http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1232217/Why-Im-ashamed-vet-shocking-expose-profession-puts-pets-painful-unnecessary-treatments-fleece-trusting-owners.html

Very enlightening and nice to have some honesty, I think the last sentences of that piece are what we should all live and breathe.

Common sense must prevail. A loving pet owner does not humanise their cat or dog but realises it is an animal.
The loving owner does not want to maximise their pet's life at any cost but puts their animal's welfare first.
Do not fear the death of your pet when the time comes. Instead, embrace it and ensure your pet has a good death in the same way you gave it a good life.

Most of us have noticed over the years that many of our vets are just all about the money. They are not in the interest of the animal anymore just how much they can make. Taking into consideration staff salaries, bills, overheads, equipment etc, it still does not compute. A dear friend of mine recently had such an issue and I told her to change vets instantly which she did, give me the little country vet any day.

It is very sad for animals and owners today, but many vets have us by the short and curlies.

Interesting article - but I would think that the 'blame' is 50/50 - far too many owners who put their pets through prolonged and distressing treatment 'to give them a chance'. A lot of humans expect similar treatment for cancer etc, so why not for their pets ?? Not for me - having watched my sister die of cancer this year, I certainly wouldn't put myself through prolonged treatment, let alone my dog :(

Yes - vets should give better advice to owners, but owners should think long and hard before prolonging treatment - 'who am I actually doing this for ? Myself - or my pet ?'

At long last, a vet that talks sense!
Lea x

> but many vets have us by the short and curlies

Owners can always say 'No - enough'

Exactly the decision that I made when I was a veterinary nurse almost 40 years ago. 
Pet insurance was just beginning then and I could see how that made Vets' attitudes change to the way they treated the animals in front of them.

There is no way that I would make a dog of mine suffer when the prognosis is poor.  In fact I've always gone down the 'pain free and comfortable' route, feeling that if a dog doesn't feel well anyway, how would it understand why, instead of staying familiar surroundings with owners who love him, would they abandon him to a cage and strangers pulling him about?  You can explain to a child but not an animal.  :(

I don't agree with everything he is saying, from reading it I get the feel he is saying you shouldn't put pets threw expensive treatments with low chances and that owners are terrible if they do. well I guess that means I should have had my girl put down when she got parvo, how terrible of me for having the vets treat her.

I think vets should give owners all the possible treatment options, and let the owner make up there mind. Many times I've had vets do this and they have advised which one they think is best.
When my rabbit lost the use of his back legs suddenly my vets at the time said there was a operation they do in dogs, sometimes in cats but he wouldn't attempt it in a rabbit and he would advise I have him put down.
With a rabbit at work who kept having to have its teeth done as they didn't ware down due to not being set right, the vets did it a few times untill the last time the vet felt it wasn't in her best interest as many of the teeth had gone bad and would need removing so they advised putting her down.
When my dog kept being sick I asked the vets about x rating her as I was worried she had swolled something but they all felt her stomach and said they didn't think she needed one as couldn't feel anything.

With my small animals I've often been given things for free with the smaller vets not the bigger groups of vets.
vets are like any other business at the end of the day and if someone is going to one who charges more and keeps advising unnecessary treatment simply change vets.

He's got SOME points but when he started ranting on about breeders and Crufts etc he most DEFINITELY lost my support. It's just another Jemima under a different name. Just a few examples:

We have cats that can't breathe because of their overly flat noses and weep constantly from eyes that are too large, other cats and dogs without fur that can't go out in the sunshine as they will burn.

The current fashionable craze for miniature dogs is also damaging. These dogs are prized on their tininess  -  so the smallest dogs are chosen but in reality these are the runts of the litter that used to be allowed to die as they were so weak.


Having bred Persians for 24 years, and shown them all along (not to mention that I for 4 years worked for a vet who was very interested in persians and had a lot of breeders as clients), I have yet to see one of these mythical creatures that cannot breathe. They seem to be existing in the same land as the unicorns?

White moggies, or moggies with white on the ears, have for years been getting skin cancer due to sun exposure. These are not deliberately bred for their looks, they do not lack fur at all. Indeed my former mother in law had a white and black rescued moggy who got cancer on both her ears due to sun exposure. Personally I don't like any animal to not have fur, but it's far from the truth to claim that only they cannot go outside because of the sun.

And the breeders who keep the runts in toylitters are certainly not the show breeders, which this vet is implying. Yet again the show breeders are taking the blame for the back yard breeders!

He even says that dachshunds have been bred to have long bodies to look nice, when in fact they were bred for a purpose -and certainly in my home country are still VERY much used for that purpose -hunting, and being able to go down small holes.

Anyone notice that the article is dated 2009!