- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


Scary ignorant vet!!

February 24th, 2006, 11:38 AM
OMG, i have never heard so much nonsense coming from a vet before! if this was in my face i'd run the other way screaming! i'm thinking this idiot woman got her degree from a cracker-jack box! :yuck:

man i hope i never have to meet one of these brain-washed crazy people, cuz hair would fly!

February 24th, 2006, 11:56 AM
technodoll, I've read that article before and I remember being just as shocked that a vet could be so seemingly out of touch. I can't beleive she is reccommending grocergy store kibble due to it's "freshness". No mention of ingredients to look for or anything!

I think this is scaremongering (sp?) at its finest. I feed my guys raw and did A LOT of research before I began. We have exerienced none of the problems she claims to see all teh time form raw fed dogs.

Vet's like this make me angry. They need to work with their patients to help optimize peth health. I firmly beleive that pet lovers like ourselves do things for our pets with the very best intentions and their best interest in mind.

Who wants to go to a vet like this a be lectured, chastized and made to feel like a bad owner?

February 24th, 2006, 12:05 PM
i too feed raw but am not hard-core and understand that there are MANY viable alternatives to feeding your pet these days... it was her harsh judgemental and mis-informed ways that shocked me to bits. statement like these:

We all seem to loathe the idea of feeding 'grocery store' dog food, but consider this; the grocery store food comes from huge companies with superb quality control and research programs. It flies off the shelves and doesn't get stale. The billions of pets eating these foods come into the vet's office happy, healthy and glowing. And, they only need to come in once a year for their shots.


These home-made diets may follow a recipe in a book. And of course, if it's printed in a book it's automatically true, correct, authentic, well researched and intelligent - isn't it? If we assume that there is even the slightest provable merit to these diets, we'd next have to ask if the owner has a lab-quality balance to measure every ingredient on, and every other piece of equipment to finish the nutritional analysis of each meal.

Thankfully, most of us (dog owners) recognize that a lot of those books are full of bovine excreta. And nearly all of us (Veterinarians) are laughing all the way to the bank after we fix - if possible - the problems caused by some of the alternative diets to the tune of $5,000.00, more or less, per dog. Many of the problems can't be fixed, and the pet dies. So instead of the extra two years of life Purina has shown us we can achieve, we're opting for illness, pain and early death for our dogs by refusing to feed them appropriately.

...Another note about a wonderful food like the Eukanuba Premium Performance; it is a perfectly balanced food, and it is that precise balance, even more than specific ingredients, that makes it a better dog food. If you are feeding a nutritionally balanced commercial dog food, and you start adding table scraps, raw or cooked meat, chunks of broccoli or carrots, cottage cheese or yogurt, you are unbalancing it. Don't do that, at least don't do it very much.

...have no place, IMO, in a veterinary practice... many people feel they are not "educated" enough to feed their pets and follow their vet's advice like a bible, so if they get a crappy vet like this... it's the pet that ends up suffering :( Anyways, i just needed to vent, thanks for listening!

Lucky Rescue
February 24th, 2006, 12:14 PM
This is why I always tell people NOT to ask their vets for feeding advice, or take what they suggest as law.

Most vets know little about different pet foods and that's okay. They are medical doctors and not nutritionists (or trainers or behaviorists) I just wish they would STOP giving advice on something they know virtually nothing about!!:mad:

February 24th, 2006, 12:26 PM
What a loser. I was going to quote some stuff and bash it, but the whole article is just a load of crap. What a moron.

February 24th, 2006, 04:27 PM
OMG,what a load of garbage and she's a vet:confused:
With my vet,every time I go,she asks what I feed my cats and will make suggestions,but in my case it goes in one ear and out the other:evil:

February 24th, 2006, 07:16 PM
sh** now i gotta feed purina........:eek:

February 24th, 2006, 07:23 PM
LOL Go with the sensitive skin one. It's the lesser of the evil.

February 24th, 2006, 07:40 PM
I just wish they would STOP giving advice on something they know virtually nothing about!!:mad:

:thumbs up Yup I think that would make a world of difference. I wonder how many people feed their pet a brand of food simply because it is sold at the vet's office?

