Vet visit......

Annika30

I had to bring my RR Phoenix to the vet yesterday, he had small blisters and sores on his pads, an allergic reaction, had to be put on antibiotics.
Anyway when I came in to the vet first she goes 'oh a great dane', after I told her that he's a ridgeback she goes 'oh right they are vicious'!!! I couldn't believe what she was saying, I had to explain to her that they are not vicious it's a very gentle breed, and so on. If she ever met a vicious RR the owner was probably to blame.

Finally she was wondering why I had a halti on Phoenix, again I had to explain to her that he's a 'listed breed' and you have to keep a muzzle on him in public places, it was like she didn't have a clue what I was on about.....
I was fuming when I left. No wonder certain breeds have a bad reputation when even some vets seem to propagate the myths about them......

comongethappy

OMG - and how long do these people have to study to get a degree?! But I've found that the vets here on incompetent as well. My mate's dog had puppies, and at 10 weeks she took them to get immunized. The vet asked her if at 10 weeks the puppies were old enough to get shots! Also, I took my cat in because she had excess fat / poss a slight limp going up stairs (we only saw it once, but still wanted to get her hips check just in case). I explained to the vet that she is very panicked when strange people are around. He put her on the floor to walk (though I had explained her walk was fine, it was just stairs). She did kind of a cat army crawl (you know, where soilders move on their arms and bellies) to try to get away from him. He just said "wow, that is quite a bad limp". It was totally obivious that she was just petrified! Also, same vet for all three cases now, a friend's dog had a hit and run late Thurs night. She rang the vet's out of office mobile, he answered, she explained that her dog was hit high speed and badly injured, he was about to answer back when the phone call was lost. She waited for him to ring back and tried to ring him, but no sucess. They ended up having to take the dog to a Dublin vet hospital (and they live in Arklow, Co Wicklow!) and the dog died at 1:30am Friday morning. It couldn't have been saved, but what if it could have, but couldn't get the help it needed in time? The Wicklow Vet never rang back to see if she had gotten the help she needed. Cronic ...:mad:

fits

hey ended up having to take the dog to a Dublin vet hospital (and they live in Arklow, Co Wicklow!)

I have a fantastic vet based in Glenealy, pm me if you want her number. By far the best vet I've ever had. Glenealy isnt too far from Arklow.

arybvtcw0eolkf

OP I'd go with FITS and change Vet.

You don't need to pay for that type of ignorance.

dontdoit

and how long do these people have to study to get a degree?!

TBH I find your comments very flippant and pass remarkable. The veterinary degree in Ireland is one of the most challenging and tough degrees to obtain. Firstly to get a place is a chalenge in itself, with the points usually arond the 560 mark, that means you have to be in the top few % of the country in your LC to even get started. Then its 5 years full time, often starting at 7.30/8am, with most summers taken up by work experience. There is not a vet in this country who didnt work his/her butt off to get trou vet school and it would be impossible qualify without being completely competent.

That said, like in all proffessions and in all walks of life, there will always be individuals you prefer to work with or simply feel more confident around. So I suggest instead of slagging off this vet why not do something positive and take your business elsewhere. Also I suggest for half a second you think about your own attitude around the vet...not the best start if you go in to the clinic already second guessing, the vets primary concern is heping the patient rather than convincing a scepic owner of his competency. I suggest if you drop this your pet will get much better attention!

The vet asked her if at 10 weeks the puppies were old enough to get shots!

I suggest this was said in passing in an attempt to involve the owner and certainly not a true question!!

fits

Dontdoit, There are an incredible amount of bad/ignorant vets in the country... I've heard of some advising against neutering, giving poor advice about neutering. I've dealt with some myself, who do not tell me what is wrong, what they're doing, what they're administering. Getting information out of them is like getting blood from a stone...
A vet should at least be able to differentiate between such major breeds as rhodesian ridgebacks and great danes, and have some idea of dog behaviour.

