It would surely be lovely to know more details about the adult-onset cases of parvo. I do know that there are different strains of parvovirus and that one vaccine cannot protect against them all. I also fully realize that immune-compromised animals are more at risk for any of them, regardless of vaccination status. Thanks!

I will be curious to know the reason for the outbreak.

Have people stopped vaccinating as their critters become adults because they don't hear of many adult cases? Are critters not getting their yearly checkups? Is it economic as opposed to owner decisions?

It's horrible for the critters that have become ill, but hopefully this is a wakeup call for those who haven't gotten their boosters.

Kind thanks Dr. Coates for the informative article. Your insight into the option of titering pets to confirm their status of immunity before re-vaccinating is refreshing. It is so important for pets to be checked (titered) before re-vaccination!

Below is a ink to a recently developed product called VacciCheck (Biogal Corporation). VacciCheck is an in-house product that your veterinarian can use to check your pet's titer levels for the core vaccines of Hepatitis, Pravovirus and Distemper to confirm that your pet is adequately covered.

It's simple, safe and effective. More importantly - you will have peace of mind knowing that your pet is protected.

It's all about options -

http://www.biogal.co.il/biogal/Articles/VacciCheck/

With common interests,

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
The Healthy Dog Project
www.facebook.com/healthydogproject
www.healthydogproject.org

This is a Bad one, kills a pup fast, if they are taken to their Doctor as a litter,this keep the puppies getting the Paro-virus and protect others...I've never knew Adult Dogs could get this Parvo-virus. Yearly check-ups and shots keeps this from happening. I hope I'm Right... Thank-you Doctor Coates, Please keep us updated.

Titer, and boost only if required Kay. It's the only way to know if you dog is "properly" protected. Otherwise you are only assuming - that's where the damage comes into play.

Best,

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
The Healthy Dog Project
www.healthydogproject.org
www.facebook.com/healthydogproject

To be fair to the owners, most owners are not prepared to buy vaccines over the counter and inject their dogs themselves.

And I've never ever been charged a mere $6 for a booster vaccine at the vet. $35 + is more like it. Add to that the vet exam fee and I can see why people are putting off vet care, especially if they're struggling.

I've been titering my dogs for years and they've never needed a booster vaccine for Parvo. It makes me wonder if this is a different strain or something.

Would like more information on the effected dogs background. A parvo vaccine is good for at least 7 years tests have shown... would be interesting to see if these dogs were vaccinated at all or if this is a new strain.

I know our problem with the testing is this is the first i ever heard of adault onset of parvo, we can't afford to test them, we struggle just to pay bills and put food on the table and make sure they have food, but our oldest dog had parvo when she was a baby and now she is 14 yrs old, i don't think we have to worry

Titers are notoriously inaccurate in stressed animals. Animals are stressed at the vet office. Annual vaccines are an inexpensive insurance policy to keep our pet kids safe. The 3 year protocol is an experiment with your pet. The duration of immunity studies are performed on low numbers of animals in laboratory settings. I do not feel comfortable telling my clients that the parvo vaccine will protect for 3 years! The virus is ubiquitous and all diseases are waiting for an unprotected pet to sniff the virus or ingest it. Remember, pets are exposed to disease when they greet eachother by sniffing rear ends. I am far more afraid of the diseases which we protect our pets through vaccination than the adverse effects of vaccines. Remember, geriatric pets have weak immune systems and need to be vaccinated more often.

I understand and appreciate your concerns Dr. Ken and thank you for your comments. But, as the American Association of Animal Hospital 2011 Canine Vaccination Guidelines state:

"Infectious core vaccines are not only highly effective, they also
provide the longest DOI, extending from 5 yr up to the life of the
dog. "

Below, for your reference is a link to the PDF:
https://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocuments/CanineVaccineGuidelines.pdf

With common interests,

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
Founder
The Healthy Dog Project

www.healthydogproject.org
www.facebook.com/healthydogproject

I would say that BECAUSE geriatric pets have weakened immune systems, they should not be vaccinated further.

My particular breed dog typically lives til 12-13 y.o. I start titering at 8 y.o. None of them have ever needed a booster at all.

(My dogs aren't stressed at the vet, fortunately.)

My cats never leave the house except to go to the vet. They all stopped getting boosters after age 5 and only get rabies, and only because it's required by law.

Sorry, but more information is needed instead of such a blanket response.

"Whatever the reason, I’ll certainly be using this outbreak as evidence as to why adult dogs need to receive their boosters or have their titers checked on a regular basis."

I'm very disappointed in this post.

This was a very informative post. It is our responsibility to be informed pet owners. Therefore we need to be proactive and do our homework.

Most understand the importance of vaccination protocols and the usage of titers.

The more you know the better steward you are for those you love.

Best,

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
The Healthy Dog Project

www.healthydogproject.org
www.facebook/healthydogproject

I'm glad you found it informative. It is important news to have for sure - however, I would like more detailed information on the individuals who were treated with parvo.

I certainly would like to hear more about those adult dogs that came down with parvo. This sounds very unusual and I hope this is being investigated.
Is there any evidence that a dog that has had an adequate immune response to the vaccine and as an adult has no more measurable antibodies/titre that the dog would not have an adequate immune response if it would be exposed to the disease? As far as I know the only time a titre is really useful is a few weeks after an individual was vaccinated for a viral disease.

that this is surprising. But it's not. I've been fearing this outcome for a long time now. If you frequent dog forums of any type, pet owners more and more frequently recommend against nearly any vaccinations. I knew it would only be a matter of time before we saw diseases that were formerly only seen in puppymills in the general population.

I still don't understand why people trust strangers on the internet more than they would their vets, but it certainly appears that they do. My prediction is that distemper will be right behind parvo in terms of unexpected resurgence.

So understand your feelings about this subject, but science is science.

Ask your vet if s/he is familiar with the 2011 AAHA Canine Vaccination Guidelines or VacciCheck. If not, you amy want to do some of your own research.

Your pets depend on it.


Best,

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
The Healthy Dog Project

www.healthydogproject.org
www.facebook.com/healthydogproject

AAHA is not a "Stranger on the internet"

I graduated from Purdue School of Vet Med in 1979. Dr Carmichael, from Cornell, began the whole vaccine debate in 1979. It has been ongoing for 32 years! He felt that puppies should be vaccinated at 2,3, and 4 months, one year later and perhaps every 3 years until they were 8 years old. He recommended that dogs over 8 be vaccinated annually once again. I have seen Parvovirus on more than one occasion in dogs over 8 years of age whose owners stopped vaccinating because they were protected! I know that in Great Britain when 10% of the population stopped vaccinating for pertussis, the incidence doubled. The same in California. What is scientific fact today is often not fact tomorrow. My pet kids are vaccinated annually and I rest well knowing that they are protected to the best of my ability! I do not fear vaccines.

Clients deserve the right to access well informed, proactive professionals. They also deserve access to data that provides them with comprehensive science to support their concerns, such as this article by Dr. Ronald Schultz - which I attach for your review.

http://www.ivis.org/advances/Infect_Dis_Carmichael/schultz/ivis.pdf

We are fortunate in this country to immunize wisely. But thousands have personally experienced the damage that over-vaccination can cause and will clearly have concerns with your question "What do you want?".

We wanted safer vaccine protocols. We want transparency -and we want health. And we are willing to work to make it happen.

Our world is not flat - and our glass is not half empty. Our world is full of possibilities. Many of us have found professionals that we can work with to make science a tool for those who demand good health. Others are learning from blogs like this how to find someone to help them with their pet's health issues.

With hard work and a healthy "dose" of optimism we should be able to provide more options to those who need them.

The world is open to those who have open minds - our compassion for our companions demands it.

And I am committed -

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
The Healthy Dog Project
www.healthydogproject.org
www.facebook/healthydogproject

You have not answered why do people's pets that are not vaccinated beyond 8 years of age contract Parvovirus and die? I have practiced for 32 years and have seen far more harm from undervaccination than from overvaccination. I would rather give a $20 vaccine that may not be necessary than console an owner whose pet has died from a preventable disease. The vaccine risks are greatly exaggerated. The immune stimulation on a daily basis from bacteria, pesticides, uv radiation, food additives, etc far exceed the antigenic stimulation of a vaccine. As long as pets remain property, pet owners have the right to make decisions that are not in the pet's best interest, and frequently not wanting to spend money is the reason. When pets are elevated out of property status, owners who harm their pet through neglect may be held accountable.

Drken says:
The vaccine risks are greatly exaggerated.

I'm not so sure. Supposedly they are rare. I took all three of my dogs in for their rabies vaccinations last December. On dog was fine, just terribly thirsty for a few days. The other two were not.

Within the hour my Tibetan Spaniel had the huge head, lots of water in a pouch under her chin, and scratching at her belly. An obvious allergic reaction. The dog is 6 years old and has had four rabies shots.

In about a week, my 8 year old English Cocker had a relapse of his IBD. He had been perfectly normal for 5 years. I am still struggling with this problem with him.

How is it that such adverse events are supposed to be so rare and two of my three dogs had them?

My veterinarian was upset that I would only give the one shot. If I had given more how would we have known which was the problem?

I know anecdotal information is not as reliable as studies. But for me it is very important as we deal with the aftereffects everyday.

"You have not answered why do people's pets that are not vaccinated beyond 8 years of age contract Parvovirus and die?"

Please be kind enough to support the statement above to me privately at: healthydogproject@me.com.

I would be happy to respond.

Best,

Gloria J. Cestero-Hurd
The Healthy Dog Project

www.healthydogproject@me.org
wwwfacebook.com/healthydogproject

let's hope that pets are never elevated out of property status, we really do not need others to make decisions for our pets. I believe most people who frequent a forum like this can't be accused of not wanting to spend the money on our pets, sometimes there just isn't any money to spend. Do you realize how many people can't even afford healthcare for themselves anymore? What do you suggest should happen to the pets or the owners if pets were elevated out of property status and somebody decides an owner should spend more money on vet care for their pets and the owner doesn't have the money? Should the owner go to jail or the pets taken away from a loving home and taken to a shelter to be re-homed or put to sleep? If pets wouldn't be considered property anymore, veterinary care would become unaffordable because people would sue their vets just like they sue doctors that treat humans, vets would have to get liability insurance to cover those lawsuits and as a result vet care would have to cost a lot more and be out of reach for the average pet owners.

this topic is worthy of a blog of its own.. animals SHOULD remain as property.. Drken say "when animals are elevated beyond property status".. well they are either property or they are not.. if they are not then are they "human status'? let hope it never comes to that..

I am jumping for joy that you are not my vet.

My pet kids, Sunshine, Hannah, Libby, Macho, Mr. Whiskers, and Hopper are jumping for joy that you are not their Mother!

I would never see a vet that called my dogs or his "pet kids".. pets are not kids.. if you are speaking of animals.. kids are newborn goats.. any vet should know that.. and children are not pets.. honestly. "pet kids".. that is too mucxh

1. Pets are FAMILY! Ninety percent of pet parents now consider that their pet children are family members.
2. Pets are sentient beings capable of complex emotions. They feel pain. They know happiness and sorrow. They love unconditionally. They grieve for the loss of their human parents.
3. Legally our pets are property in all 50 states. The parent of a pet that is killed accidentally through negligence or deliberately with malice is only entitled to replacement value. This does not adequately recognize the emotional loss that they have suffered.
4. Veterinarians see a daily onslaught of legalized neglect and abuse because pets are dependent on their owners to decide what is in their pets best interest. The pet parent is oftentimes ignorant about what is needed, or makes the decision in their own financial best interest.
5. Veterinarians have benefited for 30 years through promoting the human animal bond to encourage pet parents to spend ever increasing sums for treatment of their pet children, yet the epitome of hypocrisy is their resolute determination that our pets remain in the legal status of property. Veterinarians remain the only health care providers without legal responsibility for acts of negligence.
6. The murder of 6-8 million dogs and cats will continue until the legal status of pets moves beyond the property level.
7. Gracie's Law recognizes the human animal bond, the emotional attachment between pets and people, compensates the parent that loses a pet child for pain and suffering and loss of companionship, and begins to move pets out of property status by recognizing a value above their replacement value.

SHOW ME YOUR LICENSE.. if you are a vet .. I am the POPE..people are murdered.. pets and animals are not.. if the killing of animals were murder every rancher and slaughter house owner would be in jail.. somehow I get a feeling you would like to see that happen.
Parents of pets are called sires and dams.. or studs and queens.. or other terms to describe the actual PARENTS..
You are outed "Drken"..
Bet you can flash that PETA/HSUS membership card.. but not a shingle to hang on the wall where people actually pay you for veterinary services.
The Veterinary Emperor has no clothes

I iknow for a fact that Dr. Ken is a veterinarian. And thank God you are not.

LOL anyone can say they are anything on this blog..it does not make it true but back to pets and property..
if pets are not property what are they? What would you like to see as their legal standing?
The ownership of property is the foundation of our society. Without it you and the rest of us would live in a subservient society, a feudal society or worse.
As for pets being dependent on us.. Cats?/ really.. cats would get along just fine without humans.. in fact they do.. in feral colonies all over the world.. feral dogs also do just fine.. although they do not live the life of "slavery" that your pets do ( just ask PETAites)
You say you would deny yourself in order to keep your pets.. is that fair to them? Especially if you become ill or cannot care for them. Humans come first.. they make the choices for their pets.as it should be... You want to be allowed to make the choice to let your pets come first.. Others should have the choice not to do that and to allow themselves to come first.. or their children ( their real children)
I want a vet who sees my dogs as MINE.Period.

LOL I do have to say that one of the most basic needs of any species and one of the most basic drives is the need and drive to reproduce. Something many people routinely deny their "pet kids". Removal of their healthy sexual organs is one of the worst things I can think of that a "pet parent" could do to their "pet children" If you are responsible for their welfare and their best interests why would you subject them to unnecessary surgery and remove healthy parts of their bodies that they were born with? Talk about cruelty..and slavery..can you imagine if we did that to our real children? Especially at an early age.. We do not allow young boys to be castrated.. that is considered cruel and unusual.. but for a male dog .. excuse me a male "pet kid'.. no problem. A major hysterectomy on a prepubescent female.. no ethical doctor would preform one unless medically necessary.. but open up a four month old female "pet kid" and remove healthy organs so your furniture won;t be ruined.... perfectly acceptable.why?? for the benefit of the "PET PARENT" ONLY..pretty selfish and cruel I would say
In essence.. pets are not children ..we do things to them that we say are "beneficial" that we would never do to human children.
Care for them.. love them. etc it is still does not make them human..and truly that is a good thing

mea culpa to Dr Ken.. I see his site and it is a nice one .. however i would like to know.. if animals ( all animals) are 'elevated' to more than property status what status will they have. i tried to find Gracie's law as it pertains to property and pets. on the web but could not.. "elevating" pets to something other than property UNDER THE LAW means that you and the courts wold have to find an acceptable number of dollars for each suit brought..and what would be the basis for the suits? pain and suffering of the pet?.. of the owner .. would pets then be called something else that makes then elevated to family status UNDER THE LAW only.. many of us consider our pets to be part of the family but how do you put a price on that? Pets do not earn money.. unless they are bred and their get are sold or if they are used in some form of work as in racing, entertainment or guide dog etc..so their loss of that cannot be considered unless they earn or have potential to earn..
so how do the courts decide on the value of a pet? Is my pet worth less than yours? more? or the same.. we already have animal cruelty laws on the books.. do you suggest we also charge people with cruelty as well a civil charges in cases like yours?
I am sorry you lost your pet this way and that you were injured.. You are the support for yourself and your family.. you were injured.. you have a case for yourself by the loss of that earning power and hospitalization bills.. and attorney fees. When we carry this to elevating pets to human levels we slide down a slippery slope.
And the use of the word "murder' is another point.. while pets can be treated poorly and even killed they cannot be "murdered" which by definition means:
/ˈmərdər/
Noun:
The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

The killing of an animal may be reprehensible and cruel.. but it is not murder by any stretch of the lawful terminology unless of course we elevate pets to human status and then the choice to euthanize your pets at your veterinarians office would be moot unless you and the attending wanted to be charged with murder. I really do not think we want to go there.

Alice, a disgruntled and drug addicted woman here in the Orlando area, broke into her mother-in-law's home, took her aged, blind, arthitic Labrador Retriever to the backyard, covered her with a blanket and beat her to death with a baseball bat. If that doesn't classify as MURDER, I don't know what does.

well I do.. even if you don;t.. it is animal cruelty.. not murder.. how can you not see that MURDER is when three young daughter are sexually assaulted and burned alive.. and the wife killed and compare that to an act of animal cruelty.. truly na sick person that cannot see the difference here.. should each of the "perps' suffer the same consequences.. PLEASE I am afraid of your answer..

Murder is murder, whether the victim is a defenseless animal, or a human being. How is the life of the dog of any less importance than the life of say.....a crack addicted person who rapes and murders? Is that person's life worth more simply because they are human? (or sub-human, as the case may be.)
How is the old and arthritic dog who was beaten to death by a SUB-HUMAN being any less helpless than a child who is murdered by another human being?
You are a specist, like so many others who "claim" to love animals, yet their words belie their true feelings...animals are not here to serve MAN, any more than women are here to serve man, any more than slavery is "normal", just because it occurs in the "human" race. I feel sorry for you if you can not see that when an innocent dog is MURDERED by a "human" being, it is just as heinous as when the victim is of the "human" species.

so are people who works at slaughter houses murderers?/ how abut Ranchers who are "premeditated' murderers".. and trucker to slaughter house " accomplices" to murder? you cannot change the definition without changing the crime,,...
Yes I am a a "specist" so are most people except ones like you.. who think a turtles life is equal to a child's..

by the way.. does a dog commit murder if it kills another dog?.how about if it kills a cat? how about it it "tortures a cat" .. then kills it.. . If the woman in Berkeley let her old dog out and it was killed by another dog.. is that murder? how about a cat that kills a bird? a cat that plays with a mouse and "tortures" it before killing it.. murder??

Caveat Poster.. let the poster beware...

so are people who works at slaughter houses murderers?/ how abut Ranchers who are "premeditated' murderers".. and trucker to slaughter house " accomplices" to murder? you cannot change the definition without changing the crime,,...
Yes I am a a "specist" so are most people except ones like you.. who think a turtles life is equal to a child's..

AS LONG AS HUMAN BEINGS EAST MEAT, THERE WILL BE ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED. WHILE I HOPE THAT IT IS DONE IN A 'HUMANE WAY", I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT. HOWEVER, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERECE BETWEEN THAT, AND TAKING A DOG OUT OF ITS HOME AND BEATING IT TO DEATH WITH A BASEBALL BAT. ALL LIFE HAS VALUE. ALL LIFE. IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THE DOGS THAT YOU BREED AND NOT SEE THAT THEY ARE WORTHY OF BEING MORE THAN JUST YOUR "PROPERTY" , I FEEL SORRY FOR YOU.

by the way.. does a dog commit murder if it kills another dog?.how about if it kills a cat? how about it it "tortures a cat" .. then kills it.. . If the woman in Berkeley let her old dog out and it was killed by another dog.. is that murder? how about a cat that kills a bird? a cat that plays with a mouse and "tortures" it before killing it.. murder??

ONCE AGAIN, YOU PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT IS INSTINCT AND WHAT IT NOT. YOU SAY THAT THAT THE S** DRIVE OF ANIMALS IS INSTINCTAL , SO, WHY ISN'T THE KILLING OF ANOTHER BEING FOR FOOD?
THE POINT IT...HUMAN BEINGS HAVE A CHOICE...THEY CAN "REASON" ON A "HIGHER LEVEL" THAN OTHER ANIMALS CAN, BUT OFTEN, THE DO NOT DO SO. RATHER, THEY SUCCUMB TO THEIR "BASER " INSTINCTS AND RAPE, MURDER, PILLAGE, MUTILATE.

Caveat Poster.. let the poster beware...

ALICE, EXAMINE YOUR OWN CONSCIENCE. AND QUIT CALLING PEOPLE NAMES AND PRESUPPOSING THAT THEY ARE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH, JUST AS YOU DID WITH DR. KEN.

I am Dr Kenneth Newman,DVM, Author of Meet Me at the Rainbow Bridge, my memoir that makes the case that our pet kids are more than property. Please go to www.meetmeattherainbowbridge.com and click on the home page link to see the Fox 13 feature story, What is your pet worth? More info can be found on my facebook community page, Gracie's Law-Pets are Family. My animal hospital website is www.careahofseminole.com I provide quality, compassionate care in a state of the art facility at prices considerably below my neighboring colleagues because if prices are set above the level that pet parents can afford, it is the pet that suffers through lack of treatment. Care Animal Hospital of Seminole, Where Pets are Family! I am working with a local attorney, whose 12 year old arthritic Golden Retriever was recently murdered by the police, to change animal law. More info on this can be obtained at Boomer's Voice, a Facebook page. I do not hide behind an alias, and put my daily commitment to my work to back up my beliefs I spend 60 hours a week at my hospital and see emergencies up until 9 pm and on weekends. Veterinarians are blessed to have the ability to help our ailing pet kids and provide preventive care.

I am glad you are above board with your identify so you can be more easily avoided.

Your loss

Yet somehow I feel just fine.

