RI?
- Thread starter TheAmazingGerby
- Start date
This topic is getting derailed quickly. I offered my perspective as a vet and that's being used to tell others they are wrong. I am NOT happy about that because in this situation no one is wrong. If someone can not speak respectfully then they will lose their opportunity to speak. Simple as that. I do not suggest testing me about this.
jajeanpierre
Chameleon Enthusiast
I am dismayed that my deep commitment and desire to better the lives of chameleons and help give owners a perspective that may differ from the opinion of some on this forum is often so twisted.
I am deeply saddened that the internet mob mentality is at play on this forum and that if one disagrees with popular opinion or popular people, one can be silenced by "reporting" posts to administrators and the administrators will respond.
I am disheartened that I am chastised for "not being friendly" enough in my posts. The content or veracity of what I write is rarely questioned, just the tone and sometimes the intent. Often times there seems to be intentional bias by the reader to misconstrue the motive behind what I write.
Sometimes I am not careful with my wording or word choice. Sometimes I hit send before I've proof read. And sometimes I am just plain annoyed that I have spent two hours digging through a veterinary textbook to find the exact reference plus the references the veterinary textbook authors have cited in their article only to have it ignored and people continue to repeat the opposite information, citing only that they have read their theory more often on the internet even though they have never had any actual contact with veterinarians about the problem being discussed. It is as if scientific truth is determined by a popularity contest where the truest theory is the one most often repeated. Facts matter.
Before I answer many complicated problems, I often will spend a few hours researching the problem so I can give the very best information I can that can be referenced in science, not just something I read on the internet. Hours. I'll be the first to admit that I do learn a lot by researching a subject. It helps me continue to learn and try to solve the problem of keeping chameleons. Still, I do it for strangers I will never meet and chameleons I have never seen because I feel a moral responsibility to help people and animals and to make the world a better place.
I am passionate about bettering the lives of all creatures in this world, including humans.
I also understand that many decisions need to be made that are based on finances and to think otherwise is naive.
The whole point of some of my posts above has been to highlight the dangers when lay people on the internet who are neither vets nor have seen the animal in person suggest that the only way to treat an animal is with expensive testing. There is also the implied and often overt opinion on this forum that to do otherwise is irresponsible and unethical. Believe me, that is the message many give when they recommend going into debt or suggest they would mortgage their house for their chameleon. There is no inherent virtue attached to going into debt for an animal. It is a personal decision only. A choice. Whether one person goes the expensive route is a choice between the owner and their vet and there are many different ways to successfully treat animals besides expensive testing as the first option.
The end result of recommending expensive testing for routine infections is that many animals will not go to the vet in the first place when the owners feel their moral character will be judged by the vet (and the internet community). They fear they will be made to feel morally bankrupt for not choosing expensive treatment. Why spend the initial $60 to $100 for a vet visit when you know you cannot afford or choose not to spend hundreds of dollars more on testing? When many on this forum suggest the only ethical way to own a pet is to also be prepared to go into debt for that animal, it tells others who are not prepared to make that decision that they lack moral principles. No one wants to be questioned about their character so the end result is the owners are less likely to seek veterinary care. Pet ownership should not be limited to the wealthy.
[By the way, that hypothesis is borne out in advertising research. Ads such as graphic anti-smoking ads are in fact more likely to increase smoking than to decrease it.]
In all my experience with infections in chameleons, pets and 20 years owning racehorses, I have only had pathology done on three or four living animals if my memory serves me correctly. It wasn't a case of my choosing not to have expensive testing done, it was that none of the attending vets ever felt it appropriate. One case was a lung wash on a racehorse that had put in an unexpectedly poor performance in a prep race for a big stake race we were pointing towards. The other times were a vet who took swabs and looked under the microscope herself. I have had pathology done on a few chameleons that have died.
I have had vets treat many many many infections. Recommending culture and sensitivity testing has never been suggested except maybe that one time with the racehorse. (I didn't deal with the racehorse vet directly so don't even know if anything was sent away for pathology.) My racehorses have had many abscesses in their feet and nicks here and there. There is an old saying: no foot no horse, so if foot infections of expensive racehorses are not routinely cultured, why would I think it standard practice for culture and sensitivity testing on other animals? A $200 culture is a drop in the bucket of my racehorse vet bill.
I also think that perhaps some people are mistaken if they believe they are having "culture and sensitivity" testing done. It is my understanding that a proper lab must do that kind of testing and is not something a vet does at their clinic. A vet looking at a slide is not the same as "culture and sensitivity" testing.
When I asked @kinyonga and @jannb to read what @ferretinmyshoes had written, it wasn't an "I told you so." It was a plea to them to read Dayna's post and realize that there are many ways to successfully treat animals and to let the attending vet and the client decide the best treatment plan based on all circumstances that none of us on the internet are privy to. That last message--to leave the treatment decision to the vet and client--was not conveyed in my post and I regret that. That post most certainly could have been worded more tactfully and for that I apologize to all involved, especially to Dayna.
And to @Decadancin I apologize for my angry post. It was inappropriate. I should have written you privately to express my anger at you for what you wrote.
