UK to citizens' perception of medical treatments: the National Health Service (NHS) which is free at the point of delivery.

It is not actually free but paid for out of taxpayer revenue - over £100 billion annually - but it feels like it is free to the citizens who rely on it for the health needs.

In the UK, health care for humans can be free unless the person can afford and selects private health care while health care for pets is never free but sometimes damnably expensive.

Pet health care is as expensive or more expensive than private human health care sometimes in the UK. But let's say that they are on a par, it is still a lot of money when paying for vet services and products.

And it all goes back to perception. Private pet health care as it always is in the UK seems beyond the means of many because they are used to walking into A&E at a local hospital or a walk-in unit for minor injuries and being seen to free of charge.

I am not condoning some of the rip-off vet prices but I think Brits need to put things in perspective. Health care for pets is an important and expensive business with ever more sophisticated diagnostic and treatment machinery. They are expensive.

The third factor is that more pet owners take out pet health insurance which pushes up the quality and price of treatments. It is a virtuous or unhelpful circle which ends up making veterinary care too expensive for many which in turn results in many pets not receiving the care they need and deserve.

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Warning about Librela and Solensia. Potential severe side effects.

Recently I wrote a post on another website about these two drugs: Librela and Solensia. They are both used to treat arthritis in pets. I think they are delivered by injection. They received FDA approval in America in January 2022 to relieve pain. The products are manufactured by animal health giant Zoetis.

My initial article was about warning pet owners about the potential dangers of this drug in terms of the severe potential side effects. But when I search the Internet for information about these drugs the predominant information is about how good they are. There is some references to side effects but I don't think the warnings have been sufficiently publicised.

That is why I am doing this cross post. As I said, these drugs were regarded as being significant advancements in treating osteoarthritis in pets. They target a protein called nerve growth factor. The vets are saying that this could exacerbate underlying nerve conditions and other medical problems.

Although Zoetis says that the side effects represent a fraction of the more than 18 million shots of this drug given in the US and internationally, there has been a plethora of complaints.

It appears that health regulators in America and in Europe have received thousands of complaints from dog and cat owners saying that their pets have developed serious or severe side effects. Sometimes the side-effects were so bad that they had to euthanise their companion animals.

Zoetis stock tumbled by 7% on these reports. Side-effects are normal in all medication as all medications are potentially poisons. But the issue here appears to be that some of these companion animals, as mentioned, have been euthanised because of the side-effects.

Like any reasonable person I am not saying that cat and dog owners should tell their veterinarians not to use these drugs. I'm just saying that companion animal owners should be aware of the potential - albeit a small potential - for severe side effects. They can then discussed the matter with their veterinarian with knowledge. They can ask their veterinarian what they think and ask him or her whether there are alternatives which are as effective with lesser side-effects.

It's about options and being aware of those options. I've always believed that cat and dog owner should go to the veterinarian armed with some knowledge about cat and dog health and the drugs that might be prescribed as it allows a proper discussion. It allows for informed consent on behalf of their companion animal.

A companion animal caregiver cannot give informed consent without knowledge. They act as trustees and the highest level of trust and responsibility towards their companion animals. To discharge that responsibility they need to have knowledge to discuss matters with their veterinarian in a meaningful way.

This page is an attempt to help provide that the necessary knowledge.

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Pet owners falling prey to extortionist corporate veterinary clinics

UK: Max Hastings a Times journalist has lambasted the veterinary profession in the UK which has deteriorated dramatically since the predatory and greedy corporate entities bought up thousands of independent veterinary in which the practices were owned by the partnership - the veterinarians working at the clinic. 

These were the charming, old-fashioned vets who more often than not focused on providing the best possible veterinary care rather than prioritising financial profit which is what vet clinics that are part of a chain now appear to do more often than not.

Max Hastings said this about a personal experience:

I heard last week of a friend's daughter who has resigned from private practice in disgust at the price gouging of its management, the relentless pursuit of financial targets and increased drug sales. This young woman now works instead for a charity, the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals. Meanwhile our local vet has just quoted us a price of £750 for removing a benign cyst from a dog's ear.

The Competition and Markets watchdog is investigating. Hastings believes that the trust of pet owners in their vets is being betrayed. He says that "we are struggling to identify a practice not owned by extortionists".

There is chain vets near me. A friend of mine asked me to take a guinea pig to a local Goddard vets. They are one of these corporate vets - a chain of outlets. And the vet there used four capsules of insecticide to treat a parasitic infection that appeared to have cleared up when probably one capsule would have done. And he smeared half of it in the fur and not on the skin. That looked like price gouging to me.

Two more case studies

My thanks to Bing's Co-pilot for researching these case studies.

Pet owners across the UK are grappling with staggering vet bills, leaving them feeling cornered and financially strained. The veterinary industry, valued at £2 billion, has come under scrutiny due to exorbitant costs and questionable value for money. Let’s delve into some real-life experiences shared by pet owners who have faced eye-watering expenses and unexpected financial burdens.