I went to your website at the Care Animal Hospital of Seminole. And under "educational programs" then vaccines you have as "required" vaccinations for dogs, one for Corona virus. A vaccine not even recommended for dogs at all in the 2011 AAHA Guidelines for dogs. Probably because it has never been demonstrated as a problem in dogs. So the virus does exist but the biggest benefit to this vaccination is fattening the wallets of veterinarians and the companies who make it. It is bogus as a protection for a dog. And it compromises the credibility of any vet recommending it.

Who is "requiring" it? Anybody other than you?

I do not vaccinate against coronavirus. I believe that is in the website provided by our software company

your "software company" recommends a vaccine that has no purpose and you have not changed that?/ really why not?

Alice, you certainly have a different feeling for your companion animals than I do for mine. I am responsible for my pet's welfare, just as I would be for a human child. In fact, human children leave the "nest" , but pet kids NEVER do. They remain perpetually as "children", dependent upon us for their every need...food, love,medical care,shelter, companionship, safety, etc.
Let's face it, not all human beings have the same feelings for their pet kids any more than they have the same feelings for their parents, their children, etc. There are different levels of love and dedication. There are aged people in nursing homes whose children NEVER visit them. I know..I used to volunteer in one. There are "pets" who have "owners", and there are pets who have "parents" Big difference. It's not just semantics, either. It begins with the mindset of the human caring for the animal companion. I would go without before I'd deprive either of my PET KIDS of anything. They get the best/most expensive food, the veterinary care that they need, and the love that they deserve. They get no benefit that I can see from being "chattel." As chattel, they can be:
1. shot to death by a cop because they are just "property?'
2. die because of vet malpractice (which has nothing to due with the rise in veterinary fees, so don't use that as an excuse)
3. beaten or abused by a person who doesn't like cats/dogs
4. raced and used as entertainment, beaten, abused and put out to pasture when they can no longer "perform"(as the poor greyhounds are)

I would rather have a vet ANY day who knows and respects the fact that I consider my pets to be my family, my children, than a vet who sees them as my property. Women were property not so long ago...actually, they still are...ever hear of the sex trade? Same mindset. Demeaning/using a sensient being and denying their right to be recognized as such.

Also, think of all of the elderly people who are childless and have no other family left "alive' but their companion animal. I'll lay you odds they don't consider their companions as chattel. Anyone who truly loves animals would never advocate them remaining as property.

From the AVMA:

Some animal owners may like to refer to themselves as "pet guardians," however "guardian" is a legal term that has significant legal implications and repercussions. Its use to describe the relationship between animals and their owners is inappropriate. Under well-developed principles of guardianship law, guardianship is a fiduciary relationship (the highest legal civil duty owed by one person to another). The ward's interests are always to prevail over those of the guardian. Some conflicts that arise from application of human guardianship law to animals are described in the text that follows. On the basis of these conflicts, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) recommends that "guardian" not be adopted, even to semantically describe the relationship between humans and their animals.

The AVMA recognizes that American society has evolved from an agrarian one in which the animals most of us owned primarily had economic utility, to an urban one in which most of us derive some emotional value from our animals. Use of guardian, however, does not clarify the responsibilities of owners to their animals that are important for forming good human-animal bonds. Instead, use of guardian may create legal questions and consequences that have the potential to adversely affect both the animals and humans involved in these relationships. Such legal questions and consequences apply to animal owners, service providers, society and animals, and include, but are not limited to:

Animal Owners

Reductions in the rights of owners and imposition of additional legal obligations—With respect to veterinary care, animal owners will have less authority and fewer treatment options. Required treatment may exceed the financial capacity of the owner to pay, yet guardianship will require that owners accept such financial burdens. Financial inability to provide treatment could easily result in increased animal abandonment.

Entailment of wards—Use of guardian gives rise to its counterpart "ward." The ward is defined as the person for whose benefit the guardianship has been established. Wards have legal rights. Applying human guardianship law to animals would mean that animals have legal rights that can be recognized in court (i.e., animals would have legal standing). This may subject owners to civil lawsuits filed by third parties on behalf of the animal.

Inability to select procedures such as euthanasia or spay/neuter—Owners wishing to relieve animal suffering by euthanasia may no longer have that option. Non-health justifications for euthanasia, including population control, may no longer be acceptable under guardianship. Spaying and neutering may also not be possible, if such procedures were not deemed to be in the best interest of the animal.

Confidentiality of veterinary information and control of medical records—Where confidentiality of veterinary medical records is governed by state statutes or regulations, conditions are defined under which and to whom medical records may or must be released. Generally owners have authority over release of their animals' medical records. Under guardianship, a veterinarian, contrary to the owner's wishes, may be able to release information to third parties because he/she believes it is in the best interest of the animal. Conversely, the veterinarian may choose not to release medical records to the owner or others because he/she believes it is not in the animal's best interest to do so.

Ability to transfer an animal to another party—Background checks may be required to ensure that transfer of an animal from one guardian to another is in the best interest of the animal. Transfer of guardianship from one guardian to another, for profit, may not be legal. Third parties may have the opportunity to impede transfer proceedings if they deem such action to be in the best interest of the animal.

Coverage of animal-related claims by homeowners' insurance—Homeowners' property loss insurance may no longer cover animal-related claims should animals be no longer defined as property under the law. Under guardianship, animals would no longer be considered property.

Required registration as guardian—In states having guardian registries, animal guardians may be required to register and to comply with all laws and regulations pertaining to that registration. Requirements for registration could include background checks, bonding, and conflict-of-interest evaluations. Registration processes are time-consuming and potentially costly.

Annual guardianship reports—Animal guardians may be required to file annual guardianship reports, including associated financial reports.

Service Providers

Loss of protection under animal abandonment laws—Animal abandonment laws are predicated on the basis that animals are property. Guardianship removes the status of animals as property.

Veterinarians' responsibilities unclear—The veterinarian's responsibilities become unclear when a guardian's direction is contrary to the best interests of the animal. Veterinarians may be required to go to court to obtain a judicial determination as to whether or not theirs or the guardian's direction is the appropriate course of action. Inability to provide timely treatment to an ill or injured animal during the course of court proceedings creates the potential for unnecessary animal suffering. For example, debate as to whether to treat a compound fracture versus selecting euthanasia for the animal could create the potential for continued pain, infection and other complications while awaiting a judicial decision. Cases involving animal issues are likely to have lower priority than those involving human issues.

Prohibitions on prescribing and dispensing controlled substances—Veterinarians may not be able to lawfully prescribe or dispense controlled substances or legend drugs to a guardian who no longer has legal status as the owner of an animal (i.e., current law assumes animals are owned and that owners receive drugs and administer them, as prescribed, to the animal).

Payment for services—Guardianship may create questions as to whom (guardian) or what (guardianship) is responsible for payment of associated animal services. Personal payment guarantees may need to be obtained.

Interstate transport—Service providers may have an obligation to prevent the physical transfer of an animal from a guardianship state to an ownership state.

Society

Unconstitutional taking of private property—A complete shift to guardianship could result in claims of a state having unconstitutionally taken private property (animals) without just compensation.

Impacts on existing statutes and regulations—Numerous statutes, regulations and policies would have to be reviewed and language altered to replace owner with guardian. These include, but not limited to, pharmacy laws, controlled substance laws, tax laws, veterinary practice laws, and other laws, regulations and policies related to animal use and services.

Impacts on ability to responsibly use animals—Guardianship may preclude the responsible use of animals for agricultural production (food and fiber), research, exhibition and entertainment (e.g., racing, circuses, rodeo), and companionship. Use of animals and animal products for such purposes may no longer be legal.

Ability to control, quarantine and vaccinate animals—Guardianship may affect the ability of governmental agencies to control and quarantine animals and require vaccination. Ensuring animal and public health requires the ability to effectively control and eradicate disease. Quarantine, vaccination, and sometimes depopulation, are necessary components of effective disease control and eradication.

Conflicts between federal and state statutes, regulations and policies—Potential conflicts may arise between states' laws, regulations and policies that are predicated on the basis of guardianship and federal laws, regulations and policies that are predicated on the basis of animals as property.

Homeless/unwanted animals—Financial burdens and inability to control burgeoning populations (e.g., problems associated with euthanasia and spay/neuter choices) may both contribute to the problem of unwanted animals.

Use of assistance animals—The concept of assistance animals (e.g., guide dogs, hearing dogs) may be objectionable under guardianship; therefore, there may be fewer animals available to provide such services. The use of animals for search and rescue may also not be acceptable.

Burdens of ownership—Owning or keeping animals may become burdensome with consequent negative impacts on animal-related industries, including loss of jobs.

Animals

Bidirectional benefits of human-animal bonds lost—Under guardianship, people may be less willing to possess animals because of concerns about increased liability. Some responsible individuals and animals would thereby be deprived of the benefits of the human-animal bond.

Reduction in animals' receipt of needed services—Guardianship may reduce a person's willingness to seek appropriate services for animals in a timely fashion.

Animals left in limbo—Guardianship may leave the welfare of animals in limbo during associated legal proceedings. A delay in the veterinarian's ability to provide medical care is one example.

Adverse effects on health and welfare—Guardianship may adversely affect the health and welfare of individual animals and animal populations.

Donnadw,
thanks for providing this info on guardianship versus owner. Many well-meaning people do not understand why we have to make sure we do not lose our ownership rights for our pets. Calling pets "pet kids" and owners "pet parents" or "pet guardians" is often done because it does describe well how many of us feel about our pets, but it's a slippery slope. I often have people comment when I tell them I have dogs and no children that the dogs are my children, and I always correct them and tell them that no, I have dogs because I love dogs, and I don't have kids because I didn't want any and I really rather have dogs and they are not a substitute for the kids I never wanted in the first place.

Just a wee bit irresponsible for a post like this without details and scientific evidence, isn't it? Trying to reverse the long-standing immunity issues and recommendations of 30 veterinary colleges?

Please do post a follow up because "fear-mongering" doesn't behoove credibility on the need of "boosters" of any vaccine. Are we now back to square one?

We once knew that the world was flat, and anyone who sailed west from Spain would fall off of the edge. As far as veterinary experts, I was taught in 1979 that dogs never suffered from stomach ulcers. They were not being scoped in 1979. Everything old is new again. Do what you want. There was a very sorry lady who wrote Ann Landers many years ago after her geriatric dog, whom she chose not to vaccinate, died from Parvo. She begged owners to vaccinate! We as a species need to reinvent the wheel every generation. We do not seem to learn from history.

Unless you know the background of the affected dogs, you can't say anything about vaccinations or claim more vaccination or titers are better or were lacking.

Could the dogs be non responders?

Could the dogs be immune compromised, extremely stressed, or malnourished?

Maybe the vaccine no longer works because the disease has evolved or changed. In such a case more of what doesn't work won't work.

if one clinic saw 8 cases, they should be able to narrow it down to possible causes, of course all the vet clinics in that area should be contacted to find out what their experiences has been.

Here is a link to an article that addresses many of the concerns that people have brought up in response to this post.

http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/dvm/Medical+news/Regional-spikes-in-parvo-cases-dont-signal-a-natio/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/742273

thanks Dr. Coates, most of the article only mentions increased parvo cases, only one mention of adult dogs. There can be a lot of reasons why adult dogs get parvo, but if there is a local concentration the cause should be investigated, as clusters of adult dogs with parvo are very unusual.

In todays econemy some have to make a choice, They can pay for the the pet to be vetted or they can pay for the family to be doctored. Sometimes it is a real tuff choice but who would you take care of first? The price of vetting is extremely high and compareble to the cost of human health care.
Add into that all of the problems breeders,pet owners farmers, and meat producers are having with the HSUS,Animal Rights activist,new laws that are unconstitutional, vague and confusing. What we have here is a FAILURE TO COMMUNCATE. Very few people today understand what is going on in the animal,agriculture world. Yes we have problems but the views of vets and people who think this way will not fix them.

Comparable to the cost of human health care? Please. There's a lot of variation on both sides of the equation, obviously, but here's some comparisons for my area (I'm using healthcare blue book at http://healthcarebluebook.com to get my human numbers and my own patients for the dog numbers):

Small bowel resection for a dog at the local ER: approx $3-5K
Small bowel resection at a human hospital: approx $14K

Ovariohysterectomy for a dog at my hospital: approx $400-$500 (and we are definitely not the cheapest!)
Hysterectomy for a woman at a human hospital: approx $8K-9K

Hernia repair at our hospital: approx $500-$600 if not done at the same time as another anesthetic procedure
Hernia repair at a human hospital: approx $8K

We may have something for a dental prophylaxis!
Cost of a dental prophy in my hospital: around $300
Cost of a dental prophy for a human: around $83 (but no anesthesia!)

Subtotal mastectomy in my hospital: approx $1100-$1300
Subtotal mastectomy in a human hospital: approx $6600

Vaccine prices in my hospital: $20-$35
Vaccine prices in a physician's office: $31-$330

IV fluids are about comparable.
Radiographs are slightly cheaper at the human hospital ($49/exposure for humans, ours are usually about $200 for 3 exposures)

The point is not that it is easy to afford vet care. I know it's hard. The point is that we are a loooooong way from charging what MDs charge. A lot of labs, etc. may be comparable, but service-wise we are not charging nearly what the human side is. That's good, in a lot of ways. Certainly no one I know would pay $8K to spay a cat.

"Hysterectomy for a woman at a human hospital: approx $8K-9K"

I'll take a wild guess that after ALL the bills come in (operating room, recovery room, surgeon, anesthesiologist, etc.), the bill for a human hysterectomy is much higher than that.

I sure would like to come to your vet office. I am in Va. and the average c section or spay 600.00 TO 800.00 dollars. AND AN EMERGENCY C SECTION IS UPWARD FROM 1,5OO.OO.The average cost for a series of vaccination is in the neighborhood of 180.00 to 200.00. There is not a lot of difference between spaying an animal and clipping the tubes of a male or female human to prevent fertility. There is not a lot of difference in getting a male animal and a male human fixed. A historctomy is a whole different ball game. And are you also adding in the office visit, the bloodwork,the fee for disposing of toxic waste,the fee for the dressing of the site, and about a dozon other things I find tacked to my bill. As far as parvo a friend of mine had her dog to the vet with parvo, the total cost of trearmnet and keeping the pup in isolation for approxamitly 8 days was 2,100.00 I know because she did not have the money to pay for it, so the vet would not treat tjhe pup. I paid the bill for her.In our area for emergency treatment [after hours] you must pay up front, they positively will not treat without payment. They will give you an estimate and the cheapest I ever heard was around 150.00 usually it is in the 1,200.00 or more. Very few people can come up with that kind of money in an instant. The vets/ admitting people will stand right there and watch the animal die in your arms. I personally saw this happen. There really is no such thing as an emergency to most vets. So yes I know that an animals life is worth less then a human but I also know that the markup on a parvo shot is 500% don't believe me get a vet supply book and check it out. Yes I know we are also paying for the knowledge but I personally think the price is to high.

you must not be in my state.. I had a dog in Er care for 12 hours.. bill? $700.00 fluids and supportive care .. 2 xrays.she lived so i am grateful.. and poorer. Clavamox.. 3 dollars per pill..my dentist charges 150 per cleaning.. dogs here more.. although I don;t have their teeth cleaned ever.. nope not ever.. oh bad owner bad owner..
the point is not the fees.. it is the priority.. people come first.. if i am not healthy who will take care of my dogs.. choices will be made as long as we are allowed to make them.. if dogs are 'elevated' out of property status.. more people will not own dogs.. ( excuse me be a guardian" of dogs)due to the fact that they will be not allowed to make any choices about their care.. already vets do not want to put dogs down until every possible test, operation or treatment can be done when often the person cannot afford it..and the result is the same.. a dead dog.. or cat..chemo, radiation and other treatments should be a choice.. as should putting the pet out of its misery when it is needed.. or chosen.. bills in the 10's of thousands of dollars are unreachable for most people..anyone else see the correlation with huge fees and the push for "pet insurance'?/

And pet insurance? - you still have to pay the bill out of pocket and then ask to get reimbursed. How many of us have that kind of reserves these days? I wish it were more like my dental insurance - you're told what the bill is, you give them your insurance information, the doctor knows how much will be paid by the insurance company and you pay the balance. Why can't pet insurance be the same way?

The only logical answer to the insurance disgrace our country faces is a single payer. I recently obtained a quote at the end of COBRA coverage for an individual family policy. I was given 2 options, $3800 or 4800 per month! The for profit insurance companies need to be eliminated­. Seniors are happy with Medicare. The system is broken and bandages are not adequate when the patient is bleeding to death. Insurance companies take money from the young and healthy and drop the older people with minor problems as soon as they could become a liability. They are supposed to invest your premiums so that you can have coverage with age. Health insurance is another Ponzi scheme and the insurance companies make Bernie Madoff look like a Saint!
As far as comparing the cost of veterinary medicine to human medicine, the human bills are on top of insurance premiums. I will take care of any pet for free if the owner wanted to pay $3800-4800 per month in insurance premiums.. Be very careful of veterinary insurance. The insurance companies are not Mother Teresa, and will only provide coverage if profitable. Who builds the skyscrapers in every Major American city? Banks and Insurance companies. I have not seen any veterinary skyscrapers yet.
If you are not familiar with Wendell Potter, do yourself a favor and do a google search to learn the truth about insurance companies from an insider who lost the stomach for denying care that was paid for in premiums.

I WILL RESPOND AS TIME ALLOWS TO THE REST OF THE AVMA TENETS ON GUARDIANSHIP.



Some animal owners may like to refer to themselves as "pet guardians," however "guardian" is a legal term that has significant legal implications and repercussions. Its use to describe the relationship between animals and their owners is inappropriate. Under well-developed principles of guardianship law, guardianship is a fiduciary relationship (the highest legal civil duty owed by one person to another). The ward's interests are always to prevail over those of the guardian. Some conflicts that arise from application of human guardianship law to animals are described in the text that follows. On the basis of these conflicts, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) recommends that "guardian" not be adopted, even to semantically describe the relationship between humans and their animals.

AND WHAT IS THE MOTIVATION OF THE AVMA (AND VETERINARIANS ) FOR PETS TO REMAIN AS CHATTEL? SEE "BADVETDAILY" IF YOU HAVE ANY DOUBTS.

The AVMA recognizes that American society has evolved from an agrarian one in which the animals most of us owned primarily had economic utility, to an urban one in which most of us derive some emotional value from our animals. Use of guardian, however, does not clarify the responsibilities of owners to their animals that are important for forming good human-animal bonds. Instead, use of guardian may create legal questions and consequences that have the potential to adversely affect both the animals and humans involved in these relationships. Such legal questions and consequences apply to animal owners, service providers, society and animals, and include, but are not limited to:

REALLY? IF MY CAT WERE ABLE TO SPEAK, DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT SHE WOULD WANT TO BE PUT IN THE SAME LEGAL CLASSIFICATION AS A CHAIR? YET MY CAT, A SENTIENT BEING, HAS NO VALUE UNDER THE LAW. AN INANIMATE OBJECT, A CAR, A CHAIR, A PIECE OF HEIRLOOM JEWELRY, IS ASSIGNED "INTRINSIC " VALUE, YET MY CAT, MY FAMILY, IS "WORTHLESS." YES, THE AVMA IS REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE WELFARE OF OUR COMPANION ANIMALS. ASK YOURSELF WHAT REAL BENEFIT A COMPANION ANIMAL GETS FROM REMAINING AS PROPERTY? IF THE OWNER TIRES OF HIS OR HER PROPERTY, IT'S PERFECTLY LEGAL FOR THEM TO ABANDON THAT PROPERTY. IF AN OWNER TIRES OF FEEDING AND CARING FOR HIS PROPERTY, IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL FOR HIM TO HAVE THAT PROPERTY EUTHANIZED. THE AVMA DOESN'T WANT THE LEGAL STATUS OF COMPANION ANIMALS TO CHANGE BECAUSE THEN, IF ONE OF THEIR PROFESSION SLAMS THE HEAD OF A DIFFICULT FELINE PATIENT ON THE EXAM TABLE, KILLING THE PATIENT, THEY ARE HELD BLAMELESS. (THAT HAPPENED IN OUR AREA) IF A VET BLUDGEONS TO DEATH A NEIGHBORHOOD CAT, (THIS HAPPENED IN FL) THEY ARE STILL FREE TO "PRACTICE THEIR TRADE. IF A VET PUNCHES A CHIHUAHUA SO HARD THAT HIS PATIENT'S EYE IS DISLOGED, HE IS FOUND BLAMELESS. (THIS HAPPENED IN AZ.)

Animal Owners

Reductions in the rights of owners and imposition of additional legal obligations—With respect to veterinary care, animal owners will have less authority and fewer treatment options. Required treatment may exceed the financial capacity of the owner to pay, yet guardianship will require that owners accept such financial burdens. Financial inability to provide treatment could easily result in increased animal abandonment.

