Hi
their is fab and amazing story in daily mail on line
6yr lab had conjenital heart problems
profeser at vet school in herts decided to do open heart surgery on dog his surgary was based on surgary they do on children
this was first ever open heart surgay thats been done on dog

highly recomed reading artical its fasanting

poor dog :( why must we subject them to everything we can do for humans.

> why must we subject them to everything we can do for humans.

Noel Fitzpatrick would love this comment ....... he is a huge champion for human and veterinary treatment being more inter-active, suggesting that more cooperation should be happening, for the benefit of both human and animal.

The op has given bitch new life she can now wonder round gardern
I use to work in vets the meds and ops they do are amazing and giving aniamls new life before new tech came they would of been pts
i am all for it
infact my gran and i both said we would rather vet opertied on us than doctor as vets have so much experince of new meds and tech
what about the gorrilla at bristol zoo she had pre eclampsa and baby heartbret was very low they called in vets and two human doctors to.do ceser mum and baby survied and doing well
So yes human and vet med do.work together
i worked in zoo to every birth is sepical due to rare breding list etc

> The op has given bitch new life she can now wonder round gardern

Not really sure I'd subject a dog to such invasive surgery so they can wonder round the garden, I'd want better quality of life.

I'm afraid I'm of the opinion that sometimes, just because you can, doesn't mean you should.....

would rather vet opertied on us than doctor as vets have so much experince of new meds and tech

I understand your point but take into account that the vast majority of the population, both on this forum & society as a whole, simply see NHS docs & get the treatment & facilities allowed by their system.
Going private either for general medical things or major ops is a whole world away, in fact a solar system away from NHS funded facilities.

I am in london & vets bills are horrendous, that is not simply a case of 'rip off' vets, the actual renting of private commercial properties here i London is the highest in UK & vets here must pay it, everything has a context & to put that in a personal context I am no lover of vets by any means, I don't really like them at all, even so some points need to be contextualised a bit more.
.

I'm afraid I'm of the opinion that sometimes, just because you can, doesn't mean you should.....

Quite agree. Quality of life has to be considered and for how long. I do however think what NF does with intertwining animal and human medical sciences together is the way forward and in many cases it can do absolute wonders for our pets but there is a limit on whether its the right thing to do for them.

There are a lot of myths around heart surgery - many have fantastic results and very fast, unpainful recovering with some people going home within 24 hours - in addition many heart procedures are now being done - including coronary artery bypass grafts etc - to patient over 80 and there has even been patients of 100 years of age.  If it is okay for a human at those sort of ages - why would it be too harsh for a dog?  It would depend on the surgery and the recovery time. I am all for this sort of progression in both human and animal treatments.

Animals don't have a choice and we can't explain that it will be worth it in the end

With heart problems they can FEEL the difference with many almost immediately - they don't need to be told to understand feeling better - no chest pain - no palpitations - no breathlessness.

why would it be too harsh for a dog?

Its an interesting Q, what would have to come after a successful op is a lot of care with exercise as to what level of activity would be favourable or non risky.
.

True - you would have to actually hold them back from being overly energetic more than anything once they felt better - but that's hardly as devastating for the dog as euthanasia or gradually worsening symptoms.

That is not to say that it is for all dogs either - just like its not for all 90 year olds - everything should be taken on a case by case basis, with humans and animals.  I just don't like it when I hear huge sweeping generalised statements where a stock answer comes out condemning dogs to death on the ill-informed premis that any operation with the heart must be cruel to do to any dog.  Not true.  Just as it isn't for humans.

> but that's hardly as devastating for the dog as euthanasia or gradually worsening symptoms.

The dog wouldn't be aware of the euthanasia. I honestly believe that there are far worse things than death and I personally wouldn't put my dogs through any invasive treatment such as this one. One of my dogs - my extra special one in a million dog - had a tumour removed a few years ago and following complications and seeing how much the surgery and the very long recovery affected him so adversely I have decided that I wouldn't put a dog through that ever again. I would far rather he spent whatever time he has left with me enjoying his life than having to spend another six months to a year with a very restricted lifestyle.

If he lost his quality of life I would rather he went quietly to sleep in my arms than put him through a procedure that would prolong his life but not return it to what it should be. It's my own very personal view and we are all different but having watched and cared for a human loved one who would have been far better off leaving this world and their pain behind a good four months earlier than they did I would never hesitate to give that option to one of my dogs - I just wish we could do the same for humans.

> than put him through a procedure that would prolong his life but not return it to what it should be

You are generalising and being inaccurate.  Those with heart problems that are dealt with have to be on restricted exercise post op- just as they would recovering from a broken arm - it does instantly condemn all dogs with all heart issues to a restricted or permanent change in their life styles as you seem to be imagining - you are generalising heart issues/repair when there are so very many medical treatments as well as surgical and they all have different outcomes, prognosis long-term and short-term.  I'm very sorry but that is a blinkered way to look at any topic.