Case Studies:

1. Dave Bicker’s Parson Russell Terrier, Rufus:

   • Rufus developed glaucoma, necessitating eye removal surgery.
   • The initial cost for tests and eye drops was £300.
   • The vet offered two options: an immediate operation for £800 or a £200 cheaper alternative in Derby.
   • Bicker’s colleagues generously pooled funds to cover the bill.
   • When Rufus needed a second enucleation, the cost had skyrocketed to £1,750 within just two-and-a-half years.
   • Bicker laments the lack of affordable vets and suspects price adjustments to match industry standards.

2. Laura’s Experience with Dental Plaque Removal:

   • Laura’s rescue cat, Bella, required plaque removal from her teeth.
   • A London vet chain quoted an astonishing £900 for the procedure, insisting Bella be anesthetized.
   • While vacationing in France, Laura sought a local vet’s opinion.
   • The French vet charged a mere €33 (approximately £28) for the same procedure, completed in five minutes without anesthesia.
   • Laura was astounded by the stark contrast in costs between the UK and France.

Industry Investigation:

The UK’s competition watchdog has launched an investigation into the veterinary services industry, aiming to address concerns of potential overcharging and lack of transparency¹.

Pet owners find themselves caught in a delicate balance between their beloved companions’ health and financial strain. As the debate continues, it’s clear that affordable and accessible veterinary care remains a pressing issue for many.

---

Published on September 8, 2023

Read the full article on The Guardian

-----

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Dogflation at 9% in Britain against 4% general inflation. Dog owners ripped off.

Image: MikeB

British veterinarians are killing the goose that lays the golden egg. And somewhat mysteriously and without transparency prices of a range of dog products have risen faster than general inflation. To me, being a rather cynical person 😇, the manufacturers and retailers are ripping off dog owners by jacking up their prices after the Covid-19 pandemic. They know that there are more dog owners out there in Great Britain and they want to milk them as much as possible.

Dogflation means the increase in prices of dog related services and products.

That certainly applies to veterinarians. The Times today reports that "125 owners a day give up on pets as dogflation bites". It's a good title with a hint of amusement but this is a serious matter. 😒

The information comes from Dogs Trust, Britain's biggest dog rehoming charity. They say that they are experiencing unprecedented demand. What they mean is that more people than ever are giving up their dogs to the charity.

And the biggest worry for dog owners is veterinary bills. The problem is that independent veterinarians have been bought out by big businesses to form veterinary clinic chains run by accountants who simply prioritise making a big profit rather than providing an excellent service to their patients. 

RELATED: UK pet owners go abroad to cut bills for veterinary treatments.

That's how it works for the big corporations. So Britain has lost those beautiful independent veterinarians. Well, there are still some around but there are far too many vet chains charging inflated prices and they are, as I mentioned in the opening sentence, killing the goose that lays the golden egg.

By that I mean they are reducing the number of pet owners because the cost of owning a pet is too high and because of that there will be less work for veterinary services. You can only charge so much. You can only rip off people so much before they give up and go away. This is beginning to happen.

The Times reports that, "Dogs Trust says record numbers of owners want to give up their animals and some of its kennels are so busy they have waiting lists."

And the problem is the rising cost of dog food, pet insurance and perhaps most importantly veterinary care. And because there are more people giving up pets which is the general trend at the moment, there are less people to adopt them because there are two sides to this problem.

If the mood in the UK is that it is too expensive to own a dog or a cat there are going be less people knocking on the doors of animal shelters looking for a pet to adopt in addition to, as mentioned, more people giving them up.

Last year Dogs Trust received more than 45,000 requests to give up their pet which is the equivalent of 125 per day.

The chief executive of Dogs Trust, Owen Sharp said: "The demand for us to take in dogs is outstripping our ability to meet it at the moment, so we have waiting lists. There is a direct correlation between people struggling to afford to have their dogs and the numbers wanting to give them up."

The charity commissioned Capital Economics, a research company, to work out the value of dogflation versus the general inflation in the country. Dogflation is at 9% while general inflation is at 4%. And Mr Sharp doesn't know why there is this disparity. I know why: it's rip off Britain.

These companies are taking advantage of people. And a survey by Dogs Trust found that veterinary bills are the biggest concern as mentioned.

Mr Sharp said that he was at a loss to explain the steep rise in prices. He said:

"You hear things such as manufacturing costs are higher or raw material costs are higher but you wouldn't really expect them to be disproportionately higher than the production of human food. So is there an issue going on in retail? I don't know. There is a lack of transparency around it, and I don't feel it's getting enough focus at the moment."

Dogs Trust has asked the government to intervene. They want the government to support struggling dog owners by removing VAT on pet food and veterinary services. Pet owners are being disproportionately hit by inflation.