ANIMALS ARE REGULARLY ABANDONED BY PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO PAY FOR THEM. MANY OF OUR PETS CAME FROM A HOME IN WHICH THE FAMILY WAS UPPER MIDDLE CLASS, YET DIDN'T GIVE A FLIP ABOUT THEIR COMPANION ANIMALS. CHANGING THE LAW SO THAT ANIMALS ARE NO LONGER CHATTEL MIGHT MAKE SOMEONE THINK TWICE BEFORE ABANDONING THEIR PETS, RATHER THAN DOING THE OPPOSITE., SINCE THERE MIGHT BE COMMENSURATE PUNISHMENT/FINE, FOR LACK OF RESPONSIBLITY ON THE PART OF THE GUARDIAN. IT WOULD MAKE IT FAR EASIER TO PROSECUTE SOMEONE WHO ENGAGED IN ANIMAL ABUSE OR CRUELTY. . WITH RESPECT TO VETERINARY CARE, THE COST HAS RISEN STEADILY, AND HAS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE CURRENT ECONOMY. THERE ARE HOMELESS PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT ABANDONED THEIR ANIMALS, AND MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE WHO HAVE.

Entailment of wards—Use of guardian gives rise to its counterpart "ward." The ward is defined as the person for whose benefit the guardianship has been established. Wards have legal rights. Applying human guardianship law to animals would mean that animals have legal rights that can be recognized in court (i.e., animals would have legal standing). This may subject owners to civil lawsuits filed by third parties on behalf of the animal.

AND WHAT IS WRONG WITH AN ANIMAL HAVING LEGAL RIGHTS? IF A CHILD IS BEING ABUSED, THAT CHILD IS TAKEN OUT OF THAT HOME. IF AN ANIMAL IS BEING ABUSED, THEY DON'T STAND A CHANCE BECAUSE THEY ARE "JUST PROPERTY.":

Inability to select procedures such as euthanasia or spay/neuter—Owners wishing to relieve animal suffering by euthanasia may no longer have that option. Non-health justifications for euthanasia, including population control, may no longer be acceptable under guardianship. Spaying and neutering may also not be possible, if such procedures were not deemed to be in the best interest of the animal.

THAT ALL DEPENDS UPON THE WISDOM OF THE ATTORNEY/VET/PET PARENTS WHO CRAFT THE LAW. RIGHT NOW, EVEN IF AN ANIMAL IS NOT SUFFERING, AND THE OWNER OF THAT ANIMAL IS JUST TIRED OF CARING FOR THE ANIMAL, IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL FOR THE OWNER OF THAT ANIMAL TO TAKE THE PET TO A VET AND HAVE THAT ANIMAL EUTHANIZED. HOW IS THAT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ANIMAL?

Confidentiality of veterinary information and control of medical records—Where confidentiality of veterinary medical records is governed by state statutes or regulations, conditions are defined under which and to whom medical records may or must be released. Generally owners have authority over release of their animals' medical records. Under guardianship, a veterinarian, contrary to the owner's wishes, may be able to release information to third parties because he/she believes it is in the best interest of the animal. Conversely, the veterinarian may choose not to release medical records to the owner or others because he/she believes it is not in the animal's best interest to do so.

JUST TRY TO GET YOUR PET'S MEDICAL RECORDS IN TOTO IF SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG DUE TO THE VET'S FAILURE TO CORRECTLY DIAGNOSE, ETC. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS ARGUMENT, AND IF THERE HAS TO BE A HIPPA LAW ENACTED AS AN ADDENDUM TO AN INTRINSIC VALUE LAW, THEN THAT IS WHAT NEED TO BE DONE. VETS ARE JUST TRYING TO FRIGHTEN PET LOVES AND BRAINWASH THEM INTO THINKING THAT THERE IS ACTUALLY A BENEFIT FOR THE ANIMAL FOR THEM TO REMAIN AS PROPERTY.

Ability to transfer an animal to another party—Background checks may be required to ensure that transfer of an animal from one guardian to another is in the best interest of the animal. Transfer of guardianship from one guardian to another, for profit, may not be legal. Third parties may have the opportunity to impede transfer proceedings if they deem such action to be in the best interest of the animal.

HOW MANY VETS DO BACKGROUND CHECKS ON THEIR CLIENTS TO SEE IF THEY ARE INDEED, FIT AND COMMITTED ENOUGH TO GIVE AN ANIMAL A FOREVER HOME.? TRANSER OF GUARDIANSHIP SHOULD ENTAIL A BACKGROUND CHECK FOR THE PERSON TO WHOM THE ANIMAL IS BEING TRANFERRED. THIS IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ANIMAL, AND THAT IS WHAT SHOULD MATTER THE MOST.

Coverage of animal-related claims by homeowners' insurance—Homeowners' property loss insurance may no longer cover animal-related claims should animals be no longer defined as property under the law. Under guardianship, animals would no longer be considered property.


Required registration as guardian—In states having guardian registries, animal guardians may be required to register and to comply with all laws and regulations pertaining to that registration. Requirements for registration could include background checks, bonding, and conflict-of-interest evaluations. Registration processes are time-consuming and potentially costly.

ONE SURE WAY TO SEPARATE THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAFF....ONE SURE WAY TO ENSURE THAT THOSE WHO DO CHOOSE TO ADOPT AN ANIMAL ARE SERIOUS ABOUT THAT COMMITTMENT AND DO NOT TAKE IT LIGHTLY.

Annual guardianship reports—Animal guardians may be required to file annual guardianship reports, including associated financial reports.

Service Providers

Loss of protection under animal abandonment laws—Animal abandonment laws are predicated on the basis that animals are property. Guardianship removes the status of animals as property.

WHAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE NOW WHO ABANDON THEIR ANIMALS? NADA. TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF RENTERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MOVED AWAY AND ABANDONED THEIR ANIMALS. WE TOOK THEM IN AND HAVE NEVER REGRETTED THAT FOR ONE MOMENT. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY PROSECUTED FOR ABANDONING ANIMALS? I WOULD VENTURE TO GUESS A VERY SMALL NUMBER. IF A GUARDIANSHIP ENTAILED A PUNISHMENT METED OUT TO THOSE WHO ABANDON THEIR PETS, PERHAPS MORE WOULD THINK BEFORE ACTING SO IRRESPONSIBLY.

Veterinarians' responsibilities unclear—The veterinarian's responsibilities become unclear when a guardian's direction is contrary to the best interests of the animal. Veterinarians may be required to go to court to obtain a judicial determination as to whether or not theirs or the guardian's direction is the appropriate course of action. Inability to provide timely treatment to an ill or injured animal during the course of court proceedings creates the potential for unnecessary animal suffering. For example, debate as to whether to treat a compound fracture versus selecting euthanasia for the animal could create the potential for continued pain, infection and other complications while awaiting a judicial decision. Cases involving animal issues are likely to have lower priority than those involving human issues.

NOW, WHO IS FEAR MONGERING? WHAT RESPONSIBLE PET PARENT WOULD KNOWINGLY ALLOW THEIR COMPANION TO SUFFER, OR DENY MEDICAL CARE WHEN NEEDED? THE AVMA IS STRETCHING THIS ISSUE TO THE NTH DEGREE IN AN ATTEMPT TO SUPPRESS ALL THINKING TO THE CONTRARY.

Is your furkid spayed or neutered? You assume that your cat would not want to be considered furniture but I would assume that he or she would not want to be altered and denied of the joys of reproduction.

All of our companions animals are spayed. Our youngest was found riddled with fleas, suffering from giardia, emaciated, and near death. She was spayed as soon as she was physicaly able to withstand the surgery.
The other three, who were abandoned by neighbors, were already spayed when we took them in.
BTW, there is a difference between sex and reproduction:)

Caveat emptor has done a beautiful job responding to the stated position of organized veterinary medicine. The key point is What is the advantage to our pets of remaining property? I understand that there is a benefit to pet parents who are either neglectful or malicious in that there is no responsibility. Veterinarians that practice good medicine and communicate well have nothing to fear. Slaves, women, and children were all chattel property in our not too distant past. There were people that were against elevating their legal status. It was difficult, but it was the right thing to do. As society has become more impersonal, our pets play a greater role in our emotional well being. We owe them far more than they now receive. Below is the text of Gracie's Law.
GRACIE’S LAW


To recognize the emotional bond that exists between pets and people, the human animal bond, this law entitles the owner of a pet that is deliberately killed through an act of malice or accidentally killed through an act of negligence to the sum of $12,500 for loss of companionship and pain and suffering, plus all legal fees required to prove the negligence or malice. An equal amount, $12,500, will be donated to a pet rescue organization of the bereaved pet owner’s choice in honor of their lost pet. This law does not supersede the laws already in existence which entitles the pet owner to the value of their pet as property. In the case of an act of malice, all laws relating to criminal prosecution remain in effect. A veterinarian who prescribes an appropriate medical or surgical plan by community standard that is declined by the owner of the pet would not be held accountable under this law, should the medical record state that the owner of the pet declined the appropriate treatment.

When we establish an inherent value that differentiates our pets from property, then the dialogue can begin about what care will be expected. This will be decided by pet parents, lawyers, veterinarians, breeders, animal rescue organizations, legislators, etc. The status quo is unacceptable. It will be difficult, but it is the right thing to do!

Question- do you ever see doctors (vets or other), who are unfairly accused of malpractive or negligence?

Contrary to what the insurance industry and conservative talk radio would have you believe, it is very difficult to bring a case to trial. Gracie and I were crushed between the rear of our car and the rear of a lady's car who backed up 25 yards without looking. My leg was broken in 3 places and I needed surgery for an ACL, but I am alive today because Gracie was crushed to the width of my calf before I felt the impact. I was told at a deposition that I had a simple broken leg case and that Gracie was property. I have been an advocate to change the law since that day. In Florida, prior to trial you must attend court appointed mediation. The insurance company makes an offer, that is non binding, but if you choose to go to trial and do nor receive 75% of the offer at mediation, you are required to pay the legal fees of the insurance company. I was told that I may have to pay $130,000 to go to trial. Give me a break. What do the insurance company attorneys do for that kind of money. There are few frivolous lawsuits, and malpractice cases are not the cause of increased vet fees, medical fees, or insurance premiums. Many injured people have no legal recourse against the insurance companies, and settle for pennies on the dollar because the system is already stacked against the injured. I once believed that frivolous lawsuits were a problem, until I was injured and my canine buddy was killed!

At least we can agree on one thing- insurance companies are the devil. ; )

And I am sorry to hear about your accident and terribly sorry about Gracie. I believe that the negligent owner should have to pay somehow, but changing the classification of animals out of property is still a nasty prospect, at least for me.

Apparently the conservatives are so alarmed about the idea people could collect damages other than the value of their pet they have completed sample legislation for conservative lawmakers on the ALEC website (you may access if you are a conservative legislator). You can try to get at their proposed legislation but you won't be able to unless you are elected. The site is paid for by fat cats. A little about ALEC:
http://alecwatch.org/

But this document also explains some of their worries:
http://www.alec.org/am/pdf/ALEC-State-Factor-Animal-liability.pdf

This is the kind of legislation they are very worried about:
ILL. COMP. STAT. § 70/16.3 (2002)
http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stusil510ilcs70_1_16.htm#sec70_16_3
Scroll down to the statue.

I can't find the case, but fairly recently an Illinois citizen won a case where as property the dog from a rescue was valued a tiny sum as property despite the fact the owners took the dog to a University veterinary clinic and paid much larger sums to try to save the dog's life. The court said the value of the dog was what the owners were willing to pay to try to save the dog's life not the minimal sum of the cost of the dog from a shelter. In this case, the dog was property but the value was not the replacement cost.

The system is rigged against the small person. Even recently class action suits against WallMart and AT&T in CA have said if anyone wants to collect for fraud, they have to do it as an individual (AT&T) and they can discriminate against their female employees (Walmart) without redress unless they file individually. The average Joe can't afford the legal fees.

why only $12,500 to the "pet parent"? isn't your pet worth more than that? Mine is. Why the same amount to a "charity" of the owners ( pet parents) choice.. what good does that do? Shouldn't that be the choice of the person who suffered the loss.. to give to a charity? Who gets the tax benefit of the donation? There are so many legal snafus in this I can understand why it was sent for judicial review.
pets benefit as property as the AVMA says.. by many reasons..

I knew what the opposition to Gracie's Law would be, and crafted my idea to take the objections into account. This was never about money to me, but it was to Geico. Since I was a veterinarian, Gracie was killed, and I was in the zone of impact, my case met the legal requirements for non-economic damages to be awarded. Geico assigned their number 2 national litigator to my case because they were concerned that a precedent could be set allowing for an award above property value. In Gracie's Law, the award was capped because I believe that for forgiveness to occur and the injured party to be made whole, responsibility for injury must be admitted, an apology offered, and restitution made. Gracie was worth far more than this amount to me, but I thought that some reasonable amount could be selected so other grieving pet parents could receive something for their loss. The provision that an equal amount be donated to an animal rescue organization was added to silence those who said that this was only about money. If somebody kills a pet through negligence or malice, they will be liable and it may serve as a deterrent factor. The animal rescue organizations can use the money for good and benefit animals in need. In other words, take a sad song, and make it better. As a practicing vet, I realize that veterinarian's treatment plans are often declined, and when a pet dies who could have been saved, the owner trapped in the guilt phase of grief may try to take his guilt out on the veterinarian. Innocent veterinarians are protected through the final clause.

but it really is just about the money or else an apology would be all that is necessary.. what good does the money do to you when your dog is dead?
We already have laws that sentence people to fines and jail time when found guilty in cruelty cases.
If you want people to suffer when they have done something accidentally negligent.. like your case.. how does money make it better? What does the person learn by writing you a check.. and how do you benefit other than by putting the check in the back.. or buying something.. or even giving it away.. how about a ""fine" of so many hours worked in the local shelter? Wouldn't that be better for all concerned?

I total agree with you on that one, I worked in a shelter for years, I worked in a poutry plant too.I have also worked a farm and butchered. People need to experiance something other then book learning befor they try to teach others a better way.Because of my age and my life experiances I have learned a lot of thing that those who set in their highrise appartments and think that eggs milk and meat are made at walmart will never know.My life may have been rough and colorful but its they who are missing out!!

The laws are rarely enforced regarding animal cruelty, and perpetrators usually get a slap on the wrist and go on their way to abuse again or worse, to move on to human abuse. We are a capitalist society and to many, having to part with their money is a far worse punishment than anything else. Finally, if people knew that they would be held accountable for negligence or malice, perhaps they might be more careful. I have heard from many victims of veterinary malpractice over the last 2 years whose stories are heartbreaking, and they do not rest well because there was no justice because their property was harmed. To the true pet parents who make the practice of veterinary medicine a joy, those who truly understand the human animal bond and do not just pay it lip service in the name of profit, a pet is not chattel property! I take my oath to prevent and relieve animal suffering seriously, and far too often I have to turn a blind eye to owner inflicted animal suffering which rears its ugly head through neglect and abuse.

that is assuming people who commit your "crime" have money what if they don't.. then jail time for them? how about they have to sell their home or give it to you .. or give it to a charity? Did the person who hit your dog go onto a life of abusing animals ot continue on to abuse people..
negligence and malice are two totally separate things under the law but I am sure you already know that..
another topic.. if pets are not chattel property how will there be any more pets for sale? or would you prefer that people not breed any more dogs and cats? or that only "certain "people can be "pet parents"..and only "certain" people can be allowed to let their "pet children" reproduce.. or should "pet parents" allow "pet children' to reproduce and then give away the "pet grandchildren" only to "certain" other people... or can the pets be sold?
as a vet would you consider a dog having fleas as neglect? .. how about ticks?
Your oath also says you will use your knowledge for the "conservation of animal resources". What does that mean to you?

If there is a court case on record, and the guardian of the pet prevails, it would not only serve as a "black mark" for the veterinarian/clinic involved, it would serve as a wake up call for those who are so naive to think that it is "all about the money."
The goal of our lawsuit was to see that ALL companion animals have intrinsic value. It is wrong that only animals involved in something that brings in money to the human race have value. (aside from service dogs, which already have intrinsic value, as well they should). Just because my cat or your dog isn't used for entertainment purposes or to make money for sick people who frequent "entertainment" that exploits animals, doesn't mean that companion animals have any LESS value than a thorougbred race horse or a poor greyhound, who were it not for the sick practices of the human race, would not be exploited. .
As far as the provision in Gracie's law for half of the award to go to the rescue organization of the pet parents' choice (in memory of the companion animal who died) , what is wrong with that? How can anyone who loves animals find fault with that?
And by the way, I walk the talk....I am a vegetarian, and I shop at Orlando Pet Pantry for my babies' food, never deny them medical care, and since they are nearly 19 and 13 years old , respectively, I would say that we are doing something right.

but it really is just about the money or else an apology would be all that is necessary.. what good does the money do to you when your dog is dead?
APOLOGY? WE WEREN'T EVEN ALLOWED TO SPEAK TO THE SURGEON, AND I THINK IT WAS BECAUSE SHE WAS SO SHOOK UP AND KNEW THAT THEY HAD DONE WRONG. I ASKED REPEATEDLY, IN WRITING AND OVER THE PHONE, TO SPEAK TO BOTH THE VET TO WHOM OUR DOG'S CASE WAS ASSIGNED (WHO WAS NOT A SPECIALIST) AS WELL AS TO THE SURGEON, AS WAS REPEATEDLY DENIED. SO, YOU MAY RANT ALL YOU WANT ABOUT AN APOLOGY, BUT YOU ARE NOT LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD. DO YOU HONESTLY THINK THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ADMITTED THEIR ERRORS? THEY WOULDN'T EVEN SPEAK TO US?


We already have laws that sentence people to fines and jail time when found guilty in cruelty cases.
If you want people to suffer when they have done something accidentally negligent.. like your case.. how does money make it better? What does the person learn by writing you a check.. and how do you benefit other than by putting the check in the back.. or buying something.. or even giving it away.. how about a ""fine" of so many hours worked in the local shelter? Wouldn't that be better for all concerned?

AND AS DR. KEN, AKA THE "FAKE" VET, ACCORDING TO YOU, SAID, PEOPLE ARE RARELY PUNISHED SEVERELY, IF AT ALL, FOR ANIMAL CRUELTY OR ABANDONMENT. WHAT DO THEY LEARN BY WRITING A CHECK? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THEY DON'T WRITE THE CHECK, THE INSURANCE COMPANY DOES, AND SECONDLY, THEY LEARN THAT IF THEY SAY A VET IS ON PREMISES 24/7, A VET HAD DARN WELL BETTER BE THERE. THEY LEARN THAT IF A CLIENT THINKS THAT THERE IS SOMETHING SERIOUSLY WRONG WITH THEIR PET, THEY'D BETTER LISTEN THE NEXT TIME. THEY LEARN THAT A CORRECT DIAGNOSIS REQUIRES THE PROPER TESTING AND USING SOME OF THAT EXPENSIVE EQUIPMENT THAT THEY HAVE ON PREMISES. THEY LEARN THAT THEY SHOULD HAVG THE COMMON DECENCY TO CALL THE CLIENT WHEN THE PATIENT PASSES, AND THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE THE PROFESSIONAL ETHICS TO SPEAK TO THE CLIENT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. DURING OUR TRIAL, I LEARNED THAT VETS ARE ACTUALLY TAUGHT IN VET SCHOOL HOW TO ALTER RECORDS, ETC. THIS INFORMATION CAME TO US THROUGH A VET WHO HAD NOTHING TO LOSE BY TELLING US THIS INFORMATION.
AS DR. KEN SAID, WE LIVE IN A CAPITALIST SOCIETY, AND THE ONLY THING THAT PEOPLE WHO WAREHOUSE ANIMALS UNDERSTAND IS WHEN IT HITS THEM OR THEIR INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE POCKETBOOK, OR WHEN THEIR LICENSE IS ON THE LINE.
ALICE, FOR HAVING HAD TWO PETS DIE FROM MALPRACTICE, YOU SURELY ARE DEFENSIVE OF PETS. MAKES ME WONDER IF YOU ARE TELLING THE TRUTH.
AND BY CALLING ME "TRASH", YOU ARE ONCE AGAIN SHOWING YOUR IMMATURITY AND CRASS NATURE, AND YOU INABILITY TO DEBATE. WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, AND WHEN YOUR "OPPONENT" HAS A RESPONSE TO EVERY ONE OF YOUR POINTS, NAMECALL. VERY MATURE, ALICE.

And I am sure that you understood my typo....Alice, and that is that you are very apologetic of VETS (not pets) for having had two pets supposedly die from vet malpractice. Doesn't make sense.

And one more comment regarding spaying and neutering and how wonderful the human race is because we do not castrate boys or perform hysterectomies on females.
Ever hear of gential mutilation? Or is the dogs and cats who perform that lovely "service" to their young?

to humans there is a difference between sex and reproduction.. to animals .. especially domestic pets.. NO.. no difference.. if that were true then castrated pets would still "enjoy" sex as humans do after a hysterectomy or vasectomy.. even eunuchs had sex drive..domestic animals have "sex' in order to reproduce which is why you don't catch your intact dog having "sex' with your intact bitch unless she is in heat... it is called DRIVE..some primates and other non domesticated animals do have sex for 'fun' but most do not..
by the way.. how does being riddled with fleas, having giardia etc equate to removing healthy reproductive organs... removed "as soon as she was physically able to "withstand" ( indicating that surgery is indeed a risk and a an operation) the surgery".
if animal have legals rights as you say they should.. then what is to keep them from having the legal right to reproduce?
you cannot have it ALL ways.. you see the glass as half full but most pets in this country are treated very well.. most of them are already castrated.. and most live a life that CHILDREN in some countries would love to have..
but then we are talking about parvo here..
so get your pet that you own vaccinated..