If more specialism is needed, then so be it...

comongethappy

Dondoit - I do agree it was a very generalised statement, and I'm sure that there are many vets who are brilliant at their jobs. And, yes, I do know it's extremely hard work and takes dedication - I worded it incorrectly - all I was trying to emphaise is that there seem to be quite a few who seem to leave some of their training behind when they get their degree. Unfortunately, I wish it was the case that the vet was trying to make conversation with my friend (re: shots at 10 weeks), but she wasn't. She was going to seek the opinion of another vet (which I suppose is a good thing - better safe than sorry). But at the same time these are basics.

And thanks - I've gotten details to take my business elsewhere. But never have I given the vet any attitude - until recent experiences I never second guessed or thought I knew better (after all, you think that they are the professionals). But I'm afraid it's a number of people who have had bad experiences/advice , not just myself. Based on a recommendation from fits, I have passed details of another vet in the area on to these individuals as well.

Annika30

I'm certainly not going to make a return visit to this vet, can anyone recommend a good vet in the Louth/Meath area?

Nala

Dontdoit- If these vets went through all the training you describe and still don't know

-The difference between a Rhodesian Ridgeback and a Great Dane
-How old a pup needs to be for jabs
-That dangerous dogs are made not born

Then they are clearly incompetent. A Rhodesian Ridgeback is piss easy to identify. Big tall reddish coloured dogs with a line of hair down their back that grows in the opposite direction to the rest.
As for puppies getting jabs- this is completely routine, the vet should know this. I have rarely been to the vet and there hasn't been a puppy in the waiting room waiting for its injections.

Garth

There are huge numbers of vets who are incompetent when it comes to small animals/companion animals, and who really should just stick to horses and cows because that's all they seem to know about.

I went to two vets -- one desperately incompetent (tried to spay a tomcat, told an owner that a kitten was "just quiet" when he was dying of toxoplasmosis), the other well intentioned but still not good enough.

Now I travel 45 minutes to a vet I know I can trust and who knows what he's doing. His nurses are more up to date on cats and dogs than the vets around here. (we go to Beaufield Vet in Celbridge... I know people who travel from the North to see them)

There is no excuse for the level of incompetence I have seen in some vets. If it's that hard to get into the program then these people are not stupid. the only other idea is that they are poorly educated or don't care enough to keep up to date.

fits

Garth wrote:

....the only other idea is that they are poorly educated or don't care enough to keep up to date.

Well its got to be a bit of both... this idea that they got 650 points and studied for five years, and are therefore beyond questioning is a bit hard to swallow tbh...:mad:
There doesnt seem to be any accountability like what doctors have either.

doctor evil

Nala wrote:

-That dangerous dogs are made not born

Opinion not fact.

comongethappy

Garth wrote:

There are huge numbers of vets who are incompetent when it comes to small animals/companion animals, and who really should just stick to horses and cows because that's all they seem to know about....

There is no excuse for the level of incompetence I have seen in some vets. If it's that hard to get into the program then these people are not stupid. the only other idea is that they are poorly educated or don't care enough to keep up to date.

Garth / Fits, I think you're on the money here. The wicklow vets were used by my mate's boss (she used to break horses) - and she sung his praises before, said he was brilliant with the horses. It seems like maybe they put all their efforts it the agricultural side of vet care and perhaps aren't as up to date with small pet care as they are when it come to horses, cattle, etc.

morgana

I found this true as well. My experiences in Cork City (where one presumes they deal a lot with companion animals) with different vets over the years was that they couldn't care less about cats in particular. Now I'm out in the country and at long last found a vet I can trust and who seems to know his stuff and deals well with small animals & cats (and his nurse is absolutely lovely, its a small practice, there's just the two of them).

kashi

doctor evil wrote:

Opinion not fact.

I don't want to start an arguement or anything, but what would you consider a fact regards to "dangerous dogs are made not born" as Nala said. Let's face it, it is always a human's fault that dogs are dangerous. It could be due to bad breeding (due to not worrying about the parent's disposition or whatever!) or lack of training/ love/ attention. There are loads of factors involved, and remember it is breeds like Labradors and Golden Retrievers that cause the most bites in the UK.