The charity wants as many dog owners to keep their pets as possible and the same would apply to cats. Mr Sharp added that the charity "desperately need the government to step up and play its part for this country's 12 million dogs and their owners."

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Narcissistic veterinarian with an inferiority complex over his small phallus stabbed his girlfriend

Hodgkinson and Fioletti photograph I believe that this image is in the public domain at this time.

Alberto Fioletti, 31, had, it was claimed in his criminal trial, developed a narcissistic personality disorder. His defence barrister, as I understand it, claimed that he slept with many women to "validate" himself". And he had an inferiority complex because of his "small penis".

His state of mind contributed, it seems, to his behaviour when he stabbed his girlfriend six times in the chest and once in the back with a kitchen knife.

The murder occurred on May 5 last year after an argument. His then girlfriend, Stephanie Hodgkinson, 34, a veterinary nurse, kicked Fioletti out of her flat in Bournemouth, Dorset.

The pair had met on a dating app and then started their relationship in October 2022.

They were both employed in veterinary practices. After the argument Fioletti told Hodgkinson: "I hope you're happy with yourself. You're gonna have a death on your hands now."

Fioletti admitted manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. He denied murder but was found guilty of murder after a three-week trial.

Stephanie Hodgkinson's mother collected her granddaughter shortly before Stephanie was murdered. The grandmother, Sally Lloyd, said that, "I am tortured by the fact that as we played in the park, Stephanie's life was taken".

Fioletti's defence KC (King's Counsel - a top barrister) said that Fioletti had a severe personality disorder which affected his culpability and that he had been on suicide watch when on remand waiting for his trial.

The judge, Susan Evans KC, sentenced him to life with a minimum term of 15 years. She said to him that, "The damage you have done is immeasurable."

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Veterinary fees in the UK are often unjustifiably variable and inflated

NEWS AND COMMENT/OPINION: The Times reports today that veterinary fees in the UK have become a minefield because they unjustifiably vary tremendously from region to region, from place to place and in general they have increased many would argue unreasonably. 

The changes have come about because of the purchase of a very large number of independently owned and operated veterinary clinics by big corporations including equity funds which are managed by accountants; businessmen who's objective is to extract as much money as possible from these businesses whereas in the past the primary objective by an independent veterinarian was to provide a good service.

The Times reports that dog and cat owners are facing inexplicable variations in prices with some chains charging seven times more than others for the same procedure.

A new business/website has commenced which recently looked into this to try and help pet owners navigate the minefield. It was started by Susie Samuel and it is called VetHelpDirect.com. They have asked a large number of veterinary clinics and businesses owning and controlling these clinics to provide information about their pricing.

Three of the big six chains said that they would eventually provide all the information requested. However, the private-equity owned IVC Evidensia declined to provide the information. 

This business operates more than 1000 practices in the UK. They said that the "price is a single metric that does not reflect the quality of care or customer experience provided by our team." Comment: most people would see their response as trying to find a reason to not provide the information because it embarrasses them.

Here are some examples:

• The cost of a consultations varies between £20 and £120 in the UK.
• The cost of castrating a medium-sized dog varies between £100 and £760.
• Prescription charges vary between £12 and £31.
• The cheapest area for consultations is Dumfries and Galloway.
• The highest prices are found in West London.
• The most expensive prescription charge is in Canterbury.
• The least expensive prescription charges in Plymouth.
• Within the Birmingham post code, the cost of castrating a 35 kg dog varies between £155 and £500.
• The variations on the above in Torquay are between £40 and £120.
• As a whole, on average, the cost of a consultation in the UK is £47 but in Southampton it is nearer £60.

Veterinarians have been accused of failing to be transparent about their prices. It makes it difficult for customers to compare which is the major reason why, I suspect, that Susie Samuel has started her comparison price website mentioned above.

Her website provides visitors with the means to compare veterinary surgeries under a five-star review system. They found that the higher prices were not linked to better services. The 20 most expensive practices had an average rating of 4.4 out of five while the cheapest 20 has an average rating of 4.5.

--------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Diary of a female Palestinian in Gaza recording taking a cat to a veterinary clinic

The Guardian newspaper online is publishing extracts of a diary from a 35-year-old Palestinian man living in Gaza by the name of Ziad. The diary provides us with some insights into life in Gaza under this terrible Israeli onslaught. Note: I first believed the diary was written by a woman because I misinterpreted the name's gender! Hence the title to the article.

A dystopian scene of shattered and destroyed Gaza. Image: UNICEF/UNI453255/EL BABA

We all understand that Israel has a right to retaliate in response to the terrorist attack on October 7 which was horrendously brutal. But to many, Israel have gone too far and they seem to be bent on destroying Gaza. Although I won't get into a political debate on that.

But Ziad is writing his diary within this context; a shattered Gaza were the inhabitants are struggling to survive and remain alive. Within his diary is a little extract of a cat that she rescued and how he deals with her. The cat's name is Manara. The name is Arabic for "Light". I've taken the name to be female.