Alice, when we found our cat, she was pregnant, but we did not know it. (nor did our vet on the first exam, as she was so emaciated and ill) Rather than risk HER life, we AND OUR VET decided that spaying was the only way to save her. (we waited until she put a significant amount of weight on, was tested for pre op so that we knew that her liver/kidney/etc values were safe for surgery.
You know nothing about our cat or her history, yet you pontificate as if you were the Pope himself.
We saved her life, and we have provided her with everything that she needs for the past 12 years. She, in turn, has provided us with love and gratitude. I don't think that she cares that her "drives" are not being addressed, rather, that her belly is full and she has shelter, love and medical care when she needs it. She's sleeping in her bed on the kitchen counter beside me as I type this.
People like you make it abdundatly clear why I prefer four legged animals to most people.

I see half full.. pets are treated very well.

Spend a day in any large city humane society or animal control. Your pets may be treated very well. Mine are Family. Many are not. The death of 6-8 million unwanted dogs and cats each year is a national disgrace! The legal classification of pets as chattel property is the root of this evil. In the 32 years that I have practiced vet med, that is 192-256 million pets that have been killed in animal control and humane organizations. Something should be done. If not changing the legal status, then what would be better? If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. For evil to exist, all that is required is for good men to turn a blind eye to it. This is pure evil!

no what is pure eveil is sayng that killing animal is murder.. that the death of an animal is equal to the death of a human.. that those who are killed in war are the same as those we kill in so called shelters.. and please. why is it that all of the Holier than Thous think none of us have ever worked or been to a shelter that kills animals..
T
We have worked miracles since you went to Purdue.. the number of animals killed ins "shelters" has plummeted.. can we do better .. yes we can and the no kill movement is working to stop the killing of animals that can be re homed
Oh please stop with the solution and problem BS.. you can be neither of these or both.
What status would animals have if not property? If I consider my cattle as "pets' but then kill slaughter them.. am I guilty of murder? Is the killing of them accidental.. no.. is it malicious? who can say..
many people have rabbits as pets.. but eat them as well.. same with goats.. "pets' is a term we use for what?/ for just cats and dogs?.. how about Hamsters? Fish? Birds? and of course Reptiles
I am curious to know.. if a person comes in and says their dog has bitten several people and they want it put down.. will you do it? Or will you ask them to keep the dog.. or will you taek the dog.. home to your family and other pets.. would that be malicious to kill that dog..?? or is that absence of malice but ok to kill? so many questions.. pets are property.. it is better for them and better for the world ( except lawyers of course)

There was a story on our local news not too long ago about a beautiful , elderly Lab. A drug-addicted woman who was going through a divorce broke into her mother-in law's home, and took the Lab into the back yard, covered her with a blanket, and beat her to death with a baseball bat. If that is not murder, I don't know what is, Alice.

Some times I am amazed at what people say, other times I am just discussed. There is not now ,never was or ever will be a time when an animal, any animal, pet or what ever, will be of more value then a child. our children are priceless. To say that an animal is the same as a child says to me that YOU have a mental problem. I will never set an animal up to my table with a fork and spoon. I well never put my child on the floor with a bone and kibbles, Why, because they are not the same. I will expect my child to grow up with the ability to be rational, to vote, to raise, carefor, and produce the future. I will expect them to know the difference in good and evil,I will expect them to take care of their property so that it improves their life. I expect them to pursue life liberty, and happiness. I would never expect that of an animal, I would never expect to see my child run over and smell the neighbors butt or the neighbors child to run up to me and hump my leg. I hope my child never gets hairballs and I hope it is never nessasary to eat an afterbirth or bath my child by licking. There are so many thing that set animals apart from human that it would take all night and forever to put them all down in print. It is said that man is made in the image of God. No where have I ever seen it different except in those who whorship idles. It is also said that God gave man dominion over animals. they were to be used for and by man to make man all he could be. And I have never seen anywhere where it says animals are the equel of/with man. If you have, please let me know. Animals were put here for us to use in what ever way improves the lives of man be it by being food, pet, protector or simply by being. Animal have a certain amount of inteligents but it take humans to train them and bring it out. They don't just up and shake your hand or play dead because they saw something else do it. their inteligents are centered for survival. Now I know that if I bath my dog he really don't care, he will go and find the stiningest thing he can find and he will roll it, then no matter how rotten it is he will eat it. would you do that? how can you even contemplate an animal as equel to a human. This is so asinine on so many levels that I can't even continue. I can't believe that there are really people out there who think that way. and I definately don't want them on my deserted island. Cause they are going to ne unhappy when I eat there dog. Or maybe they will gine themselves in its place.

hey I am an atheist and I agree with you.. well said

Some times I am amazed at what people say, other times I am just discussed.

I THINK YOU MEANT DISGUSTED, AS AM I.



There is not now ,never was or ever will be a time when an animal, any animal, pet or what ever, will be of more value then a child. our children are priceless. To say that an animal is the same as a child says to me that YOU have a mental problem.

WHO DETERMINES WHAT AN ANIMAL IS WORTH? SINCE YOU HAVE OFT LOOSELY QUOTED THE BIBLE, I SUGGEST YOU PICK UP A COPY OF "THERE IS ETERNAL LIFE FOR ANIMALS". IT WAS WRITTEN BY A CHRISTIAN AND IT IS ENTIRELY SUPPORTED BY BIBLICAL VERSES. HERE ARE SOME OF THE CHAPTER TITLES:

GOD'S RELATIONSHIP WITH ANIMALS

HOW MUCH DO ANIMALS KNOW?

ANIMALS IN HEAVEN

ANIMALS HAVE SOULS AND SPIRITS

RESTORATION, RESTITUTION , AND ETERNAL LIFE

MISINTERPRETATIONS



THERE ARE MANY MORE CHAPTERS, BUT EACH ONE IS REPLETE WITH BIBLICAL VERSES SUPPORTING THE FACT THAT ANIMALS ARE NOT MADE FOR US TO USE AND ABUSE, AS YOU HAVE SAID.







I will never set an animal up to my table with a fork and spoon. I well never put my child on the floor with a bone and kibbles, Why, because they are not the same. I will expect my child to grow up with the ability to be rational, to vote, to raise, carefor, and produce the future. I will expect them to know the difference in good and evil,I will expect them to take care of their property so that it improves their life. I expect them to pursue life liberty, and happiness. I would never expect that of an animal, I would never expect to see my child run over and smell the neighbors butt or the neighbors child to run up to me and hump my leg. I hope my child never gets hairballs and I hope it is never nessasary to eat an afterbirth or bath my child by licking. There are so many thing that set animals apart from human that it would take all night and forever to put them all down in print.

YES, WHY DON'T WE DO THAT...LET'S SEE....HITLER, MUSSOLINI, VLAD THE IMPALER, THEODORE BUNDY, JOHN WAYNE GACEY....NEED I GO ON?







It is said that man is made in the image of God. No where have I ever seen it different except in those who whorship idles.

AGAIN, DO YOURSELF A FAVOR, SINCE YOU PROFESS TO BE A CHRISTIAN, AND GET A COPY OF THE BOOK THAT I REFERENCED.





It is also said that God gave man dominion over animals. they were to be used for and by man to make man all he could be. And I have never seen anywhere where it says animals are the equel of/with man. If you have, please let me know.

AND WHAT DOES "DOMINION" MEAN TO YOU? DO YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT A LOVING GOD WOULD WANT PEOPLE TO PROFIT FROM THE EXPLOITATION OF HIS CREATURES...ANY OF HIS CREATURES?





Animals were put here for us to use in what ever way improves the lives of man be it by being food, pet, protector or simply by being. Animal have a certain amount of inteligents but it take humans to train them and bring it out.

OH, REALLY? THEN HOW IS IT THAT DOGS HAVE AN INHERENT ABILITY TO SNIFF OUT CANCER? THEIR SKILL MAY BE "HONED" BY HUMAN BEINGS, BUT THEY ARE GOD GIVEN AND INHERENT. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN A DOG THAT WAKENS THE FAMILY WHEN THERE IS A FIRE, OR THE STORY OF HACHI, THE JAPANESE DOG WHO WAITED YEARS FOR THE RETURN OF HIS DECEASES "MASTER?:" DID PEOPLE TEACH THEM THOSE SKILLS? DID PEOPLE EMBUE THEM WITH FEELINGS AND COMPASSION? DID PEOPLE TEACH THEM TO RECOGNIZE DANGER WHEN THEY SEE/SMELL IT?





They don't just up and shake your hand or play dead because they play dead because they saw something else do it. their inteligents are centered for survival.

IF THAT IS TRUE, THEN WHY ARE THERE SO MANY STORIES ABOUT DOGS RISKING THEIR OWN LIVES TO SAVE THEIR HUMAN FAMILY MEMBERS?





Now I know that if I bath my dog he really don't care, he will go and find the stiningest thing he can find and he will roll it, then no matter how rotten it is he will eat it. would you do that? how can you even contemplate an animal as equel to a human. This is so asinine on so many levels that I can't even continue. I can't believe that there are really people out there who think that way. and I definately don't want them on my deserted island. Cause they are going to ne unhappy when I eat there dog. Or maybe they will gine themselves in its place.



HOW CAN YOU EVEN CONTEMPLATE THAT ANIMALS ARE NOT SENTIENT BEINGS? HOW CAN YOU PUT YOUR FORK INTO WHAT WAS ONCE A LIVING, BREATHING BEING AND CHOW DOWN WITH NO REMORSE? HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT JUST BECAUSE DOGS LIKE TO ROLL IN POO, THAT MAKES THEM ANY LESS "GOOD" THAN A HUMAN BEING WHO ENGAGES IN ALL MANNER OF DISGUSTING BEHAVIORS, INCLUDING BETTING ON HORSES AND DOGS, HAVING SEX WITH MINORS (OR ANIMALS?) YES, MAN IS CERTAINLY MORE NOBLE THAN HIS FOUR LEGGED COUNTERPARTS, ISN'T HE?

I stand by what I said and yes I hit the wrong keys and I mispell.I am only human.I will not go into another lengthy discussion with you. I wont waste my time on something so asinine. However the book you spoke of is not the bible. If I quote from the Bible it because I read it from the Bible, I don't need another book to tell me what the Bible says. And I am pretty sure it was christians who wrote the Bible. I have no Ideal what Vlad the Impaler,Hitler, Gasey or any of the other evil people you mentioned had to do with anything I said.And yes you better believe I do enjoy a good steak, roast turkey or any good food set befor me. And I THANK GOD FOR PROVIDING ME WITH IT OR THE MEANS TO OBTAIN IT. I also love animals and have pets which I care for. I take very good care of them. And when I worked on the farm we took very good care of the animals because we new they were literally our bread and butter and I will add meat to that.

A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast, but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
Proverbs 12:10

Are not five aparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God.
Matthew 10:29

stand by what I said and yes I hit the wrong keys and I mispell.I am only human.I will not go into another lengthy discussion with you. I wont waste my time on something so asinine. However the book you spoke of is not the bible.
HAVE YOU READ THE BOOK? IT IF FULL OF BIBLICAL QUOTES TO SUPPORT THE TRUTH THAT IN HEAVEN, THERE WILL BE ALL MANNER OF BEINGS, INCLUDING FOUR LEGGED ONES.



If I quote from the Bible it because I read it from the Bible, I don't need another book to tell me what the Bible says. And I am pretty sure it was christians who wrote the Bible. I have no Ideal what Vlad the Impaler,Hitler, Gasey or any of the other evil people you mentioned had to do with anything I said
THE POINT IS, THAT YOU EDIFY MAN AND THE HUMAN SPECIES AS IF IT IS SUPERIOR. IT IS NOT. EACH OF THE HUMAN BEINGS THAT I CHOSE TO MENTION EXEMPLIFY THE FACT THAT MAN IS NOT ALWAYS A NOBLE CREATURE, AND MAN OFTEN IS EVIL. ONLY A SPECIST WHO THINKS THAT HIS OWN SPECIES IS SUPERIOR TO ALL OTHERS WOULD SPEAK AS YOU DO. PRIDE GOETH BEFORE THE FALL. IT IS MAN WHO MURDERS, MAN WHO RAPES, MAN WHO IS GREEDY, MAN WHO IS DECEITFUL.


.And yes you better believe I do enjoy a good steak, roast turkey or any good food set befor me. And I THANK GOD FOR PROVIDING ME WITH IT OR THE MEANS TO OBTAIN IT. I also love animals and have pets which I care for. I take very good care of them. And when I worked on the farm we took very good care of the animals because we new they were literally our bread and butter and I will add meat to that.
I AM GLAD THAT YOU TAKE GOOD CARE OF YOUR PETS. KUDOS TO YOU FOR DOING THAT. HOWEVER, IF YOU WERE STARVING, I'LL BET THAT THOSE PETS WOULD BE SEENS AS FOOD, AND YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY EATING THEM. NO MATTER IF I WERE STARVING TO DEATH, I COULD NOT EAT MY PETS. YOU COULD, AND THAT IS CLEARLY BECAUSE YOUR LIFE, YOUR SPECIES, IS MORE IMPORTANT TO YOU THAN ALL OTHERS.

IT IS MAN WHO MURDERS, MAN WHO RAPES, MAN WHO IS GREEDY, MAN WHO IS DECEITFUL.

actually there are many other 'animals " that display these exact behaviors.. many animals"rape" all predators "murder' and even omnivorous and herbivorous animals have been known to eat other species..primates and other animals hoard food.. are greedy and deprive the weakest among then from foods in order to survive whiloe their own starve..

NO MATTER IF I WERE STARVING TO DEATH, I COULD NOT EAT MY PETS. YOU COULD, AND THAT IS CLEARLY BECAUSE YOUR LIFE, YOUR SPECIES, IS MORE IMPORTANT TO YOU THAN ALL OTHERS.

that's right I am omnipotent.. you are trash.. boy would I love to see you on the island .. you would be the first to eat your own.. LOL that is if they didn;t eat you first..

So, when a dog sniffs out cancer, it's not "instinctual', but when the same dog behaves like a human being, ie. some of the behavior you just described, it's not 'instinct.'
Tell me, was it "instinct" that drove Hitler to murder the Jews? Or was it his evil nature?
Was it instinct that caused Ted Bundy to rape, torture and kill, or was it his evil nature.
From all of the "defenders" of the human race, man, according to you, has the ability to reason, which separates him from the 'lower " animals.
So, which is it....is man more evil, when he DECIDES to kill, to rape, to maim, or is a hungry cat, when she kills a mouse for food, out of instinct?

"court said the value of the dog was what the owners were willing to pay to try to save the dog's life not the minimal sum of the cost of the dog from a shelter. In this case, the dog was property but the value was not the replacement cost."

I am willing to pay one million dollars to try to save the life of my dog.. is that ok with you? Actually I would pay five million .. ok with you?

If you have all that money why arn't you out here saving the lives of dogs in shelters. Millions of dollars would take very good care of a lot of animals.And how much would you give to save a childs life?. Who comes first, your dog or a child? Me thinks you are talking through your hat as Granddad used to say

the courts awarded the people what they were "willing to pay to save their dog'.. I said I would be willing to pay five million dollars.. so Please Mr Judge and court .. give me five million.. point is awarding what someone might be willing to pay to save their pet is not what courts shoud be doing..

Alice, again you show your crass nature. This is not funny to those who have lost a pet due to negligence, malice/malpractice. I would have been happy had the jury awarded us one dollar but found those responsible guilty.
Anyone who could joke about something like this has never gone through it and/or has no compassion.

actually I have lost two dogs due to veterinary negligence.. one died while having his teeth cleaned "on the table" ( which is why i will never do that again.. )the other to a vet who performed a tracheotomy on my dog then left her to drown in her own mucus..while she had a litter of six puppies only days old.. so don;t give my your holier than thou BS
next thing you know you will tell it was my fault that I picked the wrong vet.. or that I should not have bred my female..quite honestly you are all know it alls and your attitudes are disgusting..you think you are better than everyone else and that your way is the only way..I did not find the loss of my two pets "funny" in the least.. but I realized that to try to "elevate" my dear departed loved pets ( yes I love my pets JUST AS MUCH AS YOU DO)would do damage to all pets.. and that my love for my dead dogs could never be settled by a check or any amount of money.. You seem to feel differently.. that money trumps all and yet you talk about "for profit' breeders.. now that IS funny.
"us".. are you related to Drken who is making MONEY from his book .. do you not find it crass to make money from a tragedy like this? I do.. unless the money is going to an animal rescue and not into his pocket.
my point was my dog was PRICELESS so the point of what award of what I "might be willing to pay" to save them is moot

actually I have lost two dogs due to veterinary negligence.. one died while having his teeth cleaned "on the table" ( which is why i will never do that again.. )the other to a vet who performed a tracheotomy on my dog then left her to drown in her own mucus..while she had a litter of six puppies only days old.. so don;t give my your holier than thou BS

WELL, ALICE, ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT FOR SOMEONE WHO HAS LOST NOT ONE, BUT TWO PETS ? DUE TO MALPRACTICE, YOU CERTAINLY ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF VETS.




next thing you know you will tell it was my fault that I picked the wrong vet.. or that I should not have bred my female.
ALICE, SHOW ME ONE PLACE WHERE I HAVE MENTIONED BREEDERS IN ALL OF MY POSTS. I HAVE NOT. HOWEVER, YOU SEEM TO FEEL GUILTY BY VIRTURE OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID. DO I WISH THAT ALL PEOPLE WHO WANT TO ADOPT A PET WOULD GO TO A RESCUE ORGANIZATION OR A SHELTER TO GET ONE? OF COURSE I DO. DO I THINK THAT THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME RESPONSIBLE BREEDERS? OF COURSE I DO. DO I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME WHO ALLOW THEIR ANIMALS TO LIVE IN DEPLORABLE CONDITIONS AND USE THEM AS A MONEY MAKING RACKET, WITH NO THOUGHT OF THE DAMAGE THEY ARE DOING TO THE ANIMAL? OF COURSE I DO. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE PEOPLE, WHO , MUCH LIKE HILTER :) ONLY WANT A PURE BRED DOG OR CAT. THUS, THE RESPONSIBLE BREEDERS FILL A NICHE FOR THOSE PEOPLE. BUT WITH THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS WHO DIE EACH YEAR IN SHELTERS (AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I HAVE MENTIONED SHELTERS OR BREEDERS) , IF EVERY PERSON WHO BOUGHT A DOG OR A CAT WENT TO A SHELTER AND ADOPTED ONE, IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL FOR THE POOR ANIMALS AND WOULD CUT DOWN ON THE NUMBER WHO ARE KILLED FOR NO GOOD REASON OTHER THAN OVERPOPULATION.




.quite honestly you are all know it alls and your attitudes are disgusting..you think you are better than everyone else and that your way is the only way.
NEVER SAID MY WAY IS THE ONLY WAY. I JUST ADDRESSED THAT ABOVE. ALICE, ARE WE POSSIBLY FEELING SOME GUILT FROM BREEDING ANIMALS FOR PROFIT? ONLY YOU CAN ANSWER THAT BY SEARCHING YOUR SOUL.




.I did not find the loss of my two pets "funny" in the least.. but I realized that to try to "elevate" my dear departed loved pets ( yes I love my pets JUST AS MUCH AS YOU DO)would do damage to all pets.. and that my love for my dead dogs could never be settled by a check or any amount of money..
I ADDRESSED THIS IN A PREVIOUS POST, BUT I REITERATE...I WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO RECEIVE ONE DOLLAR AND AN ADMISSION OF GUILT. MY HUSBAND AND I DISCUSSED THAT IF WE DID PREVAIL IN COURT, AFTER PAYING OUR ATTORNEY, ANYTHING LEFT WOULD GO TO PET RESCUE BY JUDY. SO DON'T PRESUME TO KNOW WHAT I THINK OR FEEL, ANY MORE THAN I SHOULD PRESUME THE SAME FOR YOU.




You seem to feel differently.. that money trumps all and yet you talk about "for profit' breeders.. now that IS funny.

AGAIN, ALICE, YOU CLEARLY HAVE A GUILTY CONSCIENCE. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I HAVE MENTIONED THE WORD BREEDERS IN ANY OF MY POSTS. EXAMINE YOUR OWN CONSCIENCE, ALICE. YOUR EMPHASIS ON THIS SUBJECT IS CLEARLY INDICATIVE OF UNDERLYING GUILT ON YOUR PART.

AS FAR AS MONEY GOES...DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT MY HUSBAND AND I WOULD HAVE SUBJECTED OURSELVES TO NEARLY FIVE YEARS OF STRESS AND ABUSE ON THE WITNESS STAND IF WE DID NOT THINK OUR BELOVED DOG WAS PRICELESS? WE WANTED TO SEE THAT HER DEATH WAS NOT IN VAIN, AND TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR ALL OTHERS DOGS AND CATS IN THE FUTURE WHO VISITED THE FACILITY WHERE OUR DOG DIED.