I have come across some vets who do seem to concentrate on sheep and cattle, because that is where their money is. We've had dogs die in agony waiting for vets to come because they are at some farm. Now I bring my GSD to a fab vet in Model Farm Road, and they have no fear of him or any other dog. They are great for giving advice as well, which is always helpful.

skink

here is a point to consider, the irish veterinary will soon be no longer recognised internationally, it will be the equivalent of an ag science degree!

over the last few years, the standard of veterinary student graduating has been poor, and getting steadily worse, there are still a few gems among them, but i think the fact that the accreditation of the degree is being removed, proves the fact that the college should never have been moved from ballsbridge!

my two cents!

also if you are looking for a good vet practice, barrack gate in naas is top class!

dontdoit

here is a point to consider, the irish veterinary will soon be no longer recognised internationally, it will be the equivalent of an ag science degree!

Em WTF are u on??? This is a complete load of crap. Skink have u ever heard of checking ur facts. Accreditation is going nowhere, whats with the random lie. Cant believe u just posted such a thing

skink

dontdoit wrote:

Em WTF are u on??? This is a complete load of crap. Skink have u ever heard of checking ur facts. Accreditation is going nowhere, whats with the random lie. Cant believe u just posted such a thing

I know my facts, it is not a lie, if you are involved in the veterinary community you would know this is completely true!

dontdoit

Yes I am involved, you clearly are not. Its not a bit true, pure slander

skink

To what extent are you? a secondary school student working in practice for the summer?

when i get into work tomorrow i will attempt to scan the article to prove i am right, but even if i can't it will be big news soon enough anyway!

dontdoit

Ha ha, first funny thing u said! Primary school but i own a rabbit!! I wish, those were the days!

Give me a break, if you cared for the profession u would never say such tripe. Maybe a career break due if your so pissed off, whats the vet school ever done to u?? Read the forum rules, no personal attacks. I know the article, its rubbish, ring the vet council urself if u dont believe me.

Schlemm

I think that vet degree from UCD is currently recognised around the EU (and NZ I think...?) and you have to do extra exams to practice anywhere else, eg, USA. The Irish vet degree was going to be recognised by the USA but then they restructured UCD (starting the 05/06 academic year) into a bunch of schools and for this reason as well as a few other tecnicalities the USA may not give the Irish vet degree an AVMA accreditation.

There's a wee bit of unrest in the vet college eg you won't get as many promotions if you're not involved in research and so on, but I've met plenty of new vets who are on the ball without a doubt. Then again, I've seen some vets who would've graduated from Ballsbridge and they're hopeless.
I find that doctors are the same...I've seen a few horrors over the years and quite simply I find a good doctor and then I stick with them...same goes with vets.

If you spend all that time at university studying and seeing practice and still don't know the basics, then you're just thick!

hadook

Annika30 - I'd highly recommend Noel Foley of Smith & Foley in Navan. He's very good with large breed dogs (Yama Moo Dane was very sick last Nov. The day after she was given a 50/50 chance of making it through the night she growled at him as he was taking the umpteenth lot of blood to test and his reaction was "oh good, she's obviously starting to feel better ) and is one of those rare vets who listens as well as talks

Annika30

hadook, Great thanks I appreciate your help.:)

jameshayes

I Think sometimes you are better going to the Blue Cross, at least you know the vets are interested in the animals!!

Annika30

jameshayes, yeah I think you're right about that.
I have written a letter of complaint to the veterinary clinic this morning, not that I think it will change the vets opinion about RRs but it's no harm that the senior vet in charge knows about her attitude.

lightening

dontdoit wrote:

Firstly to get a place is a chalenge in itself, with the points usually arond the 560 mark

That alone excludes a lot of animal lovers that would make great vets and means there are some really clever people getting the jobs (that don't know anything about animals or their behavior).

Nobody is personally attacking you... and "slander" :rolleyes:

Pipp

comongethappy wrote:

