 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / February 2005Antibiotics First, Then x-rays & blood tests
And don't trust any vet that will do it any different. Money suckers. Glarb has spoken. > And don't trust any vet that will do it any different. Money > suckers. > > Glarb has spoken. Care to ellaborate?  SignatureCheryl "Cheryl" <jlhshadow@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message >> And don't trust any vet that will do it any different. Money >> suckers. >> >> Glarb has spoken. > > Care to ellaborate? It all speaks for itself. There are vets scamming people by not going with antibiotics first. I am now seeing more and more "Well, before I prescribe, let's do some x-rays and some bloodword, blah blah blah." I love cats, but they are not children. Try the course of antibiotics first and if that doesn't make pootie feel better, then go to the stuff normally reserved for humans. Glarb > "Cheryl" <jlhshadow@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message >>> And don't trust any vet that will do it any different. Money [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Glarb Well, if they don't have a condition that antibiotics will help it defeats the purpose, and just contributes to the problem of antibiotic resistant infections as we have from human doctors just giving out antibiotics for every sniffle. I would appreciate a thorough vet as opposed to one that just wants to try an antibiotic in place of a thorough exam. I would agree with that! Antibiotic over-use for problems that aren't even bacterial are creating super-bugs that will not be treatable. Rhonda > Well, if they don't have a condition that antibiotics will help it defeats > the purpose, and just contributes to the problem of antibiotic resistant > infections as we have from human doctors just giving out antibiotics for > every sniffle. I would appreciate a thorough vet as opposed to one that just > wants to try an antibiotic in place of a thorough exam. > Well, if they don't have a condition that antibiotics will help it defeats > the purpose, and just contributes to the problem of antibiotic resistant > infections as we have from human doctors just giving out antibiotics for > every sniffle. I would appreciate a thorough vet as opposed to one that just > wants to try an antibiotic in place of a thorough exam. My doctor takes this approach. He could have prescribed an antibiotic when I had an apparent ear infection, but he sent me to an audiologist, who determined I had fluid in my right ear and that I had mild sensorineural hearing loss in the left and moderate in the right, so she sent me to her ENT, who determined after trying some things that I had something blocking the right ear from draining. He did a biopsy and tube insertion; it turned out to be a swollen adenoid (unusual in adults). At some point, I'll have to get hearing aids for the sensorineural loss, of which I was totally unaware. All that from what *appeared* to be a simple ear infection. Signaturehttp://www.slywy.com/ "Diane L. Schirf" <delenn@spammindspringnot.com> wrote in message > My doctor takes this approach. He could have prescribed an antibiotic > when I had an apparent ear infection, but he sent me to an audiologist, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > All that from what *appeared* to be a simple ear infection. Yes, but you are a human, not a cat. > "Diane L. Schirf" <delenn@spammindspringnot.com> wrote in message > > My doctor takes this approach. He could have prescribed an antibiotic [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Yes, but you are a human, not a cat. How is the principle different? The goal should be to treat the cause, not the symptoms. Pouring antibiotics down a cat that doesn't have a bacterial infection is silly and potentially harmful. Signaturehttp://www.slywy.com/ >> "Diane L. Schirf" <delenn@spammindspringnot.com> wrote in message >>> My doctor takes this approach. He could have prescribed an antibiotic [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > not the symptoms. Pouring antibiotics down a cat that doesn't have a > bacterial infection is silly and potentially harmful. Apparently, Glarb is cheap. > >> "Diane L. Schirf" <delenn@spammindspringnot.com> wrote in message > >>> My doctor takes this approach. He could have prescribed an antibiotic [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Apparently, Glarb is cheap. Well that was a little harsh, now wasn't it? What if Glarb is old and handicapped and on a fixed income?! Why do you have to be so MEAN, Karen? Everyone has different views about the value of animal life vs. that of human life, but the bottomline is that if you've adopted an animal, you should be responsible for the welfare of that animal, which means avoiding unnecessary pain in your pets. So, when you give that antibiotic treatment to your pet, you may be causing him/her unnecessary suffering and delaying the diagnosis of real problem (plus, forcing antibiotics down a cat's mouth is NOT fun for the cat and antibiotic resistance among animals sometimes can cross over to humans). If you can't afford the medical cost of your pets, it may be the best to give them to someone who can. > Well, if they don't have a condition that antibiotics will help it defeats > the purpose, and just contributes to the problem of antibiotic resistant > infections as we have from human doctors just giving out antibiotics for > every sniffle. I would appreciate a thorough vet as opposed to one that just > wants to try an antibiotic in place of a thorough exam. Most emphatic ditto! SignatureJean B.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.