February 24th, 2006, 07:50 PM
i'm guilty of that for our cat........hills prescription diet c\d for year and so far so good......he was put on that while at the vets and just kept on it(scared to change , he almost died due to a blocked urinary tract)

February 25th, 2006, 03:45 PM
IMO, there is one good and useful statement from this article:

"the old adage 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' should leap to mind"

by which I mean, if your dog is thriving and healthy on the diet you are using, you must be doing something right...and who is a better judge of that you, the dog owner?;) Even if you don't have a degree in canine nutrition:evil: .

February 25th, 2006, 07:51 PM
but please do keep in mind that today's perception on what "dog aging" or "dog health" norms are, are quite different from the ideal, thanks to years of deteriorating general health we've grown used to see and accept as "normal"... it is NOT normal to "seniorize" a dog at age 7, to see arthritis set in at 6 or 8 years, to see yellow crusty teeth by age 3, excessive weight, dandruff, bad breath, uncontrollable shedding, etc - plus not to mention all those "old age diseases" such as cancer, renal problems, diabetes, etc in younger and younger dogs.

dogs can and should live a good 15-20+ years with very little health problems (unless genetic), if fed a whole & correct diet. dogs USED to live to ripe old ages without endless trips to the vet & meds, why has that changed? easy... their diets have changed... hmm coincidence? i don't think so... :cool:

February 25th, 2006, 09:18 PM
it is NOT normal to "seniorize" a dog at age 7, to see arthritis set in at 6 or 8 years, to see yellow crusty teeth by age 3, excessive weight, dandruff, bad breath, uncontrollable shedding, etc - plus not to mention all those "old age diseases" such as cancer, renal problems, diabetes, etc in younger and younger dogs.

dogs can and should live a good 15-20+ years with very little health problems (unless genetic), if fed a whole & correct diet. dogs USED to live to ripe old ages without endless trips to the vet & meds, why has that changed? easy... their diets have changed... hmm coincidence? i don't think so... :cool:

Yeeargh! Let me clarify-I should hope NOONE thinks that what you mention at the beginning is "healthy and thriving"-and I agree wholeheartedly that a dog should live to 15+ years without meds and huge disease loads. What I meant was, if whatever way you feed your dog gives you a bouncy, brighteyed, clean-coated and breathed dog, who is some else to tell you that you're doing it wrong?

February 25th, 2006, 10:24 PM
I have a problem with the "dogs USED to live to ripe old ages without endless trips to the vet & meds". Dogs also used to be less noticed and were treated as "dogs". People didn't notice their ailments until they were very serious. Now, people pay more attention to their pets. Like I notice Jemma's eye is a bit redder than the other one, so we head to the vet. Back in the day, nobody would have taken her to the vet for that. Back in the day, nobody would take their dog in for ear infections until they were really bad and the dog didn't stop scratching. People didn't clean their dogs once a week either. People fed farm feed and didn't even know what was in it. When I was younger, the food choices were much, much fewer. It's not the same world for pets at all. It's not that our dogs are necessarily weaker, IMO. To me, we just take way better care of them now than we did before and we know more about the little ailments, too.

February 25th, 2006, 11:22 PM
prin, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. not all dogs "of before" were relegated to tie-outs on the other end of a farm and not all dogs were ignored by their owners - vets did exist before the advent of commercial dog food, there were dog shows and dog groomers galore, etc.

i'm sure you're familiar with this site:


Michael Dym D.V.M - "Over the past 40 years and 17 generations of dogs and, cats we are seeing tremendous increases in chronic ill health in our pets that was rare back in the early 1960's. Most of these illnesses revolve around breakdown in our pets' immune systems, and include chronic skin/ear allergies, digestive upset, thyroid/adrenal/pancreatic disorders, seizures, gum/ teeth problems, degenerative arthritis, kidney/liver failure, and cancer across all ages and breeds. We are also seeing a record number of behavioral and emotional disorders including alarming and unexplained fears/aggression., as well as difficulty focusing/training and paying attention. The analogy of these compared with escalating immune/behavioral diseases in children is quite disturbing. The two biggest factors in our pets' population health decline over these generations has been the severe overuse of multiple vaccines and nutrient poor and toxin filled commercial pet foods. We have also failed to address the underlying cause of disease by only suppressing symptoms with antibiotics, cortisone and related drugs, so the disease progresses and goes deeper.