I hope The Guardian don't mind me republishing a short extract from Ziad's diary:

Saturday 4 November 9.30am: "We finally find a vet where we can take Manara to have the remaining injections. It is 45 minutes’ walk away....I go with Ahmad with Manara in the bag. She does not resist..We finally reach the vet, and he tells us there is no need to give the remaining shot to Manara. He says that her eye is ruined, and all we need to do for the other one is to use eye drops. 

He does not approve of giving her anti-flea medicine because she has scars all over her body...The vet has no food left or cat litter, but he directs us to another shop, which takes another 10 minutes of walking to reach. When we arrive, I feel shocked; there is a lot of destruction around the place. I am scared.

We go into the shop and buy the food and litter. I see a number of birds, fish and one hamster. The owner tells us he has lost many animals because of the bombing....Noon Since Manara has chosen to sleep in an old carton, I go to buy her a box. Finding a box is easy but finding a blanket to put in it is not. There are almost no blankets or covers left."

He goes on to recount that only one shop has the facility where she can withdraw cash with a Visa card but at a very high commission. He goes in search of a blanket for Manara. He walked for an hour visiting every shop on his walk looking for a blanket. One seller offers to provide him with a blanket from his own home. He refuses and thanks him. He eventually finds a bed cover that came with two pillowcases.

RELATED: No cat food in Gaza since the war began on Oct 7. This means cats will become ill through a lack of proper nutrition.

Comment: my comment on the above extract is that it is surprising to me that a veterinarian's clinic remains open but barely. How many are there? Very few I expect which means many companion animals will not be receiving treatment. 

It also tells us that Manara was badly injured and is blind in one eye. She has scars all over her body presumably from injuries suffered in the collapse of a building or a bomb blast. You wonder how Manara feels emotionally. You wonder whether she'll cope emotionally. She must be enormously anxious because of the disruption, noise, irregularity of human movement and activity. 

Domestic cats love calm and regularity, routines and predictability as it reassures them. This cat is suffering the exact opposite while carrying injuries. I don't have much hope for her in the immediate future bearing in mind that Benjamin Netanyahu has committed to bombing and shelling Gaza for months to come. 

And there will be Israeli troops on the ground trying to find and kill Hamas terrorists. That'll mean more destruction of infrastructure and homes and more destruction of children. It is said that around 8000 children have been known to be killed with a possible added 3000 under the rubble.

I don't take sides. But I see a wrong being carried out here which is an over-reaction by Israel. They are using dumb bombs half the time. These are not guided missiles but from simply dropped injected from warplanes. The bombs have not been programmed to hit a certain target.

I wish Manara and Ziad well. I wish them all of God's blessings and all the luck in the world to survive the next months.

-----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Veterinarians who declaw cats must HATE them

The argument is that only a veterinarian who hates cats could declaw them because declawing is so obviously a form of punishment for the independent cat who refuses to be submissive towards the human as dogs are to their owners.

All declawing vets should be behind bars for the crime of animal cruelty. This vet declaws cats. His name is Dr Glenn Ephraim. Image: MikeB

That is a theory. Why and how else can a vet act so obviously and blatantly in clear violation of their oath not to cause harm? Declawing is non-therapeutic. It is elective. Elected by the cat owner who is scared of cat claws and perhaps scared of cats in general.

In the cat world in the United States, the elephant in the room is how the heck the veterinarians have got away with brutally and cruelly mutilating innocent kittens and adult cats since the 1950s.

You think I am exaggerating about the cruelty of the operation? No, I am not. It is the partial amputation of the ten toes of the forepaws of the cat. And sometimes all the hind leg paws as well. It causes excruciating pain and can ruin the cat for the rest of their life. Declawed cats are 7 times more likely to inappropriately eliminate. And they commonly bite their owners as their claws are gone. They compensate.

RELATED: Judgement Day for Declawing Vets.

You think the owners who declaw their cats are better off? No, many of them abandon their declawed cats because their cats' behavior has gone wrong. Declawing can change a cat's character for the worse.

Only vets who hate cats could be so horrible towards them in doing something which is a clear-cut crime in many other countries. These vets should all be in jail.

-----

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

How long do I need to keep my female cat crated post desexing?

The recommendation should come direct from your veterinarian actually but typically, it is recommended to keep a female cat crated in a small and quiet room for about 24-48 hours following the spaying operation. 

The idea is to keep the cat's activities limited for a few days to promote healing and to minimize the risk of complications. Although the duration for this will vary depending upon several factors including the cat's health and behaviour.

The environment should be comfortable and stress-free and that inside the crate or room there should soft bedding, access to water and the litter box and of course food. The litter box should be distanced from the food and water. The place should be quiet with limited interactions between the spayed female and other animals or children. She needs rest and quiet to recover. It's quite a big operation.

When the confinement period is over her activity levels can gradually be allowed to increase but once again it would be wise to seek your veterinarian's recommendations.