I too have had experiences with dogs where I had to decide when enough was enough and I knew when to make it with both dogs that it happened with. It still has not changed my view that wherever possible a chance should be given but I do believe that only an owner can make any sort of judgement call as to whether to treat or not to treat is absolutely specific to both the particular illness and possible interventions and the dogs personal character - I do not believe that it is something that should in any way be clean, cut and dry for all dogs with any particular condition.

As for the "I just wish we could do the same for humans" - I for one am glad that it cant since then no doubt with other blinkered souls looking at the world that way all older people will be shipped off to dignitas the minute they have a touch of arthritis or the need of a simple pacemaker.

> As for the "I just wish we could do the same for humans" - I for one am glad that it cant since then no doubt with other blinkered souls looking at the world that way all older people will be shipped off to dignitas the minute they have a touch of arthritis or the need of a simple pacemaker.

Oh wow - and you accused me of generalising . Having nursed my husband through a terminal illness I can assure you I am not a "blinkered soul". Watching someone you love reduced to being incapable of anything but breathing - laboured, painful breathing- made me realise that if I had let any of my dogs exist in such a fashion I would have been prosecuted for cruelty. To exist in that way for months - and it was only existing - is not something I would wish upon anybody.

And funnily enough my husband did have a pacemaker  so certainly don't have a blinkered view on that issue - nor do I have a blinkered view on heart surgery either. My niece is hoping for a heart transplant due to heart failure and she is only in her twenties so no problem with heart surgery for humans at all.

None of which changes my mind as to whether or not I would put a dog of mine through extensive invasive treatment - I wouldn't. I would far rather they had a shorter very active life than a prolonged one of a lesser quality. My dogs are working dogs and live a very active life style - being crated for months and not being able to be walked at all was not a good time for my older boy and I wouldn't put him through that again just so I could have him with me for longer.

a) I too have experience nursing loved ones who were terminal but I felt no need to use personal experience to "prove" my point
b) I too have Extensive experience in relation to heart failure - and I felt no need to use personal experience to "prove" my point
c) I will never apologise for being against euthanasia of human
d) It does not surprise me that those who would wish to see such euthanasia become legal also have no problem in agreeing to the same at the drop of a hat for all animals that suffer from any heart defect
e) We will agree to disagree since there is no purpose in creating an unnecessary argument or poor atmosphere on here - I have as much right to write my views as you do and as much right as you do to have my own opinions and feelings over issues - I've said mine without needing to add personal details to qualify my experience and don't intend to - a persons experience shapes their opinion - it sounds as if you have some experience similar to mine and yet we both reached opposite conclusions - I guess that is human nature

) I too have experience nursing loved ones who were terminal but I felt no need to use personal experience to "prove" my point
b) I too have Extensive experience in relation to heart failure - and I felt no need to use personal experience to "prove" my point

Tinar I shared my experiences because you called me a blinkered soul.

c) I will never apologise for being against euthanasia of human

I never asked you to - however I make no apologies for my views on being able to give a loved one peace if it were at all possible and was legal.

d) It does not surprise me that those who would wish to see such euthanasia become legal also have no problem in agreeing to the same at the drop of a hat for all animals that suffer from any heart defect

Not sure where you got the idea  that the above is my view? I truly believe that there are far worse fates than death- as I said before and used my "personal experience" to illustrate - when a terminally ill person expresses their wish to leave this earth and they are suffering then I can see no reason why they should't be allowed to if they have stated their wishes when of sound mind and those wishes are not coerced or forced upon them. As to euthanising a pet "at the drop of a hat" if it suffered from a heart defect I have never stated that either. I said I would not put a dog through the procedure mentioned by the OP - open heart surgery.

e) We will agree to disagree since there is no purpose in creating an unnecessary argument or poor atmosphere on here - I have as much right to write my views as you do and as much right as you do to have my own opinions and feelings over issues - I've said mine without needing to add personal details to qualify my experience and don't intend to - a persons experience shapes their opinion - it sounds as if you have some experience similar to mine and yet we both reached opposite conclusions - I guess that is human nature
Quote selected text

I don't see it as creating an unnecessary argument - it is a forum where things are discussed. I don't expect everyone to agree with my views - and I did state that they were my own personal views. I haven't made any personal comments with regard to others and haven't disrespected - or belittled - the views of others but will continue to express my views and my personal opinions as and when I feel necessary. If I wish to back up my views with personal experiences then that too is my choice :-) I too believe that past experiences shape one's views but also believe that no two experiences are the same and I have respect for the decisions and beliefs that others hold even if they differ from mine and would hope that respect would be reciprocated.

I am neither a blinkered soul, an advocate of euthanasia for all and sundry and do not lack respect for the views of others however widely they differ from mine.