A growing number of vets are stating that processed pet food is the main cause of illness and premature death in the modern dog and cat. In December 1995, the British Journal of Small Animal Practice published a paper contending that processed pet food suppresses the immune system and leads to liver, kidney, heart and other diseases. This research, initially conducted by Dr Tom Lonsdale, was researched further by the Australian Veterinary Association and proven to be correct.

...the original point of this post was: the author is neither professional nor responsible by publishing and promoting what she does, and i'm sure glad i don't know her personally or fur would fly! :evil:

February 26th, 2006, 07:10 AM
What a fool if she was my vet I would run as fast as I could from that office. I agree we do take better care of our pets nowadays then previously but I also think that has to do with pet owners becoming more educated about their pets. I wish Buddy would live to 15 or 20 but that would be a far stretch on his normal life expectancy mind you I do know of 1 English Mastiff that just crossed to the bridge at 16 years old which is rather remarkable. The owner said he switched his dogs to raw food 6 years ago and his dogs have lived longer and healthier lives since and would not switch back. He claims the money he saves in vetting his dogs throughout the year more than covers the cost of feeding raw.
Technodoll do you feed only raw? I am interested in adding raw to Bud's diet but I cannot do it all raw do to my work schedule. Any suggestions on how and what I should add that would be most beneficial he is 160 pounds give or take 10 he varies from winter to summer. He is 4 years old and pretty much a couch potato but does get lots of exercise not by his choice sometimes he would rather just watch animal planet. He has no real health issues except chronic ear infections in one ear. Which is something that cannot be fixed permanently he has had surgery but it was not successful. That is his only health problem. Thanks in advance for any input.

February 26th, 2006, 07:39 AM
When I was a girl(a looong time ago:D )my Tabby male cat,lived on boiled fishheads(free from the store)table-scraps,drank only whole milk.
Never went to the vet,no shots,no neutering,went outside at night came back in the morning.
I doubt he would have lived to be 20yrs old,as it was he died at 2yrs old after being kicked in the head by a boy on skates:evil:
My mom beat the crap out of the boy and no child-abuse charges..but times have change:thumbs up

February 26th, 2006, 08:01 AM
Sorry I have to agree with Prin on this one. I have had dogs all my life and I am going to go out on a limb and say that I am a lot older than many of you. When I grew up we fed Dr. Ballards from a can to our dog when it was the house. We also fed Gaines Burgers, again when my mom thought to buy some at the store. Most of the time they got people food. Were they healthier? Maybe then they were what we thought was healthy but not by todays standards.
I had a golden that lived to 13 eating Iams all her life except for her last year. She was bred by a byb on a farm. Her mother and father were both farm dogs and not related. I also had a golden that came from champion stock, anyone who knows goldens will remember Gold Rush Charlie. He was her dad and her grandfather. She lived to 9 years old and died from cancer. This is in my opinion the problem with many dogs dying too young. Diseases are being passed on from generation to generation and from being closely bred. This in my opinion is a large part of dogs dying before their time.
While kibble is not perfect it is what I feed my dogs. I choose the best kibble I can afford and the one that I think is best. I did my research.
I often read about how long ago when dogs were wild they ate only meat that they killed etc... The truth of the matter is that dogs have been domesticated for a long time. They no longer have the genetic make up of their wild conterparts.
What really disturbs me is when I read about people who jump on the raw band wagon after reading a few articles or messages from pet message boards without really doing their research. Are they knowledgeable enough to feed this method or recommend it to others? In my opinion no, yet this is what is happening. For anyone considering this method, please be careful, do your research, meet with a holistic vet and get yourself a mentor, (someone who knows dog nutrition and has fed raw for many years succesfully). Buying chicken necks at the butcher and throwing a couple to your dog everyday is not meeting its nutrional needs yet I have heard this on more than one occasion. I have also heard stories from people who fed only chicken and their dogs started eating dirt only to find out it is because there dogs are lacking something in their diet. When changed over to kibble or adding different meats the dirt eating stopped. Raw feeding is a science and must be done correctly.
Please be careful before starting this method of feeding or recommending it to someone.