The general advice, on my research, is that vigorous activity and jumping et cetera should be limited including access to the outdoor environments until the incision has fully healed which should take around 10-14 days.

If you have any concerns about the recovery, you will no doubt contact your veterinarian for advice.

UK veterinarians to be investigated over rising bills

For me, this is a welcome development. And also for me, the rising bills are due to one primary factor: the buying up of independent veterinary clinics by big business managed by gray men in gray suits who focus on financial profit over animal welfare. 

Vet checks cat. Image: Pixabay.

They saw an opportunity in the marketplace which was veterinary clinics owned by the veterinarians themselves who were not, in their view, sufficiently focused on making money. They've dived in and bought them up and altered the pricing structure and the methodology of operating these clinics.

And now, the competition regulator has begun a review of veterinary services because there are concerns among cat owners and others that their costs are rising faster than inflation.

I suspect that the government's concern is more to do with the inflationary aspect of the services than animal welfare. The UK government is desperate to get inflation down. The Competition and Markets Authority is going to look into how services for pets are bought and sold. About two thirds of households in the UK own a pet.

And The Times agrees with me! I've just read that. They say that, "The market has been transformed by consolidation. Independent practices are being taken over by groups."

At one time, small practices i.e. independently-owned practices accounted for 89% of the veterinary industry in 2013. That figure has fallen to 45% in 2021.

"A single company may own hundreds of practices and it may be unclear whether their vet is part of a large group. This could impact choice and reduce the incentives of practices to compete". Those are the words of the Competition and Markets Authority.

The president of the British Veterinary Association defends veterinary practices for selling up to big business in saying that his association had "not seen any hard data or real evidence to suggest that corporatisation is driving up prices."

In contrast, a spokesman for the consumer magazine, Which?, said: "[Our] research has uncovered a number of areas of concern, such as pet owners not knowing the price of treatments until after their appointment, people being unaware their vet is part of a chain and difficulties [finding] cheaper medication. The Competition and Markets Authority's review must consider these issues and lead to a more competitive veterinary industry which makes it easier for owners to shop around for the best option for them and their pet."

Huge rise in rip-off veterinary bills in the UK due to equity fund buyouts of independent vets

Huge rise in rip-off veterinary bills in the UK due to equity fund buyouts of independent vets. Image: MikeB

NEWS AND OPINION - UK: There are a number of reasons why veterinary bills have increased quite shockingly recently. But the primary reason is this: the independent veterinarians i.e. those veterinary clinics owned by the partners who are also veterinarians, have been bought up by corporate businesses owned by equity funds.

Young cat and vet. This picture is here for illustrative purposes only. Image: Pixabay.

It is equity funds who ultimately own British veterinarians in large numbers. And they bought them up because they saw an opportunity in the market.

They believed that the independent veterinarians were under-charging. They believed that they could dramatically up their charging rates and turn a huge profit. They saw an opportunity to exploit the veterinary market in the UK. 

It was an old-fashioned business. It suited the British citizen because British citizens like the old-fashioned ways. They were more honest and modest in their monetary aspirations. They weren't exploitative.

The charges were reasonable. And let's not forget that veterinarians provide a private health service. The British are used to the National Health Service which is free at the point of delivery.

If the charges suddenly rise dramatically as they have, they will be shocked and they are.

So, the first reason for the huge rises in veterinary fees is because corporate enterprises have bought up thousands of veterinary clinics and turned them into conglomerates; moneymaking businesses.

The second reason is that more and more people are turning to health insurance and this may be because the prices are going up. It's a kind of self-serving situation, an upward spiral.

Research by Tesco Bank suggests that more than half of pet owners in the UK now have pet health insurance.

Now, when a veterinarian knows that their work is going to be paid for by an insurance company, they feel that they can charge more. Once again, this is a self-serving, upward spiral in costs.

But the bottom line is that big business has got their teeth into the old-fashioned veterinary clinic and your typical cat-owning customer can own longer expect a charming veterinarian who is a partner in his own business charging you modest fees for a consultation and not seeking ways to rip you off.

Because when big business wants to make money out of any clinics they more or less have to rip you off. They will suggest procedures and operations which might not be necessary or borderline necessary.

One of the big providers of veterinary services in the UK is IVC. It is owned by private equity and operates more than a thousand practices.

Up to September 2021, in that year, they had revenues of £885 million which represents a 33% increase on the previous year. And there was an operating profit of £150 million.

One of the brands that IVC operates is Parkview Vets in south-east London. They charge £56.82 p for a consultation and £125 for a same day appointment. The cost of a spaying operation on a female dog varies between £390 and £590. They say that they provide a gold standard service. They should do at that price.

It is the same picture elsewhere. One lady, Abeer Alaydi, 28, adopted a kitten. She named him Charcoal. Charcoal became ill so she took him to a local veterinarian who charged £47 for an initial consultation.

