"Pets are a beloved part of the family readers say"


Special Report (June 9, 2006)

Opinion
Pets are a beloved part of the family, Press readers say
The Press recently asked our readers to give their opinions on how family pets should be viewed -– as part of the family or as personal property, as Ohio state law considers them.

Here is a sampling of the responses we got:

Members of the family
On your question on pets in the May 13 issue on whether your pet is a family member or personal property. My opinion is that all pets should be considered a family member. Believe me, mine are. I love them dearly. Thank you from all my pets.

Nancy Bantam
Toledo

Not used up
My canine companion, friend and part of my family is Molly, a small terrier mix who has been with me for 13 years.

I sometimes refer to her as my “used” dog. She came from another family that had her for three years. They had to move and could not take her along. Since I did not want to train a puppy, I called my vet and he told me about her. Since they had her for that long, I was pretty sure she did not chew things up or have other pesky traits or health concerns.

Molly has been with me through surgeries, deaths, weddings and new grandchildren. She senses my every mood, knows my daily routine and goes almost everywhere with me.

She watches me all the time and will wake from a sound sleep to excitedly go for a walk with me, or if she sees me having a quiet day, she senses that too.

Molly has given me so much unconditional love and companionship and also some of my heartiest laughs. She offers comfort when I’m lonely and I reassure her through nature’s thunder and lightning.

She adapted very well from having a huge fenced yard to run after squirrels, bunnies and birds. We live in a one-bedroom apartment, but you know, she is just happy to be with me.

I’m hoping since this is the second time I’ve gotten my “used” dog through my vet and it has worked out so well for all concerned, it will encourage others who are hesitant to try a dog – these puppies are not used up, just finely polished and a blessing to have in my family.

Marge Stover
Toledo

Valuable
I have many strong feelings on this subject, but I will limit it to what I feel are three important issues.

When I was younger, I trained and showed dogs until I realized that fancy pedigrees no longer made a difference to me. One of the best dogs I ever had was a Dobe-mix, Sparky. He was found by a woman who heard his cries, rescued him after some cruel person had crudely cut off his tail, dumped him off in a blizzard and then left him to die. He was only 5 or 6 weeks old at the time. She took him to a local vet, where I then adopted him.

1. Ohio state law and others should be revised to provide more protection (for the animals). Dogs are a lot more than replaceable objects and they are proving just how valuable they are, not only as pets, but by the increased number of breeds that are being trained in various areas such as assisting the handicapped, working with police, fire, EMS, etc.

2. While East Toledo has many fine veterinarians, none that I have encountered will make house calls or return to their own clinics to provide emergency care or service after hours, on weekends and holidays. The only option is to make the long drive through all the road construction to the emergency clinic in West Toledo – time wasted that could possibly save a pet’s life and shorten its discomfort.

In my opinion, East Toledo residents really need a centralized clinic or a reliable vet to provide services on this side of the river, where we can take our pets during off hours, weekends and holidays.

Only days after I returned from having major abdominal surgery, my old and sick beloved friend Sparky collapsed and was dying. I could not bend over and spent hours on the phone desperately trying to get anyone to come and help me. He suffered needlessly – I still get upset thinking about it. We have two mixed-breed dogs left and neither is expected to live much longer due to advanced age and illness. I worry about it constantly because I don’t want them to suffer the way Sparky did – they are family members in my eyes.

3. It totally astonishes me when I see “designer” pups for sale by greedy owners, backyard breeders and puppy mills at ridiculous prices. These are “cross breeds, or mutts,” bred by people who are in it for the money only. I am referring to the cock-a-poos, peke-a-poos, puggles, labra-doodles, etc. My recommendation: do not pay those extreme prices or buy from them – it only encourages others to do the same.

Joanne
Genoa

“My daily life”
I agree 100 percent that my pet cat Cupcake is a member of my family. She was born March 30, 1992 and on June 19, 1995 I adopted Cupcake from the Bowling Green shelter.

Cupcake is my daily life. She knows my voice and has a verbal routine as to eat, open the door to see outside, etc. To me, she is very valuable, keeps my spirits cheerful and at my age (85), gives me exercise up and down to feed her, clean the litter box, etc.

Virginia Myers
Walbridge

The best companion
I wish the state law would change about how valuable a pet is.

My dog brings me so much happiness every day. We play, we walk, and she understands me. She makes me laugh and if I cry, she licks my tears. She certainly is a member of the family. She is one of the best companions I could have.

If you love your pet, you will take care of him or her. My Bichon Frise, Angel, goes to groomer and to the vet for her regular check ups. She pays her way by all the love she gives back to me.

Frances Hurrelbrink
Woodville

-Compiled by Tammy Walro

To comment on this story, email .

 

 

Special Report (June 9, 2006)

From the Web...

An Abomination
Loved your story. We need more like it.

People need a clearing house to report these suspected deaths and to report vets that dont care enough to obtain informed consent or give a client any information about drugs especially off label
drugs they are using or prescribing.

I just lost my beautiful German Shepherd. It's an abomination in my opinion.

Thanks
Lola Quinlan

Many Thanks
Many thanks to Kelly Kaczala for two excellent articles. Many thanks to Melissa Burden for her Special Report

Jean Townsend
Johns Island, SC
(Always for George - Always for the Rimadyl Dogs)

Administered without consent
I just read the article titled "Pet Owners Want Informed Consent of Drug Risks" & applaud Kelly Kaczala for writing it.

Last month I lost the only puppy in the litter at 2 days old due, in my opinion, to a vet who is supposed to be a reproduction specialist administering an injection of Rimadyl to the mother after a C-section. This event in April happened after nearly 2 yrs of discussion with him regarding my negative feelings about this drug as well as others which I believe to be unsafe & I had requested that a big, bold note be attached to files for my dogs stating that this drug was NEVER to be administered to ANY of my dogs.