February 26th, 2006, 08:49 AM
I have been researching for a while now and have spoken with many people feeding raw and I agree you need to do the research it is only now that I am considering part raw. I would go raw but it does not fit in my work schedule but would like to put some in his diet. I have seen amazing differences in some of the dogs on raw just the energy level and it seems to have helped some with their ailments. This is not a rash decision I am just looking for suggestions from those feeding raw. All comments are welcome good and bad it is the best way to learn about something. PS I also remember Gaines Burgers and all the oldies guess cuz I am too

February 26th, 2006, 09:13 AM
I am considering part raw. I would go raw but it does not fit in my work schedule but would like to put some in his diet.

Mastifflover: Just a word of caution that attempting to feed your dog a combo of kibble and raw is not a good idea. Kibble and raw meat digest at different rates and feeding both to your dog can cause serious digestive issues.

I would suggest that you continue to feed kibble to your dog until you feel like you can make the switch entirely.

February 26th, 2006, 09:16 AM

...the original point of this post was: the author is neither professional nor responsible by publishing and promoting what she does, and i'm sure glad i don't know her personally or fur would fly! :evil:[/QUOTE]

Hear, hear! ;) I wouldn't take a "I'm right and you're an ignorant nobody because I'M the professional" attitude from my doctor for sure, so I'm not going to take it from a vet either! I expect to be given information and options, so that I can educate myself and make an informed decision-MY decision.

Yup, information, education and choice. That's what I meant all along, that if you have done your research and have a diet for your dog that works, huzzah! "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.":evil: -no matter what "expert" tells you otherwise!

Imagine, for a moment, that Prin, whose dogs look the picture of health, took them to this vet (gods forbid, Prin, but I hope you don't mind me using you as an illustration:D ). Vet comments on their excellent condition, asks what they are being fed, and then delivers that charming lecture from the article. Would seem kinda ludicrous, wouldn't it?

February 26th, 2006, 10:38 AM
LOL Don't worry, my dogs are at the vet ALL the time. I told the vet, I should just buy a house in the neighborhood to save the gas money. When I was younger and didn't have control, I'd beg my dad to bring the dog to the vet for this or that and he'd say it was a waste of money because it wasn't bad. Now, the slightest swell or whatever and I'm there. Like I said, things like Jemma's eye that aren't bad enough to have external symptoms other than a little bit of redness (and I mean a LITTLE BIT), that my dad wouldn't have gone to the vet for, we're there.

But ya, I've told my vet what they eat, and he didn't say a word. That's why he's still my vet.:thumbs up

February 26th, 2006, 01:09 PM
What I meant to write in my post but forgot is that it is important to do your research before chosing a type of dog food. Whether it be your vet, someone on a message board, your friend or a relative that recommends a food do your research.

February 26th, 2006, 01:28 PM
Actually, technically they are not medical doctors either. They are veternary doctors and while yes, they go through a process to acquire knowledge and there may be fewer of them making it tougher to get into vet school, the standards are quite different. They do go through the same rigourous process- they have an internship but most have no residencies and few are board certified in certain fields. Some will specialize in particular species like feline care but a vet is NOT a medical doctor!!

February 26th, 2006, 10:32 PM
I take offense to that. Not too gravely, but still, it's been bugging me since you posted it.. I wanted to be a vet forever, and I think it's harder to be a vet than a human's doctor in a lot of respects. MDs are specialized. To me that makes it easier. A vet has to be good at consultations, surgery, dentistry, and diagnosis. And there are more and more specializations in the veterinary field, as people become more willing to pay for their pets' wellbeing.

How many MDs have to make a diagnosis as quickly as a vet does? MDs send you for test after test after test and then decide to send you to a more specialized doctor to analyze the results better. Usually, a vet's client doesn't have the patience nor the time nor the money for that. So the vet has to not only diagnose quickly, but market and sell the necessary treatments to the customer to make them look absolutely necessary, or the customer is likely just going to walk away.