The vet asked her some questions. Charcoal had been eating badly and was lethargic. She confirmed that Charcoal had not eaten a foreign body. The veterinarian suggested an x-ray and some blood tests.

The bill for those two simple procedures amounted to £700. She was shocked and said:

"I was shocked. I had no idea vets cost that much. I felt like I was being exploited. They could have run an external examination or offered him some food to see if it was a blockage or a loss of appetite, but I felt like they wanted to go for the most expensive option. As a first-time pet owner, I was worried and felt responsible for the well-being of my kitten. However, they are experienced vets and should be able to tell when something is serious enough to call for an x-ray. I feel I was emotionally manipulated to agree to any suggestions they offered."

She felt that she was exploited and, to me, the charges look high to put it mildly. I'm not used to these prices either. But what is behind it is ultimately greed because equity funds only buy businesses to exploit them, to squeeze out as much profit as they can from them and to do so ruthlessly.

The Competition and Markets Authority is actively monitoring competition in the veterinary industry. They are receiving complaints about higher prices or lower quality services because too many vets in a similar area are under the control of the same business. This is stifling competition.

This is a very bad development for British cat and dog owners. Watch this space. What is happening is that some cat and dog owners are going abroad to countries like Turkey or France where they can obtain prices which are much reduced to those in Britain. They go on a holiday and have their cattle dog checked out and treated at the same time. A consultation in France costs £30 compared to more than twice that at £70 in the UK. Rip-off Britain is at it again.

The problem here is that there are pet passport issues to contend with and of course after-care issues as well. It's impossible to deliver proper after-care if you are living in Britain and the operation took place in Turkey.

Is cat euthanasia guaranteed always to be totally humane and painless?

 The question in the title, I think, is a fair one. 99.9% of the general public believes that euthanising a pet is painless and the humane thing to do when the animal is chronically ill and suffering persistent pain. Of course, we know that many pets are euthanised at the convenience of their owner or because they are unwanted. That, incidentally, is a symptom of the failure of cat and dog domestication but it is another story.

I am asking the question whether euthanising a cat with sodium pentobarbital is genuinely painless. When this drug is delivered to humans in 84% of cases their lungs fill up with a frothy liquid which causes pain and distress indeed panic because it is like waterboarding torture. How do cats feel when this drug is delivered to them? Image in public domain.

Perhaps the two words "painless" and "killing" simply cannot live together. It seems unnatural that we can kill animals painlessly because being killed would seem to be automatically painful in the natural world. At least in some way or other. Can it be entirely painless? We like to think it is. My research indicates that it isn't.

Even the best veterinarians, much-loved in their community, might occasionally screw up and make a botch of the euthanasia of a loyal customer's cat or dog. And some veterinarians do not follow sound procedures.

There are different ways to euthanize a pet at a veterinary clinic. You can employ the one jab injection of barbiturate anaesthetic, sodium pentobarbital, that's the simple route. But it can go wrong because the hypodermic needle might be misplaced or the vein might burst. The sodium pentobarbital might spill out into the body tissue which I'm told is painful. It may be very painful.

That's the first issue. And in any case, simply injecting a cat in a vein of itself is going to be at least potentially painful and probably actually painful.

We shouldn't forget, by the way, the distress/pain of the pet's owner who should really be present in the consultation room when their beloved companion is being humanely dispatched.

The way to avoid the above-mentioned difficulty in administering the killing drug is to apply an intravenous catheter to the animal and then you administer the drug through that catheter. It is a more controlled and predictable way of proceeding.

The problem here is that it can be difficult to apply the catheter. The animal might struggle. The owner won't like it and be distressed. They take the animal into a back room which I think is going to also distress the owner because they won't know what's happening.

Then they bring the cat or dog forward into the consultation room to administer the killing barbiturate anaesthetic. There could be a third step which is to apply a painkiller and sedation drug which renders the cat or dog unconscious before the final injection is applied.

In short, this could be or should be a three-stage process to guarantee that it is painless. That is: a catheter, a knockout drug which renders them in conscious, and then the third stage is the final barbiturate injection.

That's what the best veterinarians do to humanely euthanise a companion cat. However, as I understand it, most veterinarians don't do it this way. They might use the single injection which is I think problematic. Although they might use a two-stage process and avoid using the catheter which of itself is potentially problematic.

The point I'm making in this post is that it requires considerable care and a good method to ensure that the euthanasia of a companion animal at a veterinary clinic is genuinely painless and therefore humane. Sometimes it isn't on my understanding having researched the matter on the Internet. We don't have numbers to rely on to tell us if this is a big problem or a non-problem. I can't find the statistics. 

There is also the issue of the drug sodium pentobarbital which I have highlighted in the caption to the photo above.

Of course, you should know that I'm not a veterinarian and therefore reliant upon research. But I use the best sources and, in this case, these were veterinary websites.