OMG - and how long do these people have to study to get a degree?! But I've found that the vets here on incompetent as well. My mate's dog had puppies, and at 10 weeks she took them to get immunized. The vet asked her if at 10 weeks the puppies were old enough to get shots! Also, I took my cat in because she had excess fat / poss a slight limp going up stairs (we only saw it once, but still wanted to get her hips check just in case). I explained to the vet that she is very panicked when strange people are around. He put her on the floor to walk (though I had explained her walk was fine, it was just stairs). She did kind of a cat army crawl (you know, where soilders move on their arms and bellies) to try to get away from him. He just said "wow, that is quite a bad limp". It was totally obivious that she was just petrified! Also, same vet for all three cases now, a friend's dog had a hit and run late Thurs night. She rang the vet's out of office mobile, he answered, she explained that her dog was hit high speed and badly injured, he was about to answer back when the phone call was lost. She waited for him to ring back and tried to ring him, but no sucess. They ended up having to take the dog to a Dublin vet hospital (and they live in Arklow, Co Wicklow!) and the dog died at 1:30am Friday morning. It couldn't have been saved, but what if it could have, but couldn't get the help it needed in time? The Wicklow Vet never rang back to see if she had gotten the help she needed. Cronic ...:mad:

Thats just outrageous. Poor dog, and those owners tried their best to help it. It must have been heartbreaking.
Anyway the reason I quoted your post is that Im surprised at the vets behaviour. I live in Arklow and we have a wonderful vet. They know their stuff and will do absolutely everything to help a sick animal. Our dog nearly died. Hes here today because of them, they literally did absolutely everything they could and more. He had something called Illius where part of his gut stopped working. He was fitting and foaming at the mouth. They had to open him up, remove the diseased part of intestine sow it all back together and gradually get his system moving again little by little. He was so skinny when we got him home but he was alive. If you want to know which vet it is PM me. -sorry meant to add that this all happened at three in the morning on a Sunday.
Our dog is back to full health now, perfect weight, glossy coat - its because of the vet that we have our beloved pet.

wyk

I dunno about vetting, but I do know a good deal about canines, having owned some since I was a child, and having worked with several rescues. ALL dogs are capable of being aggressive. The most loving dog can bite. NO dog is a human, or reasons like a human, or even wants to be human. They are dogs, a domesticated Gray Wolf, several times removed. They have a pack instinct, will either lead or follow. They have a survival instinct, and when threatened they will either run or defend themselves. When a dog is in unfamiliar territory, or conditions, how they react is often as much to do with it's owner as with it's instincts.

Few people are professional quality dog trainers, or behaviorists. Yet EVERYONE feels they know their pet perfectly, and know exactly how it will behave in all manner of circumstances. Well, this simply isn't true. There is a reason that even professional dog handlers are often seen in public, at least at first, with a muzzle on their dogs. It isn't until a dog is comfortable, it's pecking order been sorted, well trained by a competent trainer, and whomever it interacts with is well aware of their place, and the dogs place in 'the pack', that the dog's behavior can be better predicted. This rules out 99% of dog owners, both in Ireland and the USA.

The target of dangerous breeds laws are of significance. When a Dachshund goes out of control and gets loose from it's owner, it might give someone a nasty bite on their ankle, even very small children are unlikely to be seriously hurt. When a Rhodesian becomes defensive and attacks someone, the end result could be much much more damaging, and small children can easily be killed very quickly.

The reasons more Labradors are reported biting people could simply be the amount of Labradors present. In the USA, according to the CDC and Texas State Sources, American Pitbull, and mixes top the list of fatal dog attacks, then come Dobermans and Rottweilers, then German Shepherds, Chows, Great Danes. Labradors are 6th on one of these list I am looking at for dog bites, but do not even show up as a blip for fatalities on the CDC list. Labradors are by far the most popular breed in America. It's data like this that some politicians look to when they make their legislation. It is data that makes them think that certain breeds are more dangerous than others since the most popular dog, a good medium to large size dog, like the Labrador may be biting people, but not seriously hurting or killing them as some others are.
Thus, some dogs are certainly more dangerous than others - according to these stats.

Do they ask the questions "Who did these dogs bite - was it a criminal, someone breaking into a lot or home. Was the incident random, street meeting? Did the owner command the dog to attack?" etc. etc. These are fair questions since most the dogs at the top of the list are often used as guard dogs.

Fair? I don't know. How much freedom are you willing to sacrifice for the general safety of your fellow Irish? How much data do you need to change your mind? I don't know a single Pitbull owner that looks at the CDC data and doesn't instantly denounce it on several levels. You won't be running into an American Pit Bull owner that says "This dog loves me, but I can see him killing someone's child if he got away from me, and became defensive in unknown surroundings with strange people..."

