Metro vet

Re: Metro vet

James Laidlaw — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 06:56:32 GMT

It's also my favourite band...

Re: Metro vet

jd2008 — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 06:19:12 GMT

Found by an Australian highway:

(there's also a regular radio ad over here for a company called Tossers Tools )

Re: Metro vet

Anthony Todd — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 20:51:28 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

Urban dictionary definition:

Tool

[/quote]

Um, sorry you and all the dictionaries have missed out the common antipodean meaning which equates the so-called "tool" to the male sexual organ commonly used in the UK as a "cock" or [older] as that which happens when a injection is given, as well as a nickname for Edinburgh University.

They all mean roughly the same and can be added to the vernacular which rhymes with "anchor" formerly described as a "wally".

All terms of put-downing disrespect, and well-used, IMHO, in the current context, however

play the ball chaps, not the man.

I may be a tool, dick, prick, *anker, cock and wally or all of these but my arguments or comments are sound, or not, as the case may be......but I'm still a etc.....

Although, in the case of the IT overspend, I could be persuaded to break the above admonishment!

Re: Metro vet

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:39:12 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

I get mildly irritated by vets promoting ''fluffy'' pet foods and endorsing fairly average products to encourage the less informed to make a purchase. Some of this is probably based on jealousy because I suspect he is working fewer hours, for a lot more money than me!

That probably makes me a mug but does not make him a 'tool

[/quote] At least you have the courage to admit it unlike some others on this forum.

Re: Metro vet

Bob Russell — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:35:02 GMT

Urban dictionary definition:

Tool
	A person, typically male, who says or does things that cause you to give them a 'what-are-you-even-doing-here' look. The 'what-are-you-even-doing-here' look is classified by a glare in the tool's direction and is usually accompanied by muttering of how big of a tool they are. The tool is usually someone who is unwelcome but no one has the balls to tell them to get lost. The tool is alwasys making comments that are out-of-place, out-of-line or just plain stupid. The tool is always trying too hard to fit in, and because of this, never will. However, the tool is useful because you can use them for things; money, rides, ect." His written comment did provoke some tutting and a few mild but non-complimentary comments from me. Not a helpful thing to write but not crime of the century. I get mildly irritated by vets promoting ''fluffy'' pet foods and endorsing fairly average products to encourage the less informed to make a purchase. Some of this is probably based on jealousy because I suspect he is working fewer hours, for a lot more money than me! That probably makes me a mug but does not make him a 'tool'.

Re: Metro vet

James Laidlaw — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:42:41 GMT

Alright children, let's drop it now.

Re: Metro vet

David Mills — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:17:16 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

[/quote]

Aren't you in your 60s? Peculiar.

Re: Metro vet

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 19:25:06 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]'Tool' is generally reserved for someone of intelligence who is acting temporarily stupidly or irrationaly.[/quote]

Can we have a reference to support this assertation, please.

[quote user="David Mills"]Shouldn't really base an argument on urban dicitionary and the ilk, however.[/quote]

Why on earth not? I certainly understood the term 'tool' to be synonymous with 'fool' and 'cretin' as defined by the urban dictionary. I certainly can't find anything to support your idea that it refers to a person of intelligence who has had a momentary blip.

It's all by the by, anyway. Tool in this context was pejorative. You know that. I know that. We all know that. This forum is not the place for making pejorative remarks about other members of the profession.

Re: Metro vet

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:02:17 GMT

Re: Metro vet

David Mills — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:20:24 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

David or are you just an inveterate troll? Whoops sorry was that an insult?

[/quote]

Quite possibly, though hardly offensive. You really must try harder sweetie; possibly spend more time on your insults as opposed to risible articles and letters in the Vet Times? We know you nurture a soft spot for other members involved in my post, which is your wont. Personally I choose to judge people based on the evidence available - in the case of these three it seems like publicity hungry, wrong advice, trading on their veterinary qualifications. You seemed quite keen to defend them; as you wish. I jst think slightly differently, and suspect I ahve a far deeper insight into this than you think you have.

Mr Gough, thank you for the copy and paste. Shouldn't really base an argument on urban dicitionary and the ilk, however. 'Tool' is generally reserved for someone of intelligence who is acting