"us".. are you related to Drken who is making MONEY from his book .. do you not find it crass to make money from a tragedy like this? I do.. unless the money is going to an animal rescue and not into his pocket.

I HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY BOOKS DOCTOR KEN HAS SOLD OR WHAT HE DOES WITH THE MONEY. I DO KNOW THAT WHEN I WROTE TO HIM TO BE OF SUPPORT, HE SENT ME A BOOK , GRATIS, TO THANK ME FOR SUPPORTING GRACIE'S LAW, WHICH WAS THE IMPETUS OF HIS BOOK. IF DR. KEN IS AS MERCENARY AS YOU ACCUSE HIM OF BEING, I DOUBT VERY MUCH IF HE WOULD HAVE DONE THIS. I HAPPEN TO ADMIRE A MAN WHO , NO MATTER WHAT SLINGS AND ARROWS HE RECEIVES FROM HIS COLLEAGUES, HAS THE GUTS TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT. IF MORE OF THE PEOPLE IN EUROPE DID THAT, HITLER WOULD NOT HAVE RISEN TO POWER, ALICE, BECAUSE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN WOULD HAVE PREVENTED IT.

my point was my dog was PRICELESS so the point of what award of what I "might be willing to pay" to save them is moot

AGAIN, FOR A BREEDER, YOU ARE PRETTY FIXATED ON MONEY, ALICE. KIND OF IRONIC, I THINK.

"yet you pontificate as if you were the Pope himself."

really I thought you were POPE by the wya you speak of shelters and "you don;t know what is it like" etc.. by the way do you know what your moniker means..??

YES, IT MEANS BUYER BEWARE. IN LATIN.

yet you pontificate as if you were the Pope himself."

really I thought you were POPE by the wya you speak of shelters and "you don;t know what is it like" etc.. by the way do you know what your moniker means..??

YOU'VE GOT THE WRONG PERSON....I HAVE NOT SPOKEN OF SHELTERS ONCE. HOWEVER, YOU TOLD DR. NEWMAN IF HE IS A VET, YOU ARE THE POPE. WHO IS THE ONE HOLIER THAN THOU, ALICE?

YES, WHY DON'T WE DO THAT...LET'S SEE....HITLER,

no one agreed with you more about the rights of animals than Hitler.. he believed animals were superior ( especially horses and dogs) to the "sub human" Jews that he killed with impunity.and YES malice. do a little research yourself.

just a bit of what Hitler did "for animals":
There was widespread support for animal welfare in Nazi Germany[1] and the Nazis took several measures to ensure protection of animals.[2] Many Nazi leaders, including Adolf Hitler and Hermann Göring, were supporters of animal protection. Several Nazis were environmentalists, and species protection and animal welfare were significant issues in the Nazi regime.[3] Heinrich Himmler made an effort to ban the hunting of animals.[4] Göring was an animal lover and conservationist.[5] The current animal welfare laws in Germany are modified versions of the laws introduced by the Nazis.[6]


There is much much more.. take a break for you animal rights stand and read up on Hitler and animal rights.. while horses and dogs lived in the lap of German luxury HUMAN Jews and others were being gassed by the millions.. but after all humans are sick, warped and degraded compared to "companion animals"..so what the heck..personally I find your animal rights dogma to be sick, warped and twisted.

Thank you Alice!!

"HAVING SEX WITH MINORS (OR ANIMALS?)"
as humans?

see there you go.. animals have sex with "minors" all of the time..and really if animals are "elevated" to human status.. why not have sex with them.. Animal right guru ( a vegan ) Peter Singer says sex with animals if ok with animal rights supporters.. as long as both human and animal consent.. so if animals say hey ok by me or are tacit about the response then why not?

you see "elevating animals " degrades humans.. animals as wonderful as they are.. are not humans..
you do not need a fork to enjoy eating animals.. what do you feed your dogs and cats? while they don't eat with a fork.. something died so they can live.. how would you change that

THERE ARE EXTREMISTS ON EVERY ISSUE. I DO NOT AGREE WITH SINGER, AND I SUPPORTED THE BEA**** BILL WHICH PASSED IN THE STATE OF FL AND WHICH WAS SPONSORED BY REP. NAN RICH.

ELEVATING ANIMALS DOES NOT DEGRADE HUMANS. RATHER, IT RECOGNIZES THEM AS SENTIENT BEINGS, CAPABLE OF FEELING EMOTION AND OFTEN EXPLOITED BY THE WONDERFUL HUMANS THAT YOU CONTINUOUSLY DEFEND...MUCH LIKE THE CHILD S** TRADE. I AM SURE THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO THINK THAT ELEVATING CHILDREN AND GIVING THEM "RIGHTS" IS WRONG AS WELL. THERE ARE STILL SWEAT SHOPS THAT EXIST UTILIZING CHILD LABOR AND IN MANY COUNTRIES (OUR OWN INCLUDED) THERE ARE PEDOPHILES WHO SEE NOTHING AT ALL WRONG WITH PREYING UPON CHILDREN. ARE THEY DEGRADING THOSE CHILDREN OR "ELEVATING" THEM, ALICE?

MY CAT IS A CARNIVORE BY VITURE OF HER BIOLOGICAL MAKEUP. SHE HAS NO CHOICE. SHE NEEDS THE NUTRIENTS THAT MEAT SUPPLIES AND WITHOUT THEM, SHE WOULD DIE. I, ON THE OTHER HAND, AS A HUMAN BEING WITH THE ABILITY TO CHOOSE, DO NOT NEED MEAT TO EXIST. I CAN GET MY PROTEIN FROM OTHER SOURCES, AND WHILE I AM NOT HAPPY THAT SOMETHING HAD TO DIE SO THAT MY CAT COULD LIVE...IT IS A QUESTION OF HER BIOLOGY AND NOT CHOICE, ALICE. READ "YOUR CAT, SECRETS TO A LONGER STRONGER LIFE, " BY DR. ELIZABETH HODGKINS, IF YOU NEED AN EXPERT'S OPINION, SINCE MINE IS "TRASH."

why do you have a cat? when you know they kill to eat..or that you must be the provider of the food that they eat knowing other animals were killed to provide for your "pet child" why not a "pet child" like a rabbit or hamster that are herbivores? Or a goat or a horse? there are many choices.. you have chosen to perpetuate the killing of animals to provide for ones that you prefer..a bit hypocritical eh?

why do you have a cat? when you know they kill to eat..or that you must be the provider of the food that they eat knowing other animals were killed to provide for your "pet child" why not a "pet child" like a rabbit or hamster that are herbivores? Or a goat or a horse? there are many choices.. you have chosen to perpetuate the killing of animals to provide for ones that you prefer..a bit hypocritical eh?

WHY DO I HAVE A CAT? BECAUSE I HAPPEN TO LOVE ANIMALS, NOT BECAUSE I USE THEM TO MAKE MONEY. I HAVE NOT CHOSEN TO PERPETUATE THE KILLING OF ANIMALS ANY MORE THAN YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO USE AND ABUSE ANIMALS FOR MONETARY PURPOSES. I AM GIVING YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT AND HOPING THAT YOU ARE A RESPONSIBLE BREEDER. HOWEVER, I FIND IT COMICAL THAT YOU MENTION HITLER, YET YOU FAIL TO SEE THAT THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO PURCHASE "PURE BRED" DOMESTICATED ANIMALS ARE PERPETUATING, IN THE ANIMAL KINGDOM, THE SAME KIND OF THING THAT HITLER ESPOUSED...A "PURE" RACE.
WHO IS HYPOCRITICAL, ALICE? WHO CALLS PEOPLE NAMES AND DOUBTS THAT THEY ARE WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE? I GAVE YOU FAR MORE OF A BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT THAT YOU DID FOR DR. NEWMAN, WHOM YOU MOCKED.
AND AS FAR AS MY CHOICE OF PETS, THEY ALL CAME TO ME...TWO CATS WERE ABANDONED BY RENTERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ONE WAS FOUND STARVING IN A WOODED AREA, AND OUR DOG WAS DUMPED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE TOOK THEM ALL IN, GAVE THEM THEIR FOREVER HOMES, AND IF THAT EQUATES TO HYPOCRISY, SO BE IT. IF THERE WERE MORE PEOPLE LIKE US, THERE WOULD BE FEWER HOMELESS ANIMALS.

"JUST TRY TO GET YOUR PET'S MEDICAL RECORDS IN TOTO IF SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG DUE TO THE VET'S FAILURE TO CORRECTLY DIAGNOSE, ETC. "

actually I had no problem getting the hundreds of pages of my pets records from my negligent vet..I just asked.. but a warrant would also work

THERE WERE SEVERAL PAGES OF OUR DOG'S RECORDS MISSING...ALL OF THEM CONVENIENTLY MISSING AS THEY WOULD HAVE INCRIMINATED THE VETS IN QUESTION. THERE WERE NO SURGICAL NOTES, AND THE TESTIMONY OF THE VETS IN COURT DID NOT AGREE WITH THE RECORDS. THEY ALSO FAILED TO DISCLOSE A PAGE OF THE RECORDS DURING DISCOVERY. DID YOU GO TO TRIAL? DID YOU TRY TO ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING THAT WOULD CHANGE THINGS FOR OTHER ANIMALS THAT WERE WRONGED AS YOUR POOR PETS WERE? IF NOT, YOU HAVE NO ROOM TO TALK, ALICE, AS YOU DID NOTHING TO ATTEMPT TO RIGHT A WRONG, NOR TO PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.

DO YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT A LOVING GOD WOULD WANT PEOPLE TO PROFIT FROM THE EXPLOITATION OF HIS CREATURES...ANY OF HIS CREATURES?


Yes I do..and so do most people..

by Hermann Göring as the prime minister of Prussia.[11] He announced an end to the "unbearable torture and suffering in animal experiments" and said that those who "still think they can continue to treat animals as inanimate property" will be sent to concentration camps.[7]

a bit more on your "Hilter" comment.. the Nazis also wanted animals not to be property.. Concentration camp anyone????

To the best of my knowledge, Hitler was not a vegetarian. Does that mean that you have something in common with Hitler, Alice? :)

(NaturalNews) It's common knowledge that Hitler was a vegetarian. Just ask anybody: They'll tell you so. Trouble is, the assumption is false. Hitler wasn't a vegetarian at all. Consider the historical facts:

• Biographers who wrote about Hitler (and who knew him quite well on a personal basis) openly describe his love for Bavarian sausages and game pie ("game" meaning wild meat from birds and other creatures).

• Hitler's own chef openly talked about Hitler's love for stuffed pigeon.

• In none of Hitler's speeches or writing did Hitler state he was a vegetarian or speak in favor of vegetarianism.

• Hitler was regularly given injections of a protein serum made from the testicles of a bull -- not exactly a treatment that would be tolerated by vegetarians.




Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/025163_Hitler_vegetarian_vegetarianism.html#ixzz1cHj5qrB3

Cavey, It was not I who said man Was superior to animals. It was God, Who said he created man in his image and gave man dominion over animals. So are you calling God a speciest? Man has the ability to know right from wrong, that he took from God. That is what got him thrown out of Eden. No other animal has that ability that we know of so far. And if your ancesters had not hunted and killed you would not be here. Our basic human needs for our bodies to stay human have not changed. You need to read up on nutrician. Animal protien and fat are still needed by the the body/brain to develope correctly. As far as the starving island thing, you need to go back and read what I said about you and me on that island. Nope I wouldn't hesitate a second to eat the/my pet. Then I would thank God for providing me the food to stay alive. As far as the wicket go, Hitler for instance, God has already provided for them a place of their own. HELL, And I am very sure there will ne no animals in Hell.I think God will also provide that animals are rewarded for there sacrafice for man. And if I were an Athiest like Alice I would be glad that in the end all of us, animal and human have oblivian. I will not argue with anyone there take on religon, being human I have the sense/right to make that choice and so does everyone else. Except animals they are ruled by instinct alone and everything they do is instinctive to survival, thier survival. In the wild they would not hunt down cancer or any disease or go out of thier way to help a human, Yes we hear stories but they are rare 1 in tens of million animal decide to save a human but in the world of the domesticated animal it is to thier benefit and survival to keep humans as healthy and happy as possible. Do you really think an animal is happier in the wild being hunted, starved, at the mercy of the elements and thier instincts, I believe if this were so Man would still be living wild in the wilderness.

Cavey, It was not I who said man Was superior to animals. It was God, Who said he created man in his image and gave man dominion over animals. So are you calling God a speciest?
DID YOU READ THE TWO BIBLICAL QUOTES THAT I POSTED? GOD HAS CONCERN FOR EVEN THE SMALLEST OF HIS CREATURES, INCLUDING THE SPARROW. DOMINION DOES NOT MEAN EXPLOITATION. IT MEANS STEWARDSHIP. IT MEANS INFLUENCE. DO YOU THINK THAT JUST BECAUSE GOD GAVE US DOMINION OVER ANIMALS, THAT HE WOULD APPROVE OF WHAT HAPPENS TO POOR GREYHOUNDS, THAT ARE DRUGGED, BEATEN, TORTURED, ALL FOR MAN'S ENTERTAINMENT.? DO YOU HONESTLY THINK THAT GOD WOULD APPROVE OF THE SICK PEOPLE WHO HAVE S** WITH ANIMALS? IS THAT DOMINION IN YOUR EYES? I DOUBT THAT IT IS IN GOD'S EYES.



Man has the ability to know right from wrong, that he took from God. That is what got him thrown out of Eden. No other animal has that ability that we know of so far.

DO YOU NOT THINK THAT THE DOG WHO SACRIFICES HIS OWN LIFE TO SAVE HIS FAMILY KNOWS "RIGHT FROM WRONG?" HOW ABOUT THE RECENT CASE OF THE DOG WHO WAS IN A CAR ACCIDENT WITH HER FAMILY, SURVIVED, AND GATHERED ALL OF THE ITEMS FROM THE CRASH AND MADE A BED OF THEM UNTIL SHE WAS RESCUED? YES, GOD GAVE MAN A "HIGHER" INTELLIGENCE, BUT THERE ARE MANY FOUR LEGGED ANIMALS WHO ARE MORE LOYAL, MORE COURAGEOUS, AND TAKE BETTER CARE OF THEIR YOUNG THAN THE HUMAN SPECIES? FROM WHENCE COMES THEIR GOODNESS? FROM THE SAME GOD WHO CREATED YOU AND ME.

And if your ancesters had not hunted and killed you would not be here. Our basic human needs for our bodies to stay human have not changed. You need to read up on nutrician. Animal protien and fat are still needed by the the body/brain to develope correctly.

YES, THAT'S WHY I'M NOT A VEGAN. I DRINK MILK AND EAT CHEESE, BUT I DO NOT EAT THE FLESH OF ANOTHER LIVING BEING. AT LEAST THE DAIRY COWS ARE NOT SLAUGHTERED OR RAISED TO BE KILLED.

As far as the starving island thing, you need to go back and read what I said about you and me on that island. Nope I wouldn't hesitate a second to eat the/my pet. Then I would thank God for providing me the food to stay alive.

PERHAPS GOD WOULD FROWN UPON YOU EATING YOUR PETS...HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT HE WOULD NOT SINCE HE VALUES ALL LIFE, EVEN THE SMALLEST SPARROW? UNLESS YOU ARE GOD, YOU ARE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION.


As far as the wicket go, Hitler for instance, God has already provided for them a place of their own. HELL, And I am very sure there will ne no animals in Hell.

SO, WILL THERE BE ANIMALS IN HEAVEN? SOME PEOPLE INTERPRET THE BIBLE TO SAY THAT ANIMALS HAVE NO SOULS. I AM SURE THAT YOU ARE ONE OF THEM.


I think God will also provide that animals are rewarded for there sacrafice for man. And if I were an Athiest like Alice I would be glad that in the end all of us, animal and human have oblivian. I will not argue with anyone there take on religon, being human I have the sense/right to make that choice and so does everyone else.

THAT IS ALL TRUE. I WILL NOT ARGUE RELIGION, BUT PROVIDED BIBLICAL QUOTES AND CAN PROVIDE MANY MORE WHERE THOSE CAME FROM....FROM THE BIBLE, NOT FROM MY OWN "INTERPRETATION" OF THE BIBLE.


Except animals they are ruled by instinct alone and everything they do is instinctive to survival, thier survival. In the wild they would not hunt down cancer or any disease or go out of thier way to help a human,

YOU NEVER DID RESPOND TO MY QUESTION AS TO WHY , IF AS YOU SAY, ANIMALS ARE RULED BY PURE INSTINCT, WHY THEY RISK THEIR OWN LIVES TO SAVE THE LIVES OF THEIR HUMAN FAMILY. IF YOU THINK THAT IS INSTINCT AND NOT LOVE DRIVEN, I FEEL SORRY FOR YOU, AS YOU ARE NOT USING THE GOD GIVEN ABILITY TO REASON.

AND NO....IN THE WILD , HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD DO? IF THEY FORMED A BOND WITH A HUMAN BEING, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THEY WOULD BEHAVE THE SAME IN THE WILD AS THEY WOULD WHEN DOMESTICATED.

BUT HERE ARE JUST A FEW SITUATIONS WHERE DOGS HAVE SAVED THEIR LOVED ONES...MORE THAN MANY PEOPLE WOULD DO IF THEY FOUND THEMSELVES IN THE SAME SITUATION.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1273192

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20012608-10391704.html

http://www.kvue.com/home/related/Dog-saves-man-paralyzed-in-biking-accident-111453219.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,538724,00.html


Yes we hear stories but they are rare 1 in tens of million animal decide to save a human but in the world of the domesticated animal it is to thier benefit and survival to keep humans as healthy and happy as possible.

IF YOU DO A SEARCH ON "DOG SAVES MAN", YOU WILL SEE THAT YOUR WORDS ARE NOT TRUE. THERE ARE NUMEROUS STORIES OF DOGS SAVING HUMAN BEINGS. BUT THEN, YOU WOULD RATHER EAT THEM THAN GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR HAVING ANY SENSE OF LOYALTY OR LOVE OR COURAGE.


Do you really think an animal is happier in the wild being hunted, starved, at the mercy of the elements and thier instincts, I believe if this were so Man would still be living wild in the wilderness.

DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT A MAN IS BASICALLY GOOD AND DOGS/CATS OPERATE SOLELY ON INSTINCT? IF YOU DO, THEN I FEEL VERY SORRY FOR YOU. HOPE IF YOU ARE EVER DEPENDING UPON YOUR DOG TO SAVE YOUR LIFE, THEY CAN READ YOUR THOUGHTS.

I cry Uncle!

Me Too!

] For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made.. whoever mentioned the Nazis (first) has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress.[8] This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's law.

Gowins law has been invoked by Caveat Emptor.. LOL.. and anyone who metions Hilter and actually DEFENDS him .. well. nuff said..

I never heard of Godwins Law, But it sounds right somehow. Thanks Alice for hanging in there with me, But with you going I feel like there is no inteligent life left out there.

You need to take a remedial reading course. I never defended Hitler. I held him up (along with others) as an example of the evil that humanity is capable of.

AT LEAST THE DAIRY COWS ARE NOT SLAUGHTERED

LOL.. you are the one who needs to 'study up" what do you think happens to them.. they go "moo cow heaven"? dairy cows are slaughtered and eaten just like other cattle.. they taste the same!

DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT A MAN IS BASICALLY GOOD/
yes I do.. and so do most people..
bye now.. off to walk dogs..

\THIS IS AN OLD ARTICLE, BUT YOU GET THE POINT. DAIRY COWS WERE NOT RAISED TO BE SLAUGHTERED, BUT SINCE THE ECONOMY HAS TANKED, THAT HAS CHANGED.
GLAD YOU KNOW THAT THEY TASTE THE SAME, ALICE, SINCE YOU ARE A CARNIVORE AND I AM NOT...BY CHOICE. HAVE A NICE WALK ON YOUR PROPERTY WITH YOUR PROPERTY. BE SURE TO TELL YOUR DOGS THAT YOU LOVE THEM AS MUCH AS YOU LOVE YOUR CAR OR YOUR FURNITURE, OR ANY OF YOUR OTHER POSSESSIONS.



http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/02/16-11

TURLOCK, Calif. - Hundreds of thousands of America's dairy cows are being turned into hamburgers because milk prices have dropped so low that farmers can no longer afford to feed the animals.


Ray Souza, owner of Mel-Delin Dairy in Turlock, Calif., stands with a few of his Holstein cows on Jan. 10, 2009. As of Feb. 2, the price farmers receive for a gallon of milk has been 80 cents a gallon, less than half the $1.65 a gallon the California Department of Food and Agriculture estimates it costs to produce. 'I don't ever remember being able to produce milk at that price,' said dairyman Souza, who got into the business in 1963. (AP Photo/San Francisco Chronicle, Lance Iversen) Dairy farmers say they have little choice but to sell part of their herds for slaughter because they face a perfect storm of destructive economic forces. At home, feed prices are rising and cash-strapped consumers are eating out less often. Abroad, the global recession has cut into demand for butter and cheese exported from the U.S.