In the Rimadyl insert it states:
“The safe use of Rimadyl in animals less than 6 weeks of age, pregnant dogs, dogs used for breeding purposes, or in lactating bitches has not been established. Safety has not been established for IV or IM administration.”

Since April, I have talked to at least 5 reproduction experts across the country & not one uses Rimadyl for pain associated with a C-section. And, one even went so far as to say that he would NEVER use Rimadyl in conjunction with a C-section due to the risk it could pose to the puppy's liver.

This drug was administered without my consent & against my expressed wishes & I am in the process of filing a complaint against the veterinarian with the Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners.

Again, I would like to thank Kelly for this article.

Pat Pearson
Bluebonnet Chows
San Antonio, TX

Secret Society
I am in U.K. Here our vets are almost a secret society when it comes to giving info to pet owners.

My G.S.D. was prescribed Rimadyl. He was on this for four days before he was seen by a specialist re. a hip replacement. I was told the only reaction might be a 'bit of G.I'. Max was 7 y.o. 43.75kg.Rimadyl is prescribed in U.K., broken down into small quantities and dispensed, in a bottle, without the benefit of any information sheet.

The specialist vet prescribed Zubrin (Tepoxalin) and suggested I ignore the unusually provided information sheet.My dog suffered a dreadful adverse reaction. I was treated as an hysterical owner when I brought this reaction to the attention of the specialist vet. I was away for two weeks, my GP vet saw my dog and said A.O.K. When I returned Max was now 29kg, so weak he could hardly stand, and very ill. It was only some nine months later the drug company, Schering-Plough, rang me to admit he'd had an horrendous reaction. They mentioned Shepherds seemed prone to this reaction.

Had I known Rimadyl may trigger an adverse reaction I'd have taken note of my dogs blood tests prior to his proposed hip operation.I'd have seen levels were already elevated and realised he was not a suitable candidate for the Zubrin.

We indeed require informed consent before others feel as sick over what they did to their dog, as I did, after virtually poisoning my own best friend.

Thank you for trying to change things for our animals who can't tell us how they feel.

Pam Pickett (Columnist narrowboatworld.com)

Being informed is the key
I just wanted to comment on the June 2, 2006, story as it appeared in The Press. The story was very good, very well presented. But no where was it mentioned that this drug, and a host of others such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAID's like Rimadyl by Pfizer and Deramaxx by Novartis, are supplied to the veterinarian with an FDA mandated client information sheet, or CIS. That CIS, developed in accordance with FDA rules, and approved by the FDA, lists all the side effects or adverse reactions associated with the approved use of the drug (not the extra label use of the drug). By the FDA's own standards, 'the only way these drugs that have a CIS can be used safely is if the vet's client is given a copy of the CIS'. Currently there is NO law that says the vet has to give the CIS to his client. With that said, then these drugs are being used illegally even for their FDA approved use.

The situation with vets using FDA approved drugs for their approved use illegally because they are not handing out the CIS as the manufacturer and the FDA state is so bad in Pennsylvania that Senators Mike Stack and Lisa Boscola have introduced two bills, Senate Bills SB1144 and SB1145 into committee for approval to require the vets to hand to the client a copy of the CIS when the drugs are used. Furthermore, their opinion is that these drugs that require CIS for normal use, should also require the CIS be given out during extra-label use so the client at the very minimum has a base line understanding of what side effects or adverse reactions can occur with the drugs.

The FDA has determined that possibly as many as 300,000 dogs are dieing a year due to adverse effects from FDA approved drugs. They have no data on deaths related to extra-label use. The main consensus is that the animal owners are seeing these adverse reactions occur, but do not know it is a side effect of the drug. The owner waits too long to intercede or react. The animal is then presented to an emergency room vet when it is beyond recovery. Allowing extra-label use without the baseline knowledge of what can happen during regular use would be an abomination.

The cure for this is simple. Each state's vet board needs to pass a regulation that requires the vet to discuss the drugs CIS with his client and advise the client what adverse reactions to look for. A typical drug like Pfizer's Rimadyl has about 10 'standard' adverse reactions that occur. A few are very subtle...slow down on drinking water or eating food, inattentive nature, sleepiness, nausea, panting, and confusion. To the average animal owner, these may not appear to be adverse reactions, but merely a change in attitude or age related changes. Some are point blank indications and may come on very quickly; vomiting, bloody rectal discharge, falling over, and plain death. But if the animal owner knew what to look for, the vet could be consulted, the animal presented to the vet in a savable condition, and the drug can be stopped before the liver, kidney, stomach, and/or intestinal damage occurs. Data shows that once the NSAID class of drugs, for example, start it's process and adverse reactions go too far, there is no stopping it without radical emergency repairs to the stomach and GI area. This is why it is important for the animal owner to be informed of the adverse reactions and be attentive while their animal is being treated with any drug. With extra-label use, a use that has NOT been FDA approved, the CIS sheet and pre-screening the animal for a base line conditions is imperative.

Dr. Victoria Hampshire is quite familiar with the CIS issue, pre-screening, FDA approval, and extra-label use. Feel free to ask her her opinion on this CIS issue with FDA approved drugs, as well as extra-label use.

Thank you.

Demitry Herman
2328 Huckleberry Rd.
Allentown, PA. 18104

www.dogsadversereactions.com

Send us your opinion! To post a comment here, just e-mail

 

Other Articles from "The Press"

(Posted with permission)

June 2, 2006

"Anesthesia safer today for senior dogs and cats"

"Extra-label use of drugs tricky for vets"

April 2006

"A fond farewell to an old friend"