But likely a good question is "Any dog can bite. But how many breeds have the physical ability to cause a fatal attack?" That's what the politicians likely asked...

To date the only significant bite I have from a dog is a Greyhound. I had known the Greyhound for years. Of all the dogs I have ever handled, it was the dog I least expected to bite me, which is how it happened - I let my guard down. It was in unfamiliar surroundings and I took it by the collar without warning. It took several months to heal after that dog split my nose nearly in two.

Wez
Greyhounds and Komondors: Talk about a vicious breed, their rarety alone is only what keeps them off the lists:

http://www.dog.com/breed/Komondor.asp

ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Publications/mmwr/wk/mm4621.pdf

My Komondor loves people when he knows I am comfortable with them. However, he tried to bite a friend that shook my hand once. So I have to warn people about him, or place him in a different room when they visit. Until he tried to bite my friend, I was only mildly concerned he may be defensive, being as Komondorok are guardian dogs. So, even in completely familiar and comfortable surroundings, in a situation when I was not at all in any distress, he still felt the need to protect me. How much is your dog like that?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TfTa0__MtvQ&mode=user&search=

kashi wrote:

I don't want to start an arguement or anything, but what would you consider a fact regards to "dangerous dogs are made not born" as Nala said. Let's face it, it is always a human's fault that dogs are dangerous. It could be due to bad breeding (due to not worrying about the parent's disposition or whatever!) or lack of training/ love/ attention. There are loads of factors involved, and remember it is breeds like Labradors and Golden Retrievers that cause the most bites in the UK.

fits

wyk wrote:

I
Wez
Greyhounds .......Talk about a vicious breed, their rarety alone is only what keeps them off the lists:

So one greyhound bit you and now its a 'vicious breed':D

As for their rarity, you obviously have never stepped foot on this island......:rolleyes:

peasant

sorry for straying off topic:

WYK, re bite statistics:

One important area bite statistics DON'T shed any light on is the background of the owner.

Physically speaking, a Rottweiler or GSD is no stronger/dangerous than a Labrador or St. Bernard. The main difference is reputation / image.

No "hard man" will get themselves a Lab to convey their hard man image ...they'll get something with a reputation.
Additionally ...no "hard man" will be interested in a properly socialised, friendly, well trained, cuddly "friend" ...they'll want a "biest". So they train their dog to be one.

So, the whole "dangerous dog" label becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

wyk

I was talking about Komondorok. I'm sorry if I was unclear. I work with the Greyhound rescue, so inevitably I am going to be bitten by a Greyhound, really. I have been bitten MANY times, but only once took stitches and nearly made me lose my nose. You'll notice I said it was the dog I least expected to bite me. Greyhounds are mainly of very mild temperament, and make lovely pets. However, like ANY canine, a dog in unfamiliar surroundings can become defensive. Hell, PEOPLE can become defensive. So it wasn't the dog's fault, per se. It was the handler.

And I have been to Ireland several times, and am about to move to Dublin.

WYK

fits wrote:

So one greyhound bit you and now its a 'vicious breed':D

As for their rarity, you obviously have never stepped foot on this island......:rolleyes:

wyk

You have some good points. However, a Rottweiler is quite a bit stronger than your average Labrador. In fact, your average American Rottweiler is nearly twice the size of your average American Labrador(100lbs VS 55). Also, the average Rottweiler has more than 4X the bite force(PSI) than a Labrador. So yes, a Rottweiler is far more capable physically of doing more damage to a victim than a Labrador. And this does show in the attack statistics since Labradors show no fatalities in the last 20 years or so even though bites are very common.

I don't know how big the UK spec St Bernard gets, but here it can reach 200 lbs + and be nearly 3' AT THE SHOULDERS. This dog is quite capable of killing a full sized man easily. Stating a St Bernard is not any more physically strong than a Labrador shows a bit of confusion for the breed. It is a work dog, bred to be capable of pulling a full-sized man for a great distance, as well as protecting herds. This breed is extremely rare in the US(I have never seen one in person, myself, and I visit many rescues and dog shows).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cc/Stbernardweightpull.jpg

It's temperement can be debatable, but it's physical prowess is well in excess of a Labrador, and perhaps even the Rottweiler.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=R7jhrxy0HKs is an interesting video, if not entirely scientific.