Prices for milk now are about half what it costs farmers to produce the staple, and consumer prices are falling. Unless the market can be bolstered, industry officials project that more than 1.5 million of the nation's 9.3 million milking cows could be slaughtered this year as dairy operators look to cut costs and generate cash.

"This could destroy our dairy infrastructure," said Mike Marsh, CEO of the United Western Dairymen trade association.

Three months ago, mature milkers would

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2011/10/27/new-canine-vaccination-guidelines.aspx

I am not saying this is right or wrong, or that I agree or disagree just providing it as information for those who care to read it.

http://www.itsfortheanimals.com/DODDS-CHG-VACC-PROTOCOLS.HTM

Ah, Caveatemptor, Do you really believe milk cows are not slaughtered? What do you think happenens to them at the end of their prime production period. Every animal that produces milk,eggs or yhe products to make cheese, butter,cream, yogurt, cottage cheese, buttermilk, the list goes on and on, Is slaughtered at the end of its producing time. So no matter what you eat you are still adding directly to the slaughter. Yes I read what you said about the sparrows I have read carefully every word you have written. I have come to some conclusions,please let me know if any are correct.
1. You have never raised a human child.
2. You have never lived or worked on a farm.
3. You have never been hungrey to the point of starving.
4. You have never had to beg ,borrow or steal in order to survive.
5. you were raised in the city or the suburbs.
6. You were raised by loving well to do parents.
7. You have some colledge education.
8. You have a church going back ground, a city church and yes there is a differnce.
9. At some point in your life you were very disillusioned by some human, probably a male.
10. At some point an animal was your only comfort and you felt deserted by the human race.
I hope most of these are wrong but this is the way you come accoss. Man is not perfect, no one has ever said he was, but man has the ability to consuosly change that and work to better himself.
Animal are not perfect. they do not have the mental ability to better themselves. They do have the ability to learn and to adapt. But they need the human to do that. I do not think God wants us to abuse or mistreat any of his creation, be it animal, vegetable or mineral. I do believe he meant for us to hold domimion over and use to its fullest potential everything he put on this earth for us. I think it would be a terrible sin to waste, let die or not use a god given gift.

Ah, Caveatemptor, Do you really believe milk cows are not slaughtered? What do you think happenens to them at the end of their prime production period. Every animal that produces milk,eggs or yhe products to make cheese, butter,cream, yogurt, cottage cheese, buttermilk, the list goes on and on, Is slaughtered at the end of its producing time. So no matter what you eat you are still adding directly to the slaughter.
I AM NOT ADDING DIRECTLY TO THE SLAUGHTER BECAUSE I DO NOT EAT THE MEAT. IF PEOPLE DIDN'T EAT THE FLESH OF THE COW, THERE WOULD BE NO NEED TO SLAUGHTER IT AFTER IT WAS NO LONGER ABLE TO GIVE MILK. IN SOME COUNTRIES, HORSE MEAT IS EATEN. DOES SOMEONE WHO IS A JOCKEY CONTRIBUTE DIRECTLY TO THE SLAUGHTER OF THOSE HORSES? YOU TRULY ENGAGE IN SOME STRANGE AND ILLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS.

Yes I read what you said about the sparrows I have read carefully every word you have written. I have come to some conclusions,please let me know if any are correct.

EVEN THOUGH I HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO ANSWER THESE VERY PERSONAL QUESTIONS, I WILL.
1. You have never raised a human child.
THAT IS CORRECT. I HAD STAGE IV ENDOMETRIOSIS. LOOK IT UP. VERY PAINFUL DISEASE FROM WHICH I SUFFERED A VERY LONG TIME BEFORE A DOCTOR WOULD BELIEVE THAT I WAS SERIOUSLY ILL. HOWEVER, I TAUGHT SCHOOL FOR MANY YEARS AND WAS LOVED AND RESPECTED BY MY STUDENTS AND THEIR PARENTS. PARENTS REQUESTED ME AS THEIR CHILD'S TEACHER, AND THERE IS NO HIGHER COMPLIMENT THAN THAT.
WHEN I WAS IN COLLEGE, THE MOTHER OF THE FIGURE SKATER SCOTT HAMILTON, TAUGHT ONE OF THE COURSES THAT I WAS REQUIRED TO TAKE FOR MY MAJOR. SHE ONCE SAID, WHEN DISCUSSING CHILDREN, AND I QUOTE..."PEOPLE ALWAYS ASK YOU WHY YOU DON'T HAVE CHILDREN, BUT THEY NEVER ASK YOU WHY YOU HAD THEM." THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE ON THIS EARTH WHO ARE NOT AS GOOD A MOTHER TO THEIR HUMAN CHILDREN AS I AM TO MY FOUR LEGGED ONES. INCLUDING YOU....YOU WOULD EAT THEM IF YOU WERE STARVING. (YOUR PET KIDS, THAT IS)


2. You have never lived or worked on a farm.
AND HOW MANY OTHERS ON THIS BLOG HAVE? WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE PRICE OF EGGS. (WELL, ACTUALLY A LOT, IF IT WAS A CHICKEN FARM YOU WORKED ON :) HAVE YOU EVER TAUGHT SCHOOL? I HAVE A FEELING THAT YOU WOULDN'T LAST A WEEK.
I COULD NEVER WORK ON A FARM WHERE ANIMALS WERE SLAUGHTERED. I HAVE A SET OF ETHICS THAT IS AS FOREIGN TO YOU AS CAN BE. YOU SEE ANIMALS AS EXPENDABLE, USEFUL, UTILITARIAN. I SEE THEM AS FAMILY.


3. You have never been hungrey to the point of starving.
HOW MANY PEOPLE ON THIS BLOG HAVE? I KNOW MYSELF, AND I KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT MY PETS. IF I WERE STARVING TO DEATH, I COULD NOT KILL ANY ANIMAL. I COULD NOT EAT A LIVING BEING THAT WAS LOYAL AND LOVING . I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT GOD WOULD WANT ME TO DO THAT.



4. You have never had to beg ,borrow or steal in order to survive.
ONCE AGAIN, WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING ON THIS BLOG? THE BLOG IS ABOUT PARVO AND THEN IT SEGUED INTO A DISCUSSION OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF ANIMALS. OFF TOPIC FOR SURE. MANY PEOPLE STEAL, AND THEY DON'T DO IT TO SURVIVE. THEY ARE CALLED POLITICIANS.
HAVE YOU STOLEN? EVEN IF I WERE STARVING, I WOULD NOT STEAL. DIFFERENCE IN MORALS AND VALUES, JUST LIKE THE ISSUE OF KILLING YOUR PET AND EATING HIM AND THEN THANKING GOD FOR THE FOOD. VERY, VERY SICK.

5. you were raised in the city or the suburbs.
I WAS RAISED IN A RURAL AREA. I HATE CITY LIVING AND IF IT WERE UP TO ME, I'D MOVE TO A RURAL AREA TOMORROW.

6. You were raised by loving well to do parents.
LOVING, BUT DEFINITELY NOT WELL TO DO. I DETECT SOME CLASS ENVY IN YOUR STATEMENT. BOTH OF MY PARENTS WORKED TO MAKE ENDS MEET, AND MY FATHER DIDN'T EVEN FINISH HIGH SCHOOL, AS HE HAD TO WORK TO HELP HIS FAMILY WHEN HE WAS A CHILD. BOTH OF MY PARENTS WORKED OUTSIDE THE HOME. MOTHER WAITED UNTIL MY YOUNGER SIBLING WAS IN SCHOOL BEFORE GOING TO WORK.

7. You have some colledge education.
I HAVE A DEGREE AND SOME POST GRADUATE WORK.

8. You have a church going back ground, a city church and yes there is a differnce.

I ATTENDED CHURCH AS A CHILD AND A YOUNG ADULT. I WAS CONFIRMED.
I DO NOT ATTEND ANY MORE. LARGELY BECAUSE SO MANY CHURCHES ARE FILLED WITH HYPOCRITICAL AND JUDGEMENTAL PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF. I FEEL CLOSER TO GOD WHEN I READ THE BIBLE AND WHEN I OBSERVE NATURE.

9. At some point in your life you were very disillusioned by some human, probably a male.
I WAS VERY DISILLUSIONED BY A JURY THAT DID NOT DO THEIR CIVIC DUTY AND TOOK IT AS A JOKE. I WAS VERY DISILLUSIONED LISTENING TO "PROFESSIONAL " PEOPLE LYING THEIR ASSES OFF ON THE WITNESS STAND, ALL BECAUSE WE DID NOT HAVE THE TRANSCRIPTS OF THEIR DEPOSITIONS WITH WHICH TO IMPEACH THEM.
I WAS NEARLY RAPED AS A YOUNG GIRL. ONLY KEEPING MY WITS ABOUT ME AND SCREAMING, ALONG WITH GOD'S PROTECTION, SAVED ME.

10. At some point an animal was your only comfort and you felt deserted by the human race.
ANIMALS ARE ALWAYS MY GREATEST COMFORT. ALONG WITH MY FAMILY, WHO TAUGHT ME TO LOVE THEM. MY BELOVED FATHER, WHO IS DECEASED, AS WELL AS MY HUSBAND, BOTH LOVE ANIMALS. MY MOTHER TAUGHT ME AT AN EARLY AGE THAT ANIMALS ARE PRECIOUS. I HAVE NO USE FOR ANY PERSON WHO DOES NOT LOVE ANIMALS. I HAVE NO USE FOR SOMEONE WHO COULD EAT THEIR PET, THEIR FAMILY MEMBER, TO SURVIVE.


I hope most of these are wrong but this is the way you come accoss. Man is not perfect, no one has ever said he was, but man has the ability to consuosly change that and work to better himself.

MANKIND IS NOT PERFECT, THAT'S THE ONE STATEMENT WITH WHICH I WILL AGREE.

Animal are not perfect. they do not have the mental ability to better themselves.

WHAT CONSTITUTES BETTERING ONESELF TO YOU? MORE EDUCATION? EARNING MORE MONEY? HAVING A BIGGER HOUSE? WORKING ON A FARM? EATING A PET WHEN YOU ARE STARVING?
ANIMALS DO NOT NEED THE "ABILITY TO BETTER THEMSELVES", BECAUSE IN MY OPINION, THEY ARE ONE OF GOD'S GREATEST CREATIONS. THEY COULD TEACH PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF MANY LESSONS, BUT YOU ARE TOO BLIND TO SEE OR LISTEN.

They do have the ability to learn and to adapt.
THAT IS AN IDIOTIC STATEMENT. AN ANIMAL CAN ADAPT TO HAVING ITS LEGS CUT OFF FROM CANCER. EVER SEE THE VIDEO OF DOGS WHO WALK ON THEIR HING LEGS. I HAVE A FRIEND IN GA WHOSE CAT HAD TO LEG AMPUTATED, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, FROM A SARCOMA AT THE INJECTION SITE OF A VACCINATION. SHE LEARNED TO WALK ON THREE LEGS. ANIMALS LEARN TO FIND FOOD WHEN THEY ARE STARVING. THE CAT WE FOUND IN THE WOODS, STARVING, EMULATES THE NOISES THAT SQUIRRELS MAKE BECAUSE THEY WERE MOST PROBABLY HER ONLY COMPANIONS. OPEN YOUR EYES AND YOUR HEART TO THE WONDEROUS CREATIONS THAT GOD HAS PUT BEFORE YOU, BUT THAT YOU ARE TOO BLIND TO SEE.



But they need the human to do that.
WHO TAUGHT THE CAT TO WALK ON THREE LEGS? CERTAINLY NOT MY FRIEND. WHO TAUGHT THE DOG TO MAKE A BED OF THE POSSESSIONS THAT WERE THROWN OUT OF THE VEHICLE THAT SHE WAS IN WHEN HER FAMILY MEMBERS WERE IN A NEAR FATAL CAR CRASH? NO HUMAN WAS THERE TO TEACH HER THAT. I TRULY FEEL SORRY FOR YOU, AS YOU DO NOT SEE THE WONDERS THAT GOD PUT BEFORE YOU, ONLY WHAT YOU WISH TO SEE....AND THAT IS ALL CENTERED AROUND THE HUMAN RACE.


I do not think God wants us to abuse or mistreat any of his creation, be it animal, vegetable or mineral. I do believe he meant for us to hold domimion over and use to its fullest potential everything he put on this earth for us. I think it would be a terrible sin to waste, let die or not use a god given gift.

IS A CARROT CAPABLE OF EMOTIONS? WHEN IS THE LAST TIME YOU HEARD MILK MEOW AND PURR IN RESPONSE TO BEING SPOKEN TO IN A LOVING VOICE? THERE IS , ONCE AGAIN, A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN USING AND EXPLOITING. KEEP ON EXPLOITING GOD'S CREATURES, IF THAT MAKES YOU FEEL LESS "SINFUL". I CHOOSE TO CELEBRATE THE LIVING , BREATHING, COMPANIONABLE, LOVING, SENTIENT BEINGS THAT HE PUT ON THIS EARTH TO TEACH US THE PUREST , MOST SELFLESS SENSE OF LOVE AND LOYALTY.

Alice, Don't you think it time to give up la la land? For someone that states their pets are "priceless" , you have made many statements that indicate otherwise.

And this 'statement' of who loses a debate is ludicrous. I can't hel[ but suspect that many have agendas to keep animals from recognition of value: hmm, such as "millers", researchers, and yes, even the veterinary profession that published a position statement recently the animals are SENTIENT BEINGS.

Dr. Ken: While I can get behind Gracie's Law in principle , having experienced horrific malice, fraud, and cruelty (both to human and animal) ----yes, with licensed (in NH) Veterinarians , who chose to breach every moral, ethic, federal & state law, all without fear of recourse monetarily or via state sanction---
and for the very reason you state:I
care for the best possible health and welfare of my pets, and the evidence has been developed that veterinary colleges agree that pets have developed immune systems just like humans.

When the series is completed, there should be no need for the yearly vaccine through their mature life. Seems to make "sense" to not overload the immune system nor subject the body to the adjuvants in a vaccine either.

You may hold to the belief that no harm has been received , paricularly if invisible---therefore it is a wonder that humans do not receive the same treatment of life-long boosters, particularly when canines are the common "test subject" for end-point trials because THEY DO mimic the human body so well.

BarbaraA/New Hampshire
Pocket's Story from NH
true account of Veterinary abuse, fraud, and cruelty

Somebody made a terribly "loose interpretation" and should be ashamed of themselves attempting to "shut up and censor or embarrass someone into silence.

And I've read some nutty things but this one also deserves a "stab":


by forthadogs on 10/28/2011 10:10pm


"Some times I am amazed at what people say, other times I am just discussed. There is not now ,never was or ever will be a time when an animal, any animal, pet or what ever, will be of more value then a child. our children are priceless. To say that an animal is the same as a child says to me that YOU have a mental problem. I will never set an animal up to my table with a fork and spoon. I well never put my child on the floor with a bone and kibbles, Why, because they are not the same. I will expect my child to grow up with the ability to be rational, to vote, to raise, carefor, and produce the future. I will expect them to know the difference in good and evil,I will expect them to take care of their property so that it improves their life""


What the hell does that got to do with apples and oranges? Furthermore, did it ever occur to YOU that many lose HUMAN children all over the country to medical malpractice, etc. WITHOUT recourse just the same as ANIMAL pets? Well, take a clue---that happens to, and also the same as elderly care---hmmm, what do they all have in common?

Oh, yeah, can't speak for themselves, weakest in society, and most often abused---

Until anyone has lost or knows of someone that lost a healthy newborn or healthy young child to "med mal", than I suggest to not compare or cite "differences"

It isn't what you know, or what happened, it is "who you are and who you know" that makes the outcome. Nothing has changed (for the most part)

And are most of you informed that in "some states" , you actually NEED APPROVAL by a medical board (of peers) to PROCEED with a lawsuit? (how that is constitutional is beyond me, but it is true none-the-less)

Yes that has accured to me having lost a son to med.malpratice in 2010. Don't even go there. It is one of the main reasons I argue for human life over animal.You have know ideal what a raw wound you just raked your claws through. If my son had gotten half the treatment and attention as animals are getting right now by the animal rights people HE would be alive today. There is no animal on this earth today no matter how they are treated worth more then a human child. I do have pets and I care/love them but I would tear each one into tiny pieces with my bare hands if it brought my son back to me. Thank God that would never be a propability.Does this make it any more apples and oranges to you.

Sorry "forthedogs" , you lose credibility in my "eyes", because the the humans I "know" do NOT feel that way at all, but see the similarities in abuse and treatment, and don't belittle nor make fun of the abuse to animals.

As a matter of fact, their compassion, awareness has been so heightened they realize the inept, fraudulent, lack of ethics and morality to the :elderly, children, and yes~~ the voiceless animal.

So you, my dear, are either not forth-coming and insincere, or just plain in need of some good therapy to decipher your true feelings and why you can even call yourself "forthedogs", because your words illustrate otherwise (except for the vaccine posts).

I don't hide behind any alias and never have.And have no reason to fear the same.

Barbara/New Hampshire
perhaps the 1st state to ever DOWNGRADE their veterinary practice act (2008) to allow FELONS and CRIMINALS to obtain veterinary licensure

Yes, "for the dogs", Barb brought up a very important observation. Why did you choose your moniker when your own statements belie that moniker?

My moniker is "caveatemptor". I chose it because when one goes to a physician or a vet, one is essentiallly "buying" their expertise. It stands to reason that the more informed one can be about that person's reputation, knowlege, medical/vet school, word of mouth recommendations or negative experiences, the better off the person is who is buying that service.
I have just one more question for you, which I doubt you will answer. Why did your son not receive the medical care that he deserved? What were the circumstances of the malpractice? I told you about my Dad, and our dog, now I ask you kindly if you will reciprocate so that we can all better understand your anger.

Peggy in FL

Yes that has accured to me having lost a son to med.malpratice in 2010.
HOW OLD WAS YOUR SON? I AM VERY SORRY THAT OCCURED, BUT I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU, JUST AS YOU HAD FOR ME. DID YOU CONSULT A MED MAL ATTORNEY? DID ANYONE REVIEW YOUR SON'S MEDICAL RECORDS? DID YOU ATTEMPT TO LITIGATE? IF NOT, WHY NOT?


Don't even go there. It is one of the main reasons I argue for human life over animal.
I LOST MY FATHER PARTIALLY DUE TO MED MAL. HE HAD AN UPPER RIGHT LOBECTOMY FOR WHAT HE WAS TOLD WAS CANCER, AND A BIOPSY WAS NEVER DONE PRIOR TO SURGERY. THE SURGEON APOLOGIZED TO HIM AND SAID THAT HAD HE KNOWN WHAT WAS WRONG WITH MY FATHER, HE'D NEVER HAVE DONE SURGERY ON HIM. HAD A BIOPSY BEEN DONE, HE WOULD HAVE KNOWN. HOWEVER, THAT IS NO REASON TO ARGUE TO HUMAN LIFE OVER THE LIFE OF A PET. MED MAL IS MED MAL. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT WAS A VET OR A PHYSICIAN WHO DID NOT PERFORM DUE DILIGENCE. YOU SEE, I HAVE LOST BOTH A HUMAN BEING THAT I LOVED PROFOUNDLY AND WHO SUFFERED FOR SEVEN YEARS BEFORE HIS DEATH. I ALSO LOST A HELPLESS CANINE COMPANION WHO WAS "WAREHOUSED", TO USE THE TERMINOLOGY OF OUR EXPERT WITNESS AFTER HE LOOKED AT HER MEDICAL RECORDS.
MY FATHER CONTEMPLATED SUING, BUT HE WAS TOO ILL TO DO SO, AND WAS TOLD BY ANOTHER PERSON WHO HAD FILED SUIT AND WON THAT HE WAS TOLD THAT HE WOULD "NEVER FIND A DOCTOR IN THIS TOWN AGAIN."
MY HUSBAND AND I WEIGHED OUR DECISION TO SUE FOR VET MALPRACTICE FOR SEVERAL MONTHS BEFORE COMING TO A DECISION THAT WE COULD NEVER LIVE WITH OURSELVES IF WE DID NOTHING. TO DO NOTHING WOULD BE TO ACCEPT WHAT HAPPENED AND TO DO NOTHING TO ATTEMPT KEEPING IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.
WHAT DID YOU DO TO SEE THAT YOUR SON'S DEATH WAS NOT IN VAIN? AND DON'T TELL ME THAT IT WAS A QUESTION OF MONEY, AS MOST MED MAL ATTORNEYS TAKE THEIR CASES ON A CONTINGENCY BASIS, WHICH MEANS YOU DON'T PAY UNLESS THEY WIN THE CASE. (AND THEY SHARE IN THE SETTLEMENT.)
I HAVE ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION THAT YOU POSED TO ME, AND I WOULD LIKE YOU TO EXTEND THE SAME COURTESY TO ME AS I DID TO YOU.
I AM TRULY SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS, BUT KILLING AN INNOCENT ANIMAL, EVEN IF IT WOULD BRING YOUR SON BACK, IS NOT A GODLY THING TO DO. I DOUBT VERY MUCH THAT JESUS WOULD ADVOCATE THOSE THOUGHTS.



You have know ideal what a raw wound you just raked your claws through. If my son had gotten half the treatment and attention as animals are getting right now by the animal rights people HE would be alive today. There is no animal on this earth today no matter how they are treated worth more then a human child. I do have pets and I care/love them but I would tear each one into tiny pieces with my bare hands if it brought my son back to me. Thank God that would never be a propability.Does this make it any more apples and oranges to you.

NO ONE IS SAYING THAT AN ANIMAL IS "WORTH MORE" THAN A HUMAN CHILD. DR. KEN'S PROPOSED LAW HAS A MUCH , MUCH LOWER CAP THAT THOSE FOR MED MAL WHERE THE VICTIM IS A HUMAN BEING.
HOWEVER, I ASK YOU THESE QUESTIONS, AND THEY ARE NOT DIRECTED AT YOUR DECEASED SON, BUT AT HUMAN NATURE.

1. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A PET EMPTY OUT THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THEIR HUMAN "PARENT."?

2. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A PET DISOWN ITS PARENTS/GUARDIANS?

3. HAVE YOU EVER HEAR OF A PET GRIEVING TO DEATH AFTER ITS FAMILY MEMBER DIED? IT HAS HAPPENED.

TO SAY THAT YOU WOULD RIP APART YOUR PETS WITH YOUR BARE HANDS IS THE STATEMENT OF A GRIEVING FATHER WHO IS NOT THINKING CLEARLY, AND WHO HAS AN AX TO GRIND BECAUSE HIS PETS SURVIVED AND HIS SON DID NOT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT YOUR SON WAS AN ANIMAL LOVER, BUT IF HE WAS, YOU ARE NOT HONORING HIS MEMORY BY YOUR FEELINGS AND YOUR STATEMENTS. AND I MEAN NO DISRESPECT TO YOU, "FORTHEDOGS", I AM JUST TRYING TO MAKE YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE SAID. AND SINCE I LOST BOTH A FATHER AND A PET TO MALPRACTICE, I THINK I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND YOUR GRIEF, EVEN THOUGH I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT EATING PETS TO SURVIVE AND RIPPING YOUR PETS APART WITH YOUR BARE HANDS IF IT WOULD BRING YOUR SON BACK.

Is there any way to get this to stop going into my email?

I'm sorry I ever commented.

I'm sorry I ever checked the boxes that allowed email alerts.

delete them, pretty easy~~

I think it takes about one second to delete an email. Or are you secretly reading them, P?

I'm with P on this one.......

Godwin's Law, etc.by BarbaraA on 10/31/2011 08:44pmSomebody made a terribly "loose interpretation" and should be ashamed of themselves attempting to "shut up and censor or embarrass someone into silence.

BARBARA, THANK YOU FOR BEING EDUCATED. THANK YOU FOR BEING A VOICE OF REASON. THANK YOU FOR RECOGNZING THE MOTIVATION BEHIND ALICE'S POSTS. SADLY FOR ALICE, SHE DOES NOT REALIZE THAT I WILL NEVER BE SILENCED WHEN I AM PASSIONATE ABOUT ANY SUBJECT.

And I've read some nutty things but this one also deserves a "stab":


by forthadogs on 10/28/2011 10:10pm


"Some times I am amazed at what people say, other times I am just discussed. There is not now ,never was or ever will be a time when an animal, any animal, pet or what ever, will be of more value then a child. our children are priceless. To say that an animal is the same as a child says to me that YOU have a mental problem. I will never set an animal up to my table with a fork and spoon. I well never put my child on the floor with a bone and kibbles, Why, because they are not the same. I will expect my child to grow up with the ability to be rational, to vote, to raise, carefor, and produce the future. I will expect them to know the difference in good and evil,I will expect them to take care of their property so that it improves their life""


What the hell does that got to do with apples and oranges? Furthermore, did it ever occur to YOU that many lose HUMAN children all over the country to medical malpractice, etc. WITHOUT recourse just the same as ANIMAL pets? Well, take a clue---that happens to, and also the same as elderly care---hmmm, what do they all have in common?

AGAIN, THANK YOU, BARBARA, FOR YOUR ASTUTE NATURE, AND YOU ABILITY TO SEE THROUGH THESE INNANE COMMENTS. I WATCHED MY FATHER GO THROUGH HELL FOR SEVEN YEARS. I STAYED OVERNIGHT IN A HOSPITAL WITH HIM ON TWO OCCASIONS, TO PREVENT HIM FROM BEING OVERMEDICATED WITH DRUGS THAT THEY HAD NO BUSINESS GIVING HIM, AND THAT HE HAS SEVERAL CONTRAINDICATIONS FOR, HAD THEY CHOSEN TO CONSULT A PDR. AGAIN, THIS WAS DONE BY PEOPLE WHO WERE TOO LAZY TO CARE FOR HIM AND JUST WANTED SOME FREE TIME. BOTH OF THESE INCIDENTS OCCURED ON THE NIGHT SHIFT WITH THE SAME NURSE...WHOSE DAUGHTER HAD JUST HAD A BABY AND WHO ADMITTEDLY, WAS NOT GETTING ANY SLEEP BECAUSE THE DAUGHTER AND HER NEWBORN WERE LIVING WITH THE NURSE "CARING" FOR MY FATHER. MALPRACTICE HAPPENS MORE OFTEN THAN PEOPLE REALIZE. I PITY THE WEAK, THE INFIRM, THE ELDERLY, WHO HAVE NO ADVOCATE AND NO ONE TO SIT BY THEIR BEDSIDE TO WATCH OVER THEM.

Oh, yeah, can't speak for themselves, weakest in society, and most often abused---

Until anyone has lost or knows of someone that lost a healthy newborn or healthy young child to "med mal", than I suggest to not compare or cite "differences"

AMEN

It isn't what you know, or what happened, it is "who you are and who you know" that makes the outcome. Nothing has changed (for the most part)

AND, I MIGHT ADD, IT'S THOSE WITH THE DEEPEST POCKETS AND THE LUCK OF THE DRAW. WE HAD THE EQUIVALENT OF THE CASEY ANTHONY JURY FOR OUR DOG'S TRIAL. TWO PEOPLE, INCLUDING THE FOREMAN, SLEPT THROUGH A GOOD DEAL OF THE TRIAL. ALSO, THE JURY WAS MADE UP OF PRIMARILY MEN, "FOR THE DOGS"....TWO MEN,AND FOUR MEN, WHO, WHEN THEY RETIRED TO THE "DELIBERATION" ROOM, WERE HEARD LAUGHING, BEFORE THEY SPENT LESS THAN HALF AN HOUR PORING OVER FIVE DAYS' WORTH OF EXHIBITS AND TESTIMONY.

And are most of you informed that in "some states" , you actually NEED APPROVAL by a medical board (of peers) to PROCEED with a lawsuit? (how that is constitutional is beyond me, but it is true none-the-less)

AND ONE ALSO NEEDS A QUALIFIED EXPERT WITNESS, AND OURS WORKED FOR THE DPR....WHICH SITS IN JUDGEMENT ON VETERIANRIANS. YES, IT'S SO EASY TO CRITICIZE WHEN ONE HAS NOT "BEEN THERE" AND "DONE THAT," AS ALICE ADMITTEDLY HAS NOT. I FIND IT SO VERY INTERESTING THAT ALICE CLAIMS TO HAVE LOST TWO DOGS TO VET MALPRACTICE, CLAIMS TO HAVE GOTTEN THEIR RECORDS, BUT DID NOT TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION TO SEE THAT IT DID NOT HAPPEN AGAIN, OR TO SEE THAT THE SENSELESS DEATHS WERE NOT IN VAIN.

THANK YOU BARBARA, FOR YOUR VERY PERTINENT AND INSIGHTFUL COMMENTS.


Reply to this comment | Like (1) | Report abuse

"Arguing with a zealot is only slightly easier than tunneling through a mountain with your forehead."
somebody shoot me now..

Any second now I expect the Internet version of speaking in tongues from her....

LOL.. I spit my coffee all over my keyboard on this one! thanks for the laugh

Alice,
While I may not always agree with you and your views I have to say you've always given me food for thought. To me that is a good thing. On this thread you have a lot more patience than I could of ever had. This has been like fingernails on a chalkboard.

I agree- she always brings a lot to any discussion.

Easier to call others a zealot than to answer very valid questions...based upon your prior statements.
I reiterate:

1. Did you have anyone review your TWO dead pets' medical records?

2. Why did you get the medical records if you didn't plan to do anything about what you claim was malpractice?

It is much easier to change the subject than to answer questions that are very valid , Alice. You belong in LaLa Land...your moniker suits you well.

why do I feel like a bright light is on me in a dark room and someone in a uniform is saying "you VILL answer my questions or else I VILL make fun of you.." like some skit from Saturday Night Live..
but no I am at my computer where I will say.. It is NONE of your business..but gee thanks for asking, girly man

I am afraid that I have let you push my grief to speak instead of common sense. I do not think this is a proper place to discuss this subject and will only answer your questions here because you answered mine and I believe fair is fair. First let me say that everything I have said to you is true, I lived and still live what I believe. As far as litigation and my son, Yes that is in progress as we speak, Money not being a factor, In a small town with small town lawyer who charge big prices after medical cost and a funeral it is a factor.There are cost with a lawyer even in a pro bono case.I have also delt with and helped put ln prison a child molester this was also in 2010, I was also in court to fight for the rights of a group of dogs that were unjustly siezed and lost. Most of those animals went to far worse then they came from. I have been so hungry I stole from a neigbors corn field to eat as a child.I know what it is like to take a rabbit out of a pen and butcher it to put food on the table. And like I said to this day I thank God for every morsel of food he provides. And what difference does it make what age my son was? this is one of the most hurting things people have asked me. At what age would it be less painful when he died.I am sorry you lost your father, But know one should ever outlive thier
child. My pockets have never been deep most of the time they are hanging out And again I say I would do almost anything short of hurting another human being if it brought my son back. I have no intentions of discussing this subgect further on this site. If you feel like you wish to talk to me more on this subject send me an email I can reply to you on..

I am afraid that I have let you push my grief to speak instead of common sense.
I HAVE NOT PUSHED YOU, FORTHEDOGS. I HAVE SIMPLY RESPONDED TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY WITH THOUGHT AND USING COMMON SENSE. IF THAT IN SOME WAY BROUGHT CLARITY TO YOUR THOUGHT PROCESSES, I AM HAPPY TO HAVE SERVED THAT PURPOSE.



I do not think this is a proper place to discuss this subject and will only answer your questions here because you answered mine and I believe fair is fair.
AS SOMEONE WHO WENT THROUGH THIS PROCEDURE, ALBEIT FOR THE LOVE OF OUR DOG, I ADVISE YOU NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR CASE WITH ANYONE BUT YOUR ATTORNEY,NOW THAT I KNOW THAT YOU ARE IN LITIGATION. AT THE END OF THIS POST, I WILL GIVE YOU SOME ADVICE FROM THE SCHOOL OF HARD KNOCKS.


First let me say that everything I have said to you is true, I lived and still live what I believe. As far as litigation and my son, Yes that is in progress as we speak, Money not being a factor, In a small town with small town lawyer who charge big prices after medical cost and a funeral it is a factor.There are cost with a lawyer even in a pro bono case.
I BELIEVE YOU.
THAT IS CORRECT. YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY YOUR ATTORNEY'S EXPENSES FOR TRAVEL, COURT COSTS, ETC.




I have also delt with and helped put ln prison a child molester this was also in 2010,
THAT IS WONDERFUL. I HAD A FEW SIMILAR EXPERIENCES WHILE TEACHING, AND IT IS WONDERFUL TO BE ABLE TO HELP THOSE WHO HAVE NO VOICE. (LIKE ANIMALS AND CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY, THE MOST VULNERABLE AMONG US)



I was also in court to fight for the rights of a group of dogs that were unjustly siezed and lost. Most of those animals went to far worse then they came from. I have been so hungry I stole from a neigbors corn field to eat as a child.I know what it is like to take a rabbit out of a pen and butcher it to put food on the table. And like I said to this day I thank God for every morsel of food he provides.
WE ARE ALL SHAPED BY OUR EXPERIENCES IN LIFE AND WE ARE ALL THE PRODUCT OF WHAT WE HAVE LIVED. I HAVE HAD THINGS HAPPEN TO ME TO WHICH YOU CAN NOT RELATE AND THE CONVERSE IS TRUE.



And what difference does it make what age my son was? this is one of the most hurting things people have asked me. At what age would it be less painful when he died.I am sorry you lost your father, But know one should ever outlive thier
ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS AND NOT USING COMMON SENSE. I ASKED YOUR SON'S AGE, NOT FOR THE REASONS THAT YOU THINK, BUT BECAUSE I WONDERED IF HE WERE AN INFANT OR TODDLER WHEN HE DIED. EITHER OF THOSE CATEGORIES WOULD HAVE PRECLUDED HIM FROM BEING ABLE TO SPEAK FOR HIMSELF....MUCH LIKE OUR DOG.

YES, I HAVE KNOWN PEOPLE WHO HAVE LOST THEIR CHILDREN, AND BELIEVE ME, IT IS NOT THE NORMAL "ORDER" OF THINGS AND SOMETHING THAT MOST PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED IT WILL NEVER GET OVER. THEY WILL MOVE ON, BUT THEY WILL BE FOREVER CHANGED, JUST AS I WAS AS A RESULT OF WHAT I SAW IN COURT, BOTH FROM THE VETERINARIANS (PLURAL, THERE WERE SIX WHO TESTIFIED ) AND FROM THE JURY. .



child. My pockets have never been deep most of the time they are hanging out And again I say I would do almost anything short of hurting another human being if it brought my son back. I have no intentions of discussing this subgect further on this site. If you feel like you wish to talk to me more on this subject send me an email I can reply to you on..

ALTHOUGH I APPRECIATE YOUR OFFER, WITH MY DISTRUST OF HUMAN BEINGS, WHICH WAS SOLIDIFIED AFTER OUR TRIAL, I DO NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE GIVING YOU MY EMAIL ADDRESS. HOWEVER, I HAVE SOME ADVICE, GIVEN IN GOOD FAITH AND IN COMPASSION, SINCE I HAVE BEEN THROUGH A MED MAL TRIAL.

1. DO NOT TRUST ANYONE. (OTHER THAN YOUR ATTORNEY) DO NOT DISCUSS YOUR CASE WITH ANYONE OTHER THAN YOUR ATTORNEY. IF SOMEONE TRIES TO BEFRIEND YOU UNDER THE AUSCPICES OF TRYING TO BE OF HELP, BE KIND, BUT SUSPICIOUS, AND DO NOT DIVULGE ANY DETAILS TO ANYONE OTHER THAN YOUR ATTORNEY.

2. FIND AN ATTORNEY (WHICH MAY BE DIFFICULT IN YOUR CASE, SINCE YOU ARE IN A SMALL TOWN) WHO IS AS COMMITTED TO YOUR CASE AS YOU ARE. WE WERE FORTUNATE TO FIND ONE WHO WAS AS PASSIONATE ABOUT WRITING THE WRONG DONE AS WE WERE.AND BY THE WAY, OUR ATTORNEY WAS A MALE. EVEN THOUGH WE DID NOT PREVAIL IN COURT, I GIVE HIM THE HIGHEST RECOMMENDATIONS, BOTH AS A HUMAN BEING, AND AN ATTORNEY. HE WAS MUCH MORE HONEST, AND MUCH LESS MERCENARY, AND NOT AT ALL DEVIOUS. I CAN NOT SAY THE SAME FOR THE VETS WE SUED, OR FOR OPPOSING COUNSEL.

3. DO NOT EXPECT MUCH FROM A JURY. OUR SOCIETY HAS BEEN SO DUMBED DOWN, AND MOST PEOPLE HAVE NO COMMON SENSE ANY MORE. YOU MAY STAND A BETTER CHANCE THAN WE DID, AS YOU LOST YOUR SON, A HUMAN BEING. WE LOST OUR DOG, ABOUT WHOM THE JURORS (MOST OF THEM MEN, FOUR MEN, TWO WOMEN) DID NOT CARE AT ALL. TWO MEMBERS OF OUR JURY SLEPT THROUGH A GOOD DEAL OF THE TRIAL. ONE OF THOSE MEMBERS WAS THE FOREMAN. ONE WOMAN ASKED AND GOT ANSWER TO QUESTIONS (THAT IS ALLOWED IN FL) AND THEN DID NOT APPLY THE ANSWERS TO WHAT HAPPENED TO OUR DOG. WHEN THE JURY RETIRED FOR THEIR 25 MIN. "DELIBERATION", AFTER FIVE DAYS OF TESTIMONY, THE FIRST THING THAT COULD BE HEARD FROM THE JURY ROOM WAS RAUCOUS LAUGHTER. DOES THAT TELL YOU ANYTHING ABOUT HOW SERIOUSLY THEY TOOK THEIR CIVIC DUTY?


4. EXPECT PEOPLE TO THINK ILL OF YOU AND THINK, EVEN IF THEY DO NOT VOICE IT, THAT IS IT "ALL ABOUT THE MONEY". YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW, THAT NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

5. WHEN YOU GET ON THAT STAND, EXPECT TO BE BADGERED (IF YOU HAVE A JUDGE, ANOTHER MALE, LIKE WE DID) EXPECT TO BE BELITTLED. EXPECT OPPOSING COUNSEL TO TRY AND CONFUSE YOU WITH THE QUESTIONS ASKED TO DIVERT ATTENTION FROM THE REAL ISSUE....WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR SON AT THE HANDS OF THOSE TO WHOM HIS LIFE WAS ENTRUSTED.

6. WHEN YOU GET ON THAT STAND, EXPECT THE DAMN TO BREAK. TEARS WILL COME....DO NOT TRY AND FIGHT THEM. BE YOURSELF. ANSWER CALMLY. LISTEN TO THE QUESTIONS ASKED BY OPPOSING COUNSEL AND IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, ASK FOR THE ATTORNEY TO REPEAT IT.

7. AND LASTLY, IF YOU DO NOT PREVAIL IN COURT, BE PREPARED TO FEEL AS THOUGH YOU ARE LOSING YOUR SON ALL OVER AGAIN.

I HAVE NO REGRETS FROM HAVING PURSUED LITIGATION, NOR DOES MY HUSBAND. HAD WE DONE NOTHING AT ALL, WE COULD NEVER HAVE LOOKED OURSELVES IN THE MIRROR AGAIN.


GOOD LUCK AND GOD BLESS.

That's "righting" not writing..I did not proofread and I should have.
I wish you good luck, forthedogs". And once piece of advice that I forgot...

Be prepared for a LONG battle. The wheels of "justice" move very slowly. It was four and a half years from Peach's death till we went to trial. In my opinion, the delay was due to the need for the numerous vets to get their stories staight and for their attorney to come up with a devious strategy. To my point, they actually had to be ORDERED by the court to appear at their depositions, after stalling for literally years.

Good luck. You are undertaking a very, very daunting "task", but remember that it is fueled by your profound love for your son. That makes in all worthwhile.

Let me start this with an Apology for my spelling. Okay, I have a question, I have had vets tell me that a puppy recently vaccinated for parvo can throw a false positive when tested. Onced I had a 7week old puppy to the vet, he had all the symtoms of parvo. The vet said right off the bat the puppy had parvo. The puppy tested positive. Scared the -- outa me. I decided to take the puppy home because I did not have 1,000.00 dollars for treatment. At home I isolated the pup gave it some antdiahrea. I spent the rest of the night scrubbing everything down with bleach. Next morning puppy was fine. Called the vet, took the puppy in, pup still test positive but obviously isn't sick. Vet said it was because I had just vaccinated him the day befor and that could have been why he was sick. I have also had a vet tell me the exact opposit, that there is no way a parvo shot will cause a false positive. I have had years of experiance with vets and when I was young worked for one. Almost every vet has a different view on the same subject. This makes it vry hard to decide who is right. Has anyone else had a simular experiance?

forthe dogs: you ask a serious and sincere question and someone should give you a serious and experienced answer.

Yes, most definitely "vaccinosis" does exist and always will, whether human or animal. Vaccinosis mimics the *very* illness that the vaccine is supposed to prevent. It can be parvo, rabies (in mild form), and distemper. It is a peer reviewed and reported FACT in the AVMA journals and elsewhere.

For the most part the vaccinosis disease is supposed to be milder and not as virulent as the actual disease. However, I experienced with one of my own, a form of distemper that was not death, but left its permanent scar for life.

I admit, it is "rare" , but it does happen. I think that is why there is the national "VARES" fund for humans, that "pay out monies" for the many human children that are like affected.

Take care.
BarbaraA's Blog
walnut-hill.bravejournal.com
(an occasional follow-up to related posts of veterinary or animal abuse in NH and the US)

If this is reported in the AVMA why do the vets themselves disagree? And why is the owner never told of this possibility. And what about the breeder and the buyer of a puppy who dies from vaccinosis both of which are probably very unhappy or even angry because they are told the puppy had parvo and are blaming each other..

Forthedogs: I can't answer that question; I can only guess at the various reasons---some sincere and some NOT. But vets, just like other professionals seem to think their peer reviewed publications are "secret". This is not so, but many wouldn't bother to find them or pay a fee to obtain them. Wiley is one such resource, but their are others.

Some professionals like keeping lay-people in the "dark" I can only "guess" that it is ignorance, a feeling of inadequacy, or maybe just plain FRAUD (my favorite descriptive term)

That's the beauty of today's wide-spread communication, while a person may not be able to "interpret" everything, anyone can gather enough information to ask intelligent questions and follow up questions to answers that just don't seem to make "sense"

Methinks that is why so many people attack and belittle others---just to hopelessly preserve that last bit of secretiveness, that may give someone the "one-up" on their line of work.

(including car mechanics, oil burner technicians, veterinarians, dentists, and every other trained personell

Does anyone really want answers about something? TRY submitting FOIAS and right-to-know requests---yes, you have to be patient and persistant, but eventually you'll get those answers. Some times it takes YEARS, and not many have the drive or reason to persist unless burned pretty badly.And more and more , every day, are joining the "burned" group and saying "enough"!

What is FOIAS? As I said I have some experiance with vet. meds etc. especially in dogs. I have asked a thousand questions and I get 500 different answers, And there's not much difference when dealing with human Drs. and laws. However because of something I am involved in concerning the mistreatment of dogs [I'm on the dogs side]. I have had a hard time finding good hard facts to support things I have been told mostly by the vets I have questioned and the laws pertaining there too.I have 3 cases I am personally and legally involved in. One involving animals/dogs and two having to do with people/property and an on going appeal. I do use the internet but so often I just don't know where or how. I find that with limited income I have a big problem when it comes to getting somewhere legal wise. Lawyers and appeals are exstremely expensive. How does this pertain to Parvo, In the animal business world today with the new laws and ARs. The ability of the person to get correct and useful info and backup from vets is both important and pertinent. when the vets charge excessive fees and do not give you full info both the buyer and the seller of an animal are in jeopardy. Add to that the Animal rights activist and the new vague laws that are being twisted to suit the commonwealth it is very discauraging to fight for what you know is right. We need knowledge and correct facts. We need to know how to obtain it.

A FOIA is a freedom of information act request.

I have to say this article was great but the ensuing posts just about made my head explode.

5beagles, Try losing your dog to vet malpractice if you really want your head to explode.
In fairness, I must say that of the vets in question, there was only one male and the rest were females. But our jury was predominantly male.
forthedogs, I admire you for your dedication to find correct answers and to help dogs that others are not willing to help. Kudos to you.
Barb, thanks for your excellent replies to forthedogs.
Dr. Coates, please give equal time to felines as well as canines. I enjoy reading your articles, even though we no longer have our dog.

The shame of this entire post is that the admin. allowed it to be hijacked. Comments would be better received had they not rambled on in incoherent self righteous blather. This is a forum on pets not on one individual and their life's story. All good and on point comments were lost after about the twentieth posting. And the caps thing is stupid. Just because you scream doesn't make your point right.

Okay..... Wait for it.... 3...2...1. ....

When 75% of the thread is taken over by one maybe two posters it's hijacked. We are all strong believers in our own views and beliefs but instead 99% of the people stopped reading and posting. Thus lots of people who could of maybe garnered some useful information on parvo stopped reading. Just maybe as i stated had the admin stepped and slowed things down a bit things would of stayed civil .Posters begged for it to stop and return to the topic or the like but instead it was used as some posters personal soap box.

What could be more apropos IF one loves animals than to want them to be recognized as having intrinsic value. The comments regarding same were precipitated by some very callous comments about companion animals and how some view them.
As far as my life story, I answered some very personal questions that were asked of me. I did it in good faith, just as I believed the vets who told me that there would be a vet on premises 24/7 monitoring our dog.
As to the caps issue...I used them to differentiate my posts from those to which I was responding.
The post that I directed to forthedogs to hopefully, be of help to him/her was capitalized because I was in a hurry to write before driving across town to care for my 84 year old mother.
One's perspective changes, as did Dr. Ken's, when one experiences a loss which did not have to be, in a manner which allows one to see the "other side" of an issue.
Wait for it....3,2,1.....namecalling and derogatory comments about something which I hope nobody else has to experience.
BTW, I posted two different links regarding vaccinations, which is very pertinent to this particular article, yet there was not one comment about same.

Athough the post started with Parvo and sorta spread out from there I see nothing wrong with that,discussion is for the benefit of all involved. It give all a chance to hear how someone else feels and thinks. How would we progress or even know if our ideals were right, wrong, silly, useful, etc. without something to compare them to. In all of the legal mumbo jumbo I have dealt with lately I have found it very useful to listen to others ideals. Some have been very helpful in knowing what not to do. Or, That don't sound good to me. I am constantly amazed at how defensive people become [Me Included] when some one disagrees with them. But I find I like playing the devils advocate and will become quite immersed in what they have to say about my way, my opinion. And quite often I have had my opinion change because someone I did not agree with made sense on parts of the subject or brought up a detail I had not considered. I also like to keep the people who seem to disagree with me talking. It is from them I usually get the most useful future info from. I have no hard feelings toward them and some of my worst enemies have become my most valuble friends. We are all different and we all follow different paths and walking along side someone for a while on their path can open up a whole new vista. I do want to thank everyone who has said something here, for what you have contributed to my knowledge. I have learned a lot and most of it from having stepped off the beaten path. A site I would suggest for you is VA-Pet-Law@yahoogroups.com You might even reconize me there. Now I have one more Question about Parvo. Does anyone know what the contagious period is?. Is it contagious befor symtoms? This is also somthing vets seem to disagree on.

I agree with you, some of the most interesting blogs that Dr. K had were side threads straying off-topic. I learned more about the farm/food/animal rights threads that I never knew or bothered to think about.

Over time, I have also found it interesting how many people whine when someone(s) doesn't conform to their wishes and beliefs, and how it then becomes a "control matter" , like running to the teacher in 2nd grade.

Well good for you "forthedogs" , perhaps I'll check out that group :)

With regard to the contagious period, I quoted a site below (not that the link shows or anything!).

This is pretty much what I was told - and what I saw - EXCEPT for the part where 'virus is shed in the feces of infected dogs'. Parvovirus is EVERYWHERE ALL OF THE TIME! Yes, it can be contagious BEFORE you see the symptoms in your dog. Some dogs are more severely affected than others. The end of the contagious period is when they stop shedding the virus I was told and that is after the bloody feces ends and recovery is noticeable. Another source I read said it was contagious for months afterwards. Perhaps the answer is both - because of every animal's individual immune system strength.

But make no mistake, parvo IS everywhere, all of the time. Whether a dog becomes severely enough affected to show its illness depends on the health/strength of their immune system. And yeah, I can say this from personal experience. I can send you my details outside of this forum if you want.


QUOTE: The virus is shed in the feces of infected dogs. It is passed to another dog through the nasal or oral tissues after exposure. The virus begins to be shed about 4 days after exposure. There may not be clinical signs at the time that shedding starts. (Read more: Infectious Diseases of Dogs - Parvovirus - VetInfo)

denise

#18 caveat emptor shouted:
"ANIMALS ARE REGULARLY ABANDONED BY PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO PAY FOR THEM. MANY OF OUR PETS CAME FROM A HOME IN WHICH THE FAMILY WAS UPPER MIDDLE CLASS, YET DIDN'T GIVE A FLIP ABOUT THEIR COMPANION ANIMALS. CHANGING THE LAW SO THAT ANIMALS ARE NO LONGER CHATTEL MIGHT MAKE SOMEONE THINK TWICE BEFORE ABANDONING THEIR PETS, RATHER THAN DOING THE OPPOSITE., SINCE THERE MIGHT BE COMMENSURATE PUNISHMENT/FINE, FOR LACK OF RESPONSIBLITY ON THE PART OF THE GUARDIAN."

Oh please, this is all about going Biblical on people for not measuring up. It does zip for the animals. Every law or regulation has a cost for enforcement. Do you think there's any money for enforcement of this kind of thing?

And what happens to the animals while this is going through the court system? They're languishing in pens.

Better yet, improve safety nets for animals needing rescue, put the money into shelters, foster groups, emergency vet treatment.

And I want no third party to arbitrarily decide that my feeding raw food to my animals and not getting yearly shots is tantamount to abuse.

Bah. Do something concrete for the critters in your neighborhood who need help (like offering to pay a vet bill or dropping off a bag of food, or socializing feral kittens to get them off the street) and stop generating hot air.

Cathya says "Bah. Do something concrete for the critters in your neighborhood who need help (like offering to pay a vet bill or dropping off a bag of food, or socializing feral kittens to get them off the street) and stop generating hot air."

Once again, you have no idea what I have done. I have paid the vet bill for a young woman (my mother's phlebotomist) when she could not afford the vet bill.

Each month, I pay a set amount from my checking account (automatic withdrawal) to Pet Rescue by Judy. I also donate regularly (same way) to ISAR.

I just bought a large "kitty condo", but then decided each of my girls would do better with their own "space." So, I am donating the larger one to a dear person who regularly rescues feral cats. So, before you generate hot air, you'd better know to whom you are speaking.

PS. Are you happy now....no caps, Cathy, but just debunked your "theory" and criticisms of a person about whom you know nothing, but whom you are far too quick to criticize because you do not agree with my opinion on the legal status of animals.

Athough the post started with Parvo and sorta spread out from there I see nothing wrong with that,discussion is for the benefit of all involved. It give all a chance to hear how someone else feels and thinks. How would we progress or even know if our ideals were right, wrong, silly, useful, etc. without something to compare them to.

WELL, IN THE INTEREST OF NOT UPSETTING CATHY AND ALICE, :) , I will only post the first part of my response in caps to make it easier to differentiate. It is people like you, who have the ability to think, who can see "the big picture" without getting nasty, who are a pleasure to have a conversation with, forthedogs.




In all of the legal mumbo jumbo I have dealt with lately I have found it very useful to listen to others ideals. Some have been very helpful in knowing what not to do. Or, That don't sound good to me. I am constantly amazed at how defensive people become [Me Included] when some one disagrees with them. But I find I like playing the devils advocate and will become quite immersed in what they have to say about my way, my opinion.

I APPLAUD YOUR willingness to go through the legal channels to be of help to those with no voice, like the dogs to which you have devoted so much time and effort. Debate does not have to resort to namecalling, as is so often the case when people disagree. However, I have found that the really 'hard core" people will be the first to namecall, will be the last to admit that a good point was actually made, and will never change their minds about anything, no matter how many facts or common sense based arguments you place before them.



And quite often I have had my opinion change because someone I did not agree with made sense on parts of the subject or brought up a detail I had not considered. I also like to keep the people who seem to disagree with me talking. It is from them I usually get the most useful future info from. I have no hard feelings toward them and some of my worst enemies have become my most valuble friends. We are all different and we all follow different paths and walking along side someone for a while on their path can open up a whole new vista.

ONCE AGAIN, YOU SHOW YOUR MATURITY AND INSIGHTFUL NATURE. Just as I said that I could not relate to some of your experiences, I am sure that you could not relate to mine. But at least in the end, you were not disrespectful and in the final analysis, I can see where you were coming from after you revealed the reason for your views and your profound and very valid grief over the loss of your son, "FTD" (not the florists, YOU :) ) Hope you don't mind my shortening your moniker so it's easier to type.


I do want to thank everyone who has said something here, for what you have contributed to my knowledge. I have learned a lot and most of it from having stepped off the beaten path. A site I would suggest for you is VA-Pet-Law@yahoogroups.com You might even reconize me there.

CAN ONE LOOK AT THE POSTS without becoming a member? Since I spend much of my time on the road between our house and my mother's house, I try to limit my incoming emails, but i would be very interested to read your posts. I respect you, not only because you neer resorted to namecalling, but because you have the courage to try to do something constructive about your son's death, as well as proving that you really DO love animals. Hope you like kitties, too. Just found out that I am allergic to cats, so will be undergoing immunology therapy. Of course, I would never consider getting rid of our babies, as once I adopt an animal, I am their forever mother and they are in their forever home.
Best to you, FTD. I respect you.

Yes I do like kittycats, As an adult I have always had at least two, Both of the cats I have now are rescues although I did not go after them, they came to me.I am a real sucker when it comes to feeding things that seem hungrey. One is fixed the other will be. I also have a couple of dogs and one of them is my special baby. But she is still ,second place to my children and all other good, decent humans. Yes you can read the post without joining, although most of the time once someone has looked the site over they can't resist having a say. the topic are wide spread and very interesting and the people are from all over the USA and even other countries such as Australia and England etc.We are people who love animals and are concerned with what is going on in the world today.We try to be a fair group and everyone gets to say his piece. You can disagree or agree but you need to be strong enough to hear it even if you don't agree with it. A lot of time I have just agreed to disagree and still respect and maintain civility and even be friends. I feel everyone has a right to his or her opinion. We also have a right to voice our opinion. We DO NOT have the right to shove our opinion down some one elses throat. We want nothing to do with paople who wont listen and learn. We are totally against Peta, Hsus and all others of there ilk. They are destoying animals and people. We are fighting for fair and consistant laws that work for both animals and humans. We are not agianst breeding/farming, saleing and we are not trying to turn the world and it animals into vegetarians. We would like to keep our constitutional rights intact, we do not believe we can do that by elevating animals to mans level. We do believe all animals should be properly cared for and treated with respect. When I leave theis site I hope I have at least made my intent clear. I came here to learn and I did do just that. Oh, and no I don't mind if you shorten my moniker. I think it is kinda cute the FTD. I like flowers. I hope if you decide to join pet law you will keep your Cavey moniker, I used Cavey, this is a confession cause I couln't spell the other and I didn't want to take the time to go look it up. MEA CULPA! I think. Anyway if I see you on their I will holler at you. My name on there is not Ftd. One more thing without that group of people I could never have afforded my appeal. They are the greatest!!. They picked me up ,proped me up,and they continue to back me up.

Yes I do like kittycats, As an adult I have always had at least two, Both of the cats I have now are rescues although I did not go after them, they came to me.I am a real sucker when it comes to feeding things that seem hungrey. One is fixed the other will be.

CAVEY SAYS: FTD, that's great that you like cats, too. In my opinion, they are much more likely to be abused (think what happens to cats on Halloween) and are much more vulnerable that many dogs. But then, I think of the dog fighting issue, and maybe they are equally as abused. Sad that humans are capable of such things.
Ditto here when it comes to them coming to me and not the other way around. What a blessing, to be an "animal magnet", eh? They seem to know that we will care for them and love them forever. And they return that love tenfold. Glad that you are having your cat spayed. (I will not reply to snide comments on that subject)



I also have a couple of dogs and one of them is my special baby. But she is still ,second place to my children and all other good, decent humans.

CAVEY SAYS: Our dog was my special baby as well. She did not deserve the end that she had. Enough of that subject.
Well, once again, hope that this statement will give you something to think about, since you mentioned your children. Those of us who have no children, either by choice or through no fault of our own, and do not want to adopt a child, get a chance to exercise our maternal instinct and to give unconditional love to our companion animals. I am glad that you added the adjective "decent" to describe the human species, as in the world that we live in today, there are plenty who do not fit that description.


Yes you can read the post without joining, although most of the time once someone has looked the site over they can't resist having a say. the topic are wide spread and very interesting and the people are from all over the USA and even other countries such as Australia and England etc.

CAVEY SAYS: FTD, I did try reading last night after you posted the link, but without success. I don't know what I am doing wrong. Perhaps you can help me.



We are people who love animals and are concerned with what is going on in the world today.We try to be a fair group and everyone gets to say his piece. You can disagree or agree but you need to be strong enough to hear it even if you don't agree with it. A lot of time I have just agreed to disagree and still respect and maintain civility and even be friends. I feel everyone has a right to his or her opinion. We also have a right to voice our opinion. We DO NOT have the right to shove our opinion down some one elses throat.

CAVEY: Understood. Good tenets, but the way that I feel about opinions is this. While we do not have the right to shove our opinions down another's throat, no matter what the subject, there is one thing that comes to mind. If you feel very strongly about something and that what you are doing is right, you should not shut up, you should not back down, nor should you be disuaded. If that were the case, slavery would still exist in this country and women would still be chattel and have no rights to vote, etc. Just my opinion :) As someone said to me today, those who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world are often the one to do it.



We want nothing to do with paople who wont listen and learn. We are totally against Peta, Hsus and all others of there ilk. They are destoying animals and people.

CAVEY SAYS: I have more of an issue with HSUS. Not going to get into a debate about PETA, however, when Wayne Pacelle came out publically in support of Michael Vick, that was it for me with that organization.


We are fighting for fair and consistant laws that work for both animals and humans.

CAVEY SAYS: Just reminding you that what is "fair and consistent" to one person may be anything but to another.


We are not agianst breeding/farming, saleing and we are not trying to turn the world and it animals into vegetarians.

CAVEY SAYS; I understand. I am the only vegetarian in my family. I still cook meat for my spouse (although it nauseates me) but at least he eats far less meat than he used to in the past. I do not try to cajole or force anyone in my family to forego eating meat. That is their choice. I live my beliefs, and I believe it's wrong to eat meat, so that is my choice, but not one that I try to impose on another.
I am not TOTALLY against breeding, but if given the choice, I think it is a more noble act for a human being to go and rescue an animal that would be needlessly put to death than to shell out money for one. Again, my opinion, for what it's worth.




We would like to keep our constitutional rights intact, we do not believe we can do that by elevating animals to mans level.

CAVEY SAYS: Once again, with all due respect, I think that you are missing the main point of this issue. No one said that we should try "elevate animals to man's level." We who are in favor of changing their legal status only want recognition under the law that animals, in particular, companion animals, are not inanimate objects, but sentient beings.

We do believe all animals should be properly cared for and treated with respect. When I leave theis site I hope I have at least made my intent clear. I came here to learn and I did do just that.

CAVEY SAYS: As do I, FTD. But let me make another analogy to hopefully clarify my point. At one time, children were seen as chattel under the law. That is what enabled them to be used as virtual slaves in sweat shops and factories, and when the child labor laws changed, that was part and parcel of recognizing that they are not legal chattel, but living, breathing , sentient people who did not deserve the treatment that they were getting, and all for money. That is the same way that I feel about unscrupulous breeders , or pet owners (not pet parents) who deny their pets veterinary care when they could well afford it, and choose to spend their money on high priced "things", while their companions animals suffer.


Oh, and no I don't mind if you shorten my moniker. I think it is kinda cute the FTD. I like flowers.

CAVEY SAYS: Glad you did not take offense, as none was intended. And I like "Cavey" as well, FTD.


I hope if you decide to join pet law you will keep your Cavey moniker, I used Cavey, this is a confession cause I couln't spell the other and I didn't want to take the time to go look it up. MEA CULPA!

CAVEY SAYS. You are a hoot. No need to apologize or "fess up" to that, but I think it's cute that you did.


I think. Anyway if I see you on their I will holler at you. My name on there is not Ftd. One more thing without that group of people I could never have afforded my appeal. They are the greatest!!. They picked me up ,proped me up,and they continue to back me up.
CAVEY SAYS: If I can read without joining, I will do so. In the interest of time, and keeping my inbox relatively manageable, I hope you understand. That is wonderful that you are surrounded by a group that has been so supportive and good to you. I am certain that you would return the favor, if need be.
Respectfully,
"Cavey"

FTD, I tried to read the messages without joining, and this is what I got:

Members Only
Messages
Post
Files
Photos
Groups Labs (Beta)

Hope you understand that in the interest of time, I won't join, but that I have appreciated hearing your opinions and have certainly appreciated your civility when debating. Good luck with your lawsuit and I hope and pray that you will be blessed with a better jury than ours. Also hope you are fortunate enough to have a wonderful attorney (and human being) as we did.

Cavey

Dr. Ken posted this on another site and I hope that all will read it with an open mind, remembering that a veterianrian will regularly see many more cases of abuse than most other people ever will, except for those who donate their time to work in shelters.
CA


Quote from Dr. Ken,

"I am saying that wherever pets suffer from intentional or accidental negligence, whether in a puppy mill, or the backyard of an owner who does not provide adequate food, water, companionship, or preventive veterinary care, the suffering of the living sentient being is the same. We seem to latch onto a phrase such as puppy mill and that becomes the enemy. I spent 2 years as a veterinary manager in an urban emergency clinic and became aware that many pets suffer from legal neglect and abuse because bad pet owners have no mandate to provide any veterinary care. The end result is a daily onslaught of preventable infectious, contagious, and parasitic diseases which result most frequently in death or economic euthanasia. Our local SPCA and Animal Control routinely adopted pets to owners that could not provide veterina...ry care the first time that the pet became ill, because it was more important to find a home than to find a good home. I believe that some people who raise dogs for profit can run clean nurturing environments to the dogs, because in any situation that does not provide appropriate care, the offspring will not thrive and their business will not be profitable. I also believe that there are many bad pet owners in this world and that pets suffer in any bad situation. The root cause of pet suffering is not puppy mills, but rather that living, sentient beings are shamefully classified as chattel property and until this is addressed, the death each year of 6-8 million unwanted dogs and cats will continue as it has for the 30 plus years that I have been a veterinarian."

To think that this disease can be prevented relatively easily but is so devastating once a dog does have it makes me sad. We're supposed to speak up and help our dogs and if we don't, who will? We learned about parvo in veterinary assisting school and it truly is a terrible problem. I hope these dogs get the help they need.