147 words which explain why cat declawing is barbaric and unnecessary

This is a 147-word letter to the editor on the Detroit Free Press website that was pointed out to me by a mate of mine, Doug, and which needs to be aired and recycled for as many people as possible to see. It sums up what is so immoral and cruel about this operation which has been and continues to be encouraged by many thousands of veterinarians in the United States. It is a shocking state of affairs when you consider that each vet who amputates the distal joint of each fore-toe of a kitten does so in gross breach of their solemn oath not to harm patients. In 99.99% of cases declawing is carried out for non-therapeutic reasons and therefore is a breach of oath. As such the operation is arguably a assault by a professional on a kitten and a crime under America's animal welfare laws.

RELATED: Epidemic of Botched Cat Declaw Operations.

Here is the letter - thanks Melissa Sanger in Brighton:

As a licensed veterinary technician, I have tried to comfort cats as they writhe in pain, desperately trying to pull the blood-soaked bandages from their mutilated paws after being declawed. This barbaric disfigurement — which involves severing the first digit of every toe, bones and all — should be banned everywhere.

Cats claw to exercise, stretch and mark territory. Cutting off their body parts cuts off their ability to engage in these natural and important behaviors, and can cause them lifelong back and joint pain.

Without claws, many cats resort to eliminating outside the litterbox to mark their territory. Once-friendly cats often become withdrawn and aggressive. Studies show that declawed cats are more likely to have behavioral problems, often resulting in abandonment by the very people who had them declawed.

Providing plenty of scratching posts and regular nail trims will protect furniture, and cats’ physical and psychological well-being.

New York City woman is suing her veterinarian for $3 million for 'murdering' her cat. Discuss.

This is a highly unusual story. It is extremely rare (unique?) to succeed when suing your veterinarian for "murder". What she means, I suspect, is that she is suing her veterinarian for malpractice. For being negligent. Making a mistake. She wants $3 million in compensation. That's an awful lot and she won't get it. And I also believe that she will not win the case and I'll tell you why.

Misia. Photo: Alina. It looks like she was a former TNR stray cat.

Misia was a 15-year-old tuxedo cat that her owner, Alina Kedzierska, rescued. They had a great relationship. But in June 2020 Misia, was found on the floor next to her bed in a "strange position". She couldn't move and Alina rushed her to the local animal hospital which is the Animal Medical Center (AMC) on E. 67th St.

Her cat was seen by a veterinarian who had been at the clinic since 2019. Her name is Lauren Saunders. She is a senior veterinarian there. She diagnosed a feline stroke and said that Misia had to be euthanised. Alina reluctantly agreed.

She must have discussed the matter with another veterinarian afterwards who said that it is possible to treat a feline stroke with medication: anticoagulant therapy. In which case she would have been alive today Alina claims.

The hospital made another mistake (or was it?) when they cremated Misia without Alina's consent as I understand it. She wanted an autopsy done but it didn't happen. They also lost Misia's body for a while and ignored Alina's request for a necropsy (autopsy).

So, there are two weaknesses as I see it with this claim. Firstly, it does seem pretty clear that the veterinarian did make a mistake but that's going to be challenged. The question is, was this the kind of mistake that a reasonable veterinarian could make? Veterinarians are not robots. They make mistakes. Courts have to factor that into their decisions. If a veterinarian makes a reasonable mistake, you can't successfully sue them for compensation.

The question is would a reasonably competent veterinarian have made the same decision under the same circumstances? If the answer is yes then there is no negligence.

There has to be quite a lot of leeway in a negligence claim against medical professional because you can't expect them to be perfect. And Misia was 15 years old. It may be the case that she wouldn't have been greatly benefited by medication and treatment for a stroke.

I'm not deliberately painting a negative picture but a realistic one. Another issue is that a domestic cat is not worth $3 million even when you factor in the emotional loss. I have said in the past that under the circumstances if a claim is successful, the owner should receive a minimum sum in compensation to take into account emotional distress which is fixed under statute i.e. federal or local law. That sum could be $10,000. It would reflect the loss of a family member as important to the owner as a child or relative.

Owners of cats and dogs poisoned to death by commercially prepared foods should receive an automatic $10,000 payment in compensation.

But at the moment courts rarely include compensation for emotional distress. So, she has a mountain to climb to win the case and to win that kind of compensation which, in truth, won't actually happen.

There is perhaps one last point to make. When you are with a veterinarian and they say that in their opinion your cat has to be euthanised because of XYZ, it might be useful to take a deep breath and tell them that you are going to seek a second opinion. 

Agreeing to euthanasia is going to be a final decision which cannot be reversed. I think under the pressure of being with a veterinarian and your cat being seriously ill, you need to take a backward step and give yourself a little bit of time to reflect on what is going on in order to come to the right decision.

I am grateful to the New York Post for the story.

