Supervet

viv1969

viv1969

Suspended / Banned
Messages
29,452
Name
Bat-Frog
Edit My Images
No
Oh.
My.
God.
 
viv1969 said:
Oh.
My.
God.
Click to expand...

Can't bear to watch it tbh. Dogs on three legs, horses having colic surgery, cats with prosthetic limbs .... as an animal lover, it's too gut wrenching to be entertaining. What did I miss tonight, just out of interest ...?
 
Totally inspiring if you love animals and never fails to be a tear to the eye
 
A friend of mine calls it her weekly blub fest.
 
I find it ridiculous.
 
In what sense?
 
The money that people spend on animals.
 
fracster said:
The money that people spend on animals.
Click to expand...
I agree to some extent, but I assume that many have them insured, which also costs money I suppose. It's not often that the price comes up in the show, but I think the union jack lad and his wife were happy to include their costs in order to show they got "loaaadsssssa monnnnney!"
 
Assume that is asked of myself?

Couple of weeks back they had a rabbit with a broken front leg,IIRC. The amount of work the vet did to reset the leg must have cost a fortune, I seem to recall the rabbit was quite aged as well. In my opinion, the rabbit should have gone in the cooking pot rather than have money wasted on it.

I know i`m going to get lambasted in this thread, but I firmly believe that a lot of people spend way too much on pets and should, sometimes, do the sensible thing and put them too sleep.

I have had dogs all my life,until recently, before anybody [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] me for not understanding.
 
fracster said:
I seem to recall the rabbit was quite aged as well.
Click to expand...
You recall wrong :) It was a young rabbit.
I think mr supervet always put's across a balanced view when giving options, especially with older pets.
 
fracster said:
Assume that is asked of myself?

Couple of weeks back they had a rabbit with a broken front leg,IIRC. The amount of work the vet did to reset the leg must have cost a fortune, I seem to recall the rabbit was quite aged as well. In my opinion, the rabbit should have gone in the cooking pot rather than have money wasted on it.

I know i`m going to get lambasted in this thread, but I firmly believe that a lot of people spend way too much on pets and should, sometimes, do the sensible thing and put them too sleep.

I have had dogs all my life,until recently, before anybody b****x me for not understanding.
Click to expand...

I think people are free to spend their money how they choose; and if that's on healthcare for their pet, then that's fine.
I'm wondering though why it's not OK for anyone to comment against your opinion (if that's what you consider a lambasting), but it's ok for you to say these people who care for their animals are ridiculous.
So it's not the way you'd spend your money? Fine...whatever...your prerogative. Just stop looking down your snout at those who would.
 
viv1969 said:
I think people are free to spend their money how they choose; and if that's on healthcare for their pet, then that's fine.
I'm wondering though why it's not OK for anyone to comment against your opinion (if that's what you consider a lambasting), but it's ok for you to say these people who care for their animals are ridiculous.
So it's not the way you'd spend your money? Fine...whatever...your prerogative. Just stop looking down your snout at those who would.
Click to expand...
what a truly stupid post Ruth, I thought better of you.
 
fracster said:
Assume that is asked of myself?

Couple of weeks back they had a rabbit with a broken front leg,IIRC. The amount of work the vet did to reset the leg must have cost a fortune, I seem to recall the rabbit was quite aged as well. In my opinion, the rabbit should have gone in the cooking pot rather than have money wasted on it.

I know i`m going to get lambasted in this thread, but I firmly believe that a lot of people spend way too much on pets and should, sometimes, do the sensible thing and put them too sleep.

I have had dogs all my life,until recently, before anybody b****x me for not understanding.
Click to expand...

All I can say is I pity your dogs! If you take a pet on its for life and it should get whatever care it needs - Euthanasia is not the low cost option it should be the last resort. To most of us an Animals welfare is regardless of cost though obviously not you! Personally I think your post is totally stupid but only posted after you decided your view was more important than Ruths's. There are two points of view to most things and what matters to you may not matter other people regardless of how important you feel you are!
 
First off Ruth, I am not looking down my snout at anyone. Nor am I telling anybody how to spend their money . My previous statements are my opinions. I am allowed one as well as any other forum member.Go and get another glass of red and settle down.
 
viv1969 said:
That's the best you've got today Ade?
Frankly I thought better of you :p
Click to expand...
should be better about 23:00 Ruth. For obvious reasons.

Honestly though, I fully appreciate that pets or working animals should be looked after and cared for properly. But there comes a time when the animal reaches a certain age or is sick/injured when you have to make a decision to do what is best for the animal. A decision that is sometimes painful. Keeping them alive to feed an ego is wrong in my opinion.

And spending all that money on a bleeding rabbit, whatever its age seems daft to me.
 
Can't argue with that Ade, seen too many people try and prolong an animal's suffering for their own needs
 
There are also people who write off animals because of their age when they have a lot more to give. I foster for a small rescue that focused on senior cats.

i do agree that some people prolong animals lives because they can't bear to live without them but i think each case is individual to the animal, waht is wrong with them, who the owner is, what resoruces they have and what treatment is available. I lost my 19 yr old cat last year and its possible with more money and a different vets opinion she'd still be alive and not ina 'prolonging death and causing suffering' way
 
fracster said:
should be better about 23:00 Ruth. For obvious reasons.

Honestly though, I fully appreciate that pets or working animals should be looked after and cared for properly. But there comes a time when the animal reaches a certain age or is sick/injured when you have to make a decision to do what is best for the animal. A decision that is sometimes painful. Keeping them alive to feed an ego is wrong in my opinion.

And spending all that money on a bleeding rabbit, whatever its age seems daft to me.
Click to expand...

I agree with you so far as perhaps elderly animals, vs quality of life, and from what I've seen of Noel Fitzpatrick, he's pretty adamant about not going ahead with surgery if quality of life will suffer.

On the other hand I've seen him replace the mangled rear leg with a prosthesis (bottom half) on a young dog which after a couple of weeks was careering around a field like nothing was different.

It was heartening to see tbh.
 
viv1969 said:
I agree with you so far as perhaps elderly animals, vs quality of life, and from what I've seen of Noel Fitzpatrick, he's pretty adamant about not going ahead with surgery if quality of life will suffer.

On the other hand I've seen him replace the mangled rear leg with a prosthesis (bottom half) on a young dog which after a couple of weeks was careering around a field like nothing was different.

It was heartening to see tbh.
Click to expand...

And THAT is the point isn't, as Long as the vet is giving sensible advice, not emotionally swayed, then there is nothing wrong in spending that money. I don't watch the program, but really do appreciate that medical science helps animals as much as humans when it's sensible to do so. The vet I worked for many years ago once refused to continue treatment on a rabbit to push the owner into making the right choice, the poor thing had lost almost all its rear leg muscles to a maggot strike and when after 4 days of treatment it was plain that even if we could remove every last maggot, it was never going to be able to move around properly without serious pain if indeed at all... I DO know that had that not swayed the owner, he would have carried on at least doing everything he could to reduce the suffering, but luckily the poor thing the silly woman [who bear in mind had let it get that bad in the first place due to ignorance] did realise she wasn't doing the right thing.
 
Gary Coyle said:
He's a crap actor though
Click to expand...

True!
Given he's a hugely respected vet on both sides of the Atlantic, and a pioneer in the field of small animal orthopaedics, you have to wonder why he dabbled :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top