The only reason that vets don't have residencies (although some schools do have them) is that if you screw up a surgery or misdiagnose something, there hardly a chance of getting sued. It's like a mechanic botching a job. You can never go back after him. MDs on the other hand are treating "precious" humans, who have very strong policies and legislation protecting them to the death and even beyond that. So the residency is like a learner's permit. You have big guys watching over you so you don't screw up and get everybody sued.

IMO, without a doubt, vets are doctors.

February 26th, 2006, 10:52 PM
i think it's like everything in life: there are good vets, better vets, and crappy ones. same for mechanics, butchers, school teachers - you name it. however, it's sad that we would have to question a vet's credentials in order to find good vet care for our pets, these days way too many seem so eager to make a buck peddling their crappy foods and overpriced meds (quick and easy solution go sick pets, stuff them with more drugs to mask the symptoms) instead of actually treating the pet.

sure they spend years at vet school earning that certificate, and i would HOPE that most of these people are vets because they truly love animals. but from what i've seen over the years, that is not the case. i know PERSONALLY of a vet in my clinic that drinks on the job (he reeks of alcohol and slurs his words), and other vets who have mangled dogs with sloppy surgeries using unsterilized equipment (some of these dogs have DIED), others who just prescribe awful drugs to suppress symptoms of allergies (steroids anyone?) while pushing bottom-of-the-barrel overpriced crappy food as accompaniment to this misery.

and owners just suck it up because they love their pets and would do anything for them, and TRUST that their vet is doing the best thing possible. sadly, this is not always the case. many vets take advantage of their client,s ignorance and just jump on the easy cash wagon. case in point... the article i posted that started this thread. that vet is a lunatic and a danger to her patients, if she has any more that is! :mad:

so... like buying a new car, you have to shop around for a good vet and use referrals from people you know and trust, and not just those framed certificates on the wall. and when you find that good vet, hang on to him(or her)!!

February 26th, 2006, 10:58 PM
For sure there are some horrible vets, but same goes for doctors. Just as there are vets who have never owned an animal in their lives, there are doctors who are so incredibly anti-social you wonder if they've ever talked to a real person in their entire life.

Why do they get into vet school? Because there is a need for them (and the criteria are stupid, JMO). The majority of them work for huge companies or labs, testing products on animals, but a few pretend they're in it for the animals and open their own practice, swindling people out of their money giving false care for their beloved pets. I don't know who is worse.

February 26th, 2006, 11:08 PM
Thanks BMD that was one of my concerns. So I guess we stay on kibble for now.

February 26th, 2006, 11:10 PM
i'll tell you who is worse... well worse off... it's the loving pet owners who trust their pets' lives to these people... the bad vets i mean. :( and what about those "emergency vet centers" who, if you can't produce cash or a valid credit card upon arrival with a comatose dog on your arm, will tell you to go somewhere else? :sick:

February 26th, 2006, 11:12 PM
about feeding raw and kibble... there is NO problem to feed both, just not at the same meal because they have different digestion rates. so feed raw at breakfast and kibble at dinnertime, or vice-versa, and you will have NO problems. trust me, been doing it for a while now :party: and so have many, many others all over the world.

February 27th, 2006, 01:56 AM
Just because you pack the peaches into the can it doesn't mean that you know how they're grown.

People are ignorant, and this vet is a shining example of just that. I'd like to see their degree in nutrition.
Does this vet really expect us to build a research lab in the vacinity of our homes so we can test every single piece of food we give our pets?
Not only is this vet ignorant, their also an idiot. You can't expect every pets need in nutrition to be the same. We're all different and so are our pets.

We owners strive to give our pets a healthy and happy life. Healthy and happy go hand -in- hand, you can't just have one. I'm sure we all would be healthier eating a piece of chicken, rice, and brocolli everyday but gee that sure is boring don't you think? I'm sure pets would feel the same way eating the same foods everyday. So lets let them live a little give them a change. Don't condem our pets to death or a long suffering just because we gave them a piece of chicken skin.
After all we all like to indulge every once in a while, lets give them the same luxury.