Wez

peasant wrote:

sorry for straying off topic:

WYK, re bite statistics:

One important area bite statistics DON'T shed any light on is the background of the owner.

Physically speaking, a Rottweiler or GSD is no stronger/dangerous than a Labrador or St. Bernard. The main difference is reputation / image.

No "hard man" will get themselves a Lab to convey their hard man image ...they'll get something with a reputation.
Additionally ...no "hard man" will be interested in a properly socialised, friendly, well trained, cuddly "friend" ...they'll want a "biest". So they train their dog to be one.

So, the whole "dangerous dog" label becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

peasant

wyk wrote:

However, a Rottweiler is quite a bit stronger than your average Labrador.

Hence my mentioning of a St. Bernhard

wyk

You are quite right about the self-fulfilling prophecy. As I stated previously, dogs need a firm, but fair hand, and consistent guidance. Your average breed of dog, like say a Dachshund, rewards bad ownership with usually nary a problem, and at worse an ankle bite. Your average Rottweiler or American Pit Bull rewards a bad owner with a law suit. The image makes these breeds popular, and often with incompetent owners, and from what I have seen - owners whom shouldn't have ANY sort of dog, let alone one capable of great feats. They aren't only making up for a lack of self esteem, but also are often lacking in other departments as well. So now we have a popularity with a powerful breed of dog amongst a population of dog owners that may or may not be able to control such an animal. Though you can read this in the stats, the lawmakers do not necessarily see it this way.

But one thing we d have to consider is the fact that even a good owner can sometimes lose control of their dogs. Whether someone opens their gate, breaks into their house, a thunderstorm drives it nuts - what have ya. So one argument is that disallowing the larger, more aggressive breeds, limits the liability here.

What bothers me most is the popularity of the pitbull here, and how often they attack OTHER people's pets. These are statistics hard to show. I only know from personal experience with several rescues that Pitbulls do take their toll on other dogs, far mroe so than all other breeds combined. This is what annoys me personally about incompetent pitbull owners. We did not have this issue back in the 70's and 80's when Dobermans and Rottweilers were at their height of popularity. Something about the Pitbull makes it more aggressive towards other dogs. The last attack I saw, and documented, was a Pitbull jumping a 4' fence the owner refused to heighten even after being asked several times by his neighbor. Within days the Pitbull killed a neighbors Greyhound and terrier. Which meant the pitbull had to be put down as well later on by animal control. That man didn't know it, but when he brought that pitbull home, he killed 3 dogs.


Wez

peasant wrote:

Hence my mentioning of a St. Bernhard

joejoem

skink wrote:

To what extent are you? a secondary school student working in practice for the summer?

when i get into work tomorrow i will attempt to scan the article to prove i am right, but even if i can't it will be big news soon enough anyway!

No sign of this article?

peasant

wyk wrote:

So one argument is that disallowing the larger, more aggressive breeds, limits the liability here.

Slight mistake in your argument there ...

Just because a certain breed is larger than others, doesn't make it more aggressive.

Large doesn't equal agressive, to the contrary: most large breeds are quite placid and have a high provocation threshold. (Unless they get tampered with by an irresponsible owner)




But I really think we should return to the topic of VETS, as the moderators here have asked not to discuss "dangerous dogs" anymore (after some arguments got very heated)

wyk

As I stated previously, aggression can have little to do with the breed in some circumstances(such as when a dog is lost, frightened, feels threatened, etc.). Though I see the argument for laws regarding aggressive dogs, as do most lawmakers, I also see the capability of the dog to do damage if it were loose on the general public. The Greyhound is one of the gentle breeds, especially when it comes to humans, as they have been handled by humans from birth on a daily basis. They were also bred to work in groups for hundreds of years, so aggression had to be nearly entirely removed from the breed for it to be successful. However, the worst bite I have is from a Greyhound. Life threatening? Hardly, but it DID bite me, and it most definitely is not known as an aggressive breed. Argue as you wish for a breed's temperament - but never forget the fact it is basically a domesticated Wolf, with genes that are predominately a Wolves's. So when instinct kicks in VS nurturing, they can become unpredictable. Like, say, my ex-wife.

