Gia,
Cricket and I had a horrible experience with a large
animal vet two years ago. If I wouldn't have taken
him home after the 18 hours of "care" that he received
from the vet, he would have died there. He had a
horrible infection he picked up after he ripped out
all his back claws trying to claw his way up a brick
column while trying to get away from a big dog that
had gotten out of his house and went after him. I
didn't know that his claws were gone until after I
brought him home from the vets and he recouped. They
tested his blood for FeLV while there and I thought
that was what was wrong with him. The vet was giving
him no IV fluid nor sustenance, after I had
specifically asked them to, and pretty much left him
in his cage. When I finally realized what was
happening (thank God for women's instinct), I rushed
to the vet in the middle of my work day and took him
home with antibiotics. He was pretty much lifeless;
very limp and not much responsiveness, which was
opposite of how he was when I brought him in. I
stayed home from work for two days and gave him his
meds and water every hour and food every so often when
I felt he could handle it. I could NOT believe that
he came back, that's how sick he was. The vet even
told me that he'd never seen a cat come back from
being that sick. His temperature was so high that it
went all the way to the top of the thermometer and
they couldn't tell how high it actually was.
So, in lieu of all this info., if you or anyone else
can at all avoid a primarily large animal vet, DO SO.
I guess it's kind of like asking a family practitioner
to perform a hemorrhoid-ectomy. LOL. No offense to
large animal practitioners; that's just the way it is.
:)
Wendy
--- David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Belinda:
>
> You have my heartfelt thanks for your response to my
> letter. Everything I've read here has contributed
> to the lessening of my despair about this disaster.
> Your letter is certainly no exception!
>
> I was shocked at your info re: bad experiences
> vaccinating unknown positives. Before I went the
> round of vaccinations in 2003, knowing that they
> would do no good for the already infected, I
> specifically asked if it would do them any harm. I
> was assured that it would have no effect, either
> way.
>
> That is why I didn't bother to test first. The vet
> actually was somewhat reluctant to NOT test first,
> but was adamant that it would do no harm, and, at
> $40 a (literal) shot, and the same for the
> test...well, you can do the math. I'm sure you can
> understand why I didn't test.
>
> In fact, your letter is what has made me reconsider
> my original decision NOT to test. My (2nd) vet
> seemed so certain that, if they didn't actually test
> positive now, they would surely do so eventually.
> The implication I got was that it was possible to
> get false-negative results, which also led me to
> choose vaccination without testing.
>
> Certainly, I would never vaccinate any
> positive-result cats; wouldn't be any point, would
> be a waste of money I could use for their care, and
> might actually do harm. So it looks like 'tests for
> all' is coming tomorrow. And I can't TELL you how I
> dread it....
>
> I assume your negatives have always been vaccinated?
> And I was so relieved and gratified to hear that
> you have had a positive that 'old' and that communal
> living for so long has had no ill effect.
>
> That my vet(s) don't appear to know much about FeLV
> doesn't really surprise me. They didn't know
> anything about iguanas, and I've had the same
> experience with ferrets. Still, CATS?? As you'll
> have likely read in my letter to another member,
> you'll have noted that they're mostly large-animals
> vets who almost seem...ashamed? embarrassed? to
> even treat small animals. (Anybody else ever have
> that feeling about a vet?)
>
> As to what my "vet say(s) is wrong with Elvis"...he
> only said, "Feline Leukemia." I took that as a
> definitive answer, because until I began reading
> last night, I thought that feline leukemia was,
> well...leukemia. Cancer. Which, as we all know, is
> quite enough to be wrong with anybody.
>
> Really, calling it the FeLV is SO misleading! In
> my first letter, I said that after my initial
> experience with our Flavia, it was only after I went
> back home and began thinking that I called him back
> and asked about the possibility of contagion.
>
> You know what caused the unease which prompted my
> call? It was only a chance remark by the vet,
> something about "where she caught it." It wasn't a
> completed thought, and it wasn't even to me, but to
> his assistant. Had I not overheard, I would NEVER
> have even considered that it could be a contagious
> disease. After all, cancer isn't contagious!
>
> Anyhow, I have no idea was ELSE is wrong. My gawd!!
> As I said, I thought it was 'contagious cancer',
> quite enough to cause weight loss. I'll have to
> remember to ask when I call tomorrow. You may have
> saved his life!!
>
> For that, as well as your other helpful advice and
> encouragement, I am in your debt.
>
> Gratefully,
> Gia
>
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