Wives should not tell husbands to take their cat or dog to the veterinarian (the surprising reason)

The TikTok video below on Ben the Vet's TikTok page is very short but very clear! Ben has used a TikTok facility called "duet". This is when you take the TikTok video of one person and put a video of yourself next to it in a split screen effect. I presume you can also comment on the video but this is impossible when, as is the case in this example, the female delivers a rant about not letting your husband take your pet to the vet!

But Ben does not disagree with her. The point that the lady is making - and I presume she is either a veterinarian or a vet tech - is that when wives tell husbands to take the family cat or dog to the vet without being emotionally engaged and/or without full knowledge of what is going on, they are unhelpful to the veterinarian in diagnosing the illness.

Without knowing more, I have a feeling that this advice mainly applies to domestic cats and not dogs. It is fairly common knowledge that the husband will be more invested in the family dog than the family cat. And it works both ways because the wife is much more likely to be invested in the caregiving of the domestic cat. They may also be equally involved in dog caregiving but it might be fair to say that the 'man of the house' - to use a classic old-fashioned term - is the person in charge of the dog. Is that fair comment?

RELATED: Disgruntled pet owners disillusioned with private equity-owned veterinary practices in UK.

Wives should not tell husbands to take their cat or dog to the veterinarian. And Ben the Vet on TikTok does not disagree! Screenshot.

And the presumption here is that veterinarians like to receive decent input from the patient's owner in the consultation room. They need to ask questions of the owner to hear the history of the disease sometimes.  The backstory and lead up to the current symptoms. This allows them to better understand the presented health problem.

I have always said that a cat caregiver who knows a little bit about cat health can be useful to a veterinarian. It also allows the caregiver to keep an eye on what's going on in a knowledgeable way.

Not all professionals are good at their job. Not all veterinarians are good veterinarians. An intelligent cat caregiver of long-standing who has read up about the domestic cat's behaviour and health may know almost as much as a recently qualified veterinarian.

You don't want to get into an argument with a veterinarian about diagnosis and treatment but you do want to provide useful input to speed things up and improve the accuracy of the diagnosis and therefore the treatment.

Veterinarian nicely explains why their fees SEEM to be expensive when they are not

Vets provide private health care. Screenshot.

Ben the Vet on TikTok explains in his very precise and clear way why veterinary bills seem to be expensive. It is far more likely that the British people will think this because Brits are used to getting medical treatment for themselves which is 'free' at the point of delivery. The NHS is supported from tax receipts. So, it is not exactly free but it feels like it to many.

Veterinarians provide private health care and as you can see in the video their fees for the same operations on humans are much cheaper. 

Vets are cheap and not expensive if truth be told. I don't begrudge vet's fees. They could and perhaps should charge more as many independent vet clinics are selling up to the big corporate owners. This tells us that they find it too hard to operate their own businesses and be a veterinary surgeon at the same time.

RELATED: Why are 80% of new veterinarians in the UK women?

There is another point, I feel. Because of speciesism humans regard themselves as being of a higher 'value' than lesser animals. For that reason, they feel it is okay to spend heavily on their health when needed.

But they don't want to spend heavily on companion animals if they can help it. This leaves them with the feeling that vet's fees are expensive when they are not.

RELATED: Is it right that veterinarians are cheaper than doctors?

And there is one last point. When vets such as occurs in America carry out mutilating operations for no therapeutic benefit to the animal whatsoever, you have to hate them for it. I am referring to cat declawing.

UK: number of neutered cats fell from 91 to 86% in 2020 due to Covid

NEWS AND COMMENT - UK: The legacy of Covid is with us in the world of cats because it is reported that the pandemic has caused the number of neutered cats in the UK to fall from 91 to 86% in 2020. The reason: cat owners were frightened to go to a veterinary clinic because of the fear of getting Covid.

Cat at a veterinary clinic in the UK. Photograph: Getty images

The problem is compounded by the fact that more people than usual adopted cats and dogs during the Covid pandemic as company at home during lockdowns. The two changes in human behaviour combined resulted in more than the usual number of unsterilised domestic cats. This in turn produced more unwanted litters which further in turn has put rescue charities under increased pressure as the number of unwanted cats has increased at their rescue centres.

One veterinary clinic is offering low-cost neutering and spaying for eligible cat owners on low incomes in the Bristol area: Bristol Animal Rescue Centre. The cost of neutering a male cat at this centre is £30. Spaying of female cats costs £45 to eligible pet owners across Bristol. I am sure that there are many more clinics offering the same service to try and rectify what is a problem caused by Covid.

The RSPCA report that over 1 million cats remain unneutered in the UK resulting in an unprecedented increase in cat breeding.

The Independent newspaper reported that the RSPCA had warned that these conditions might lead to hordes of cats roaming the streets. I think that was an exaggeration. A bit of good news according to Cats Protection is that the number of cats neutered under four months of age rose from 22% in 2020 to 24% in 2021. This was a welcome increase in the uptake of pre-pubertal neutering by the veterinary profession.