I dunno if I would call it an argument, really. I am just making points. Though I wouldn't mind some breeds at least requiring registration, I'm not a particularly big fan of outright banning based upon breeds.

Afterall, in all of America, there are only about 10 fatalities a year from dog bites, and I would argue the dog ownership here, per capita, is easily one of the highest, if not the highest, in the world. So it is hardly en epidemic. 34,000 people die each year in driving collisions. THAT'S an epidemic.

As for Vets, I am sure as with every other occupation, some doctors are more specialized in some areas of the field than others. Also, their own personal experiences come to play. If a Rhodesian(lovely dogs) attacked someone or something in the Vet's clinic previously, you better believe they would have a bias in the future. In any case, it would be prudent to learn from the case and at least exercise caution in the future, no?

Here we have a lot of 'country' vets. They mainly deal with farm animals, hounds for hunting, and sheep dogs. Because I have a sheep dog, and a hound, I visit them often. They charge fairly, and do good work. It's all about the fit. Find a good vet for you.

Here's my Greyhound gallery. I have owned and do own a few:

http://www.pbase.com/wyk/greyhound Nearly all were, or are mine. You'll also spot my 140 lb Rottweiler in there as well



Wez

peasant wrote:

Slight mistake in your argument there ...

Just because a certain breed is larger than others, doesn't make it more aggressive.

Large doesn't equal agressive, to the contrary: most large breeds are quite placid and have a high provocation threshold. (Unless they get tampered with by an irresponsible owner)




But I really think we should return to the topic of VETS, as the moderators here have asked not to discuss "dangerous dogs" anymore (after some arguments got very heated)

Nala

Wez, the moderators have asked for no more discussion of dangerous dogs, the thread about them was locked, this thread is about vets.

wyk

Nala wrote:

Wez, the moderators have asked for no more discussion of dangerous dogs, the thread about them was locked, this thread is about vets.

I understand. However, I was trying to help explain WHY some people, even Vets, may feel the way they do about large breeds in general. And cited some reasons lawmakers and vets have themselves seen recently. The OP clearly stated their issue was a vet that seemed to have issues with large breed dogs and aggression. I'm not really arguing for or against. And the thread doesn't seem to have gotten out of hand...yet. Even so, I'll stop. I think I've said enough to enlighten a few.

Original Post wrote:

I had to bring my RR Phoenix to the vet yesterday, he had small blisters and sores on his pads, an allergic reaction, had to be put on antibiotics.
Anyway when I came in to the vet first she goes 'oh a great dane', after I told her that he's a ridgeback she goes 'oh right they are vicious'!!! I couldn't believe what she was saying, I had to explain to her that they are not vicious it's a very gentle breed, and so on. If she ever met a vicious RR the owner was probably to blame.

Finally she was wondering why I had a halti on Phoenix, again I had to explain to her that he's a 'listed breed' and you have to keep a muzzle on him in public places, it was like she didn't have a clue what I was on about.....
I was fuming when I left. No wonder certain breeds have a bad reputation when even some vets seem to propagate the myths about them......

skink

joejoem wrote:

No sign of this article?

yea busy week at work, anyway, couldn't find, but if anyone does not believe me, ring ucd, or the veterinary council, its well known at this stage!

Schlemm

skink wrote:

yea busy week at work, anyway, couldn't find, but if anyone does not believe me, ring ucd, or the veterinary council, its well known at this stage!

Just out of curiosity, what was it published in? The vet degree from UCD is recognised by the EAEVE and also in Australia and New Zealand. The reason that they are reluctant to grant AVMA accreditation, which they never had previously, is for a bunch of reasons, including the fact that the head of the school of ag, vet and food science is not a vet himself after UCD was restructured begining the 05/06 academic year.

dontdoit

yea busy week at work, anyway, couldn't find, but if anyone does not believe me, ring ucd, or the veterinary council, its well known at this stage!

OH God, not again!!! :mad:
IM IN UCD AND YOUR WRONG!!!

Please stop posting this lie, european accrediation and RCVS still stands.
Time to call it a day and admit your wrong!!:rolleyes: