Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Mark Hedberg — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:16:11 GMT

Cool! will try that next time!

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Thomas Johnson — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:19:51 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"].

Sure, ACP and and opioid can be used, but I find ACP unreliable as a sedative.

(my two pence!)

[/quote]

I use a combination of full dose ACP and pre-med doses of Domitor and Torbugesic, which gives very good sedation and good veinous access.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Braden Collins — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 02:01:11 GMT

This may earn me a few red stars but I think it's another way to look at things - a few weeks ago I was driving home and came across a kangaroo that had been hit by a car and both its back legs broken. It was thrathing around on the road and very distressed. It would have taken about 15 minutes to get back to the clinic and get the necessary euthanasia drugs. As I was about to drive back someone else stopped, said they were a hunter and had a knife in the ute that would do the job. The knife was sharp enough to shave the hairs on my arms (checked before used) so the hanter used it to cut the kangaroos throat. It appeared to lose consciousness within a few seconds.

Although this isn't quite by the book, I think that the animals welfare was best served by this bloke euthanasing the animal, as those few seconds of pain that may come from a slit throuat was far better than the 15 minutes of broken legs and attempting to inject a wild animal.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Mark Hedberg — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:19:59 GMT

[quote user="Lorna McHardy"]

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]

Sedation doesn't have to be traumatic - medetomidine and torbugesic make a great many euthanasia's much lower stress. 5-10 mins, dog settles down for a nap, and then the vein. The cephalic isn't significantly harder to hit, in my opinion. The vasoconstriction exists, but the vein's don't magically disappear. There's still a diameter there.

Sure, ACP and and opioid can be used, but I find ACP unreliable as a sedative.

(my two pence!)

[/quote]

I agree, would never use acp/opioid for a dog that needs sedation before euthanasia - not reliable enough. What I meant was that some dogs are so stressed simply by being in a consulting room that it doesn't matter what you inject them with. And moreover, dom/torb stings a bit, which doesn't help either, but that's a minor issue compared with the stress of just being at the surgery and having something - anything - done to them. They're a minority, those, but a significant one, I think.

[/quote]

Both excellent points. I try my best to get an accurate weight, but you're right, sometimes a euthanasia simply won't go the way you want. I guess it's back to "communicate, communicate, communicate" and try to schedule them for end of consults or something!

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Lorna McHardy — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:43:27 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]

Sure, ACP and and opioid can be used, but I find ACP unreliable as a sedative.

(my two pence!)

[/quote]

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Mark Hedberg — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:30:46 GMT

Sure, ACP and and opioid can be used, but I find ACP unreliable as a sedative.

(my two pence!)

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Lorna McHardy — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:12:02 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

now if we followed the example of many other occupations, and gave staff time off and post-traumatic stress counselling every time they had to kill a curable animal-then the fees would be astranomical-but perhaps our suicide rate would improve

Wynne

[/quote]

Ouch.

Regarding methods of dispatch... being shot cleanly by a trusted owner when just back from a favourite walk is certainly going to be a lot less stressful for the dog than being driven to a place of tension and injected by a scary vet using, if necessary, a muzzle and a nurse with a good grip. I for one have carried out quite a few euthanasias that were arguably inhumane, despite my best efforts to make it as atraumatic as possible. Even sedation can be very stressful. The vast majority go smoothly and peacefully, but I still, after nearly 20 years, heave a sigh of relief every time one does.

Problem is... if owners are, in principle, legally permitted to euthanase their animals, how do you make sure it's done as humanely as possible with each individual? Most people don't have access to suitable means.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Bob Russell — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:49:55 GMT

Has anyone bothered contacting the BBC asking why a veterinary opinion was not included? It is easy to email Radio 2. Most of us have the ability to send an email so why should it be the BVA that 'jumps in' with a defence. I didn't hear the original item but those of you that did could spend a couple of minutes dropping them a line.

The BBC can easily contact them for comment, perhaps they just forgot!

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:44:26 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Mr G, I think you misunderstand my post.[/quote] Sorry if I did.

[quote user="David Mills"]But, rather, imagine you are a producer of the show and you are looking for a vet slant on the whole thing. Who would you turn to? The Voice of the Profession would be a good start, or the RCVS - both surely have gravitas and detailed knowledge.[/quote]

Yes, but in this case, the point is that they were obviously NOT looking for a vet slant. Now you might think they should have, and I might even agree with you. But it's categorically not the fault of the BVA or the RCVS that they decided to have the Kennel Club comment instead. What neither you nor I know is how many calls a day that the RCVS / BVA get from media outlets that DO consider them the first port of call. To criticise them because one didn't is statistically wrong!

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

David Mills — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 23:31:36 GMT

Mr G, I think you misunderstand my post. I didn't mean they should have been on the show through knowing their production team. But, rather, imagine you are a producer of the show and you are looking for a vet slant on the whole thing. Who would you turn to? The Voice of the Profession would be a good start, or the RCVS - both surely have gravitas and detailed knowledge.

Now either:

1. BVA didn't feature because despite their claims they aren't prominent enough generally (PR failing)

2. They were invited to attend or comment and didn't (PR failing).

If 2, it's a shocking misjudgement, possibly mitigated by the ineffeciency and autocratic nature of things coming out of the organisation; if 1, then this is a more chronic failing of the PR department to actually be a representative voice. Which rather leaves the political ambitions of BVA looking a little silly.

The second strand, incidentally, was the complete absence of any mention of this in any press release - I've had at least 20 clients talking about it, with a variety of takes, and indeed misinformations about actual events that took place. This is, of course, meant to be BVA, a membership organisation, looking after members interests. Would an email outlining what actually happened, how to tackle difficult financial questions from people should they ask about it, be too much? Wouldn't have thought so.

We've been here, before, recently. Perhaps they were too busy being proactive, providing soundbites on TB or somesuch.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:47:44 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Surely one would think the voice of the profession, the BVA, pays its PR people to get to stories like this? Nothing on their website, as it happens. [/quote]

Fundamental misunderstanding of how PR works, David. How would you expect the BVA PR people to know that Jeremy Vine (in this case) was about to run a story about this? The answer is they can't, unless they have a good relationship with the production team. It's quite impractical for a PR to have a relationship with every production team in the country, or for a production team to have a relationship with every PR in the world, so that's not a practical solution.

Sure, there are things that one can do to make it more likely that you'll be contacted by the media for an opinion, but that's the best you can hope to achieve.

As I keep saying, why don't you ask the question (i.e. "Sally, why wasn't BVA asked to comment about this, and what can be done to make it more likely in the future?), instead of the sarcasm?

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

David Mills — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:14:52 GMT

Surely one would think the voice of the profession, the BVA, pays its PR people to get to stories like this? Nothing on their website, as it happens.

Another national news story? Nah, we won't bother with that. Again. Pass the non-free-range sandwiches and biscuits, duck.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Chris Barker — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:28:29 GMT

As an aside...

No-one has mentioned the fact that the said Vine program did not contact a vet for a comment - the in-studio 'commentator' was a bod from the Kennel Club

And this is where the profession sits - way down the list when comment is required

Chris B

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Gillian Mostyn — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:48:03 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

Possibly. But it really only needs to cover time.... the drugs and materials are cheap eh?

[/quote]

And of course a professional fee to cover your time, your nurses time, and your professionalism and expertise in carrying out an examination, discussion and actually carrying out the procedure. Also lets not forget cost of drugs, consumables, storage, natural wastage, buying and running a freezer, wages, heating, rent, rates etc etc - No, the fees charged are generally more than reasonable. What would 10-15 minutes of a lawyers time cost?

[/quote]

When I say 'time' I mean our costs - not my personal income! In the same way surgical time doesn't just cover the vet';s wage!. I agree that our time is valuable - I was simply saying there isn't much cost involved in the procedure apart from that.

Speaking of lawyers - I had a bit of a query and rang my solicitors for advice. I had a 30min free consultation today (albeit with a junior staff member no doubt) which did actually clear up the problem. Pretty good really. (Although he offered to send a letter for me, for £100 +VAT).

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:08:25 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]A shotgun would not (imho) be suitable Admittedl;y I've never actually seen the effects of a shotgun at point blank range to the skull,but I wouldn'tbe happy about it without proof it didn't hurt [/quote]

I have used a shotgun a number of times to euthanase cattle and it is very effective and little mess.

I will link a picture of a cow with a broken leg that I shot with a 12G shotgun using a standard game cartridge at about 12"

Link

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:23:21 GMT

As long as they're pre-stunned, I've no problem-but I do object to some people being allowed tobreak a law intended to protect animal welfare

Wynne

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Rob Davis — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:18:58 GMT

[quote user="Dave Cumber"]I was slightly concerned that the closing comment was from a pig-farmer who had shot his cat in the back of the head with the comment that the cat was scared of vets and that the bullet only cost a few pence!![/quote]

I'm not sure that this is cause for concern. I think a firearm in the hands of a properly skilled (and licensed) person is an acceptable means of euthanasia ("good death"). It would be instantaneous and pain free, and as has been mentioned above, would not involve a stressful journey in a cat basket etc. It may not be aesthetically to everyone's taste, but ethically I don't see a problem with it.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Tim Cheyne — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:51:29 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

I also think the derogation for religious slaughter should be removed-after all what about the human rights of a co-habiting, alcoholic who wants to move to an Arab country.[/quote]

I see the point that you are making, Wynne, and I agree about the religious slaughter but your comment is a bit 'shotgun' (pardon the pun). Alcohol is legally available to non-Muslims in a number of Arab countries, it is here, and we have just received legal access to pork (genuine bacon and eggs for breakfast!).

Also there have been recent suggestions that the derogation will be removed in UK soon (and that applies to Jewish slaughter too) plus a report that more than half of the animals ritually slaughtered in UK are pre-stunned,

Tim.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Bob Russell — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:33:18 GMT

You charge what it costs for cremation plus what it cost you to provide the service and you charge extra to make a profit. If you do not make a reasonable profit you will need to hike charges elsewhere, cut costs and income or shut up shop!

Taking one charge and critisising it because it varies and generates profit is so typical of a proportion of the profession. No profit, no business, no job!

£60 all in may be appropriate for one practice and £160 may be just as appropriate in another. Look at the overall profit a practice owner is making and judge that!

Mid-range cars and mid-range lifestyles are the norm for probably 95% of practice owners. No profiteering just issues of perception! The grumbling/vocal clients will grumble just as much even if you halve your fees.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Judith Joyce — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:44:17 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]Euthanasia has costs to the practice beyond that of the pentobarb.[/quote]

Yes.

Malcolm N

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Mark Holmes — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:38:38 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

A shotgun would not (imho) be suitable Admittedl;y I've never actually seen the effects of a shotgun at point blank range to the skull,but I wouldn'tbe happy about it without proof it didn't hurt

[/quote]

Believe me it wouldn't hurt. in fact on our firearms course it was cited as the best means of euthanasing a pig. Shot gun 10 cm from the skull. All the pellets enter as a lump of lead but then don't exit as they quickly lose kinetic energy.

The other thing is you need to consider if the death is more stressful than the time taken to obtain treatment. I know a farmer who's dog ended up in his combine. The result was not pretty but still alive. He was miles away from any help. He battered it to death with a wrench. The distress the dog would have experienced otherwise was greater then the few blows to the head. If he had to cut its throat one could not have critisised him if that were the quickest and only available solution.

With regards to the price of euthanasia, we need to consider the psychological effects on us of killing regularly, it may even be responsible to a large degree for the profession's suicide rate. Euthanasia has costs to the practice beyond that of the pentobarb.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:19:54 GMT

The cost of euthanasia should be based on at least whatever the practice normally charges for consultation etc. I don't think it benefits anyone to start quoting prices on this forum but suffice to say I practice in Greater London and my fees overall reflect this. So in my case the fee for euthanasia will be a consultation fee, an injection fee and the cost of the drugs I've used with a 100% mark-up. If we're then talking about the cost of disposal, there is the cost of the freezer, rent for the space it takes up, the electricity to run it, a body bag, CPC charge me £30 + VAT before they even collect anything so if there is only one body to collect it has to be added to cost of the cremation fee which also should have a mark-up of at least 50%. Funny, how some people lose sight of the fact that we are running a business and if we don't make a decent profit our business will die and there will be no-one here to help them even they did want to pay us. There will always be some vet who wants to undercut everyone else, I doubt in many cases it is through a philanthropic urge more likely to get business off rivals. Don't lose sight of the fact that euthanasia (as opposed to just killing something) is a skilled procedure that very few people are trained to do or have the equipment to carry out - why shouldn't we charge for that skill? I am prepared to lower my charges in cases of 'genuine' hardship or to help charitable clients.

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:03:50 GMT

Mariette My cremation service only collects once a week-there's an extra charge for specialcollections in-between -and the charge for returning a large dog's ashes is £120

Wynne

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:01:10 GMT

It's not who kills an animal that's important It's whether or not it's done humanely

I would have no problems with killing an animal with a rifle at point blank range to the head

A shotgun would not (imho) be suitable Admittedl;y I've never actually seen the effects of a shotgun at point blank range to the skull,but I wouldn'tbe happy about it without proof it didn't hurt

Slitting an animals throat would definitely not be suitable-and I alsothink the derogation for religious slaughter should be removed-after all what about the human rights of a co-habiting, alcoholic who wants to move to an Arab country

When time is taken into consideration,and mental stress on practice personel who have to perform sometimes unnecessary killings-young dogs for example, most practices certainly don't overcharge-now if we followed the example of many other occupations, and gave staff time off and post-traumatic stress counselling every time they had to kill a curable animal-then the fes would be astranomical-but perhaps our suicide rate would improve

Wynne

Re: Jeremy Vines show Friday 9th December

plantagenet — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:20:37 GMT

Thats the euthanasia only charge - not cremation. Since I don't sedate every dog I reckon it evens out. I suppose the euthanasia itself is not something I want to 'make' much out of, most are clients who may have had a lot of treatment up till then. Cremation and especially individual cremation will make the profit for me. A big dog, on its own, if pre-sedated may not actually turn a profit but, being totally business minded - there's nothing like a good euthanasia to win you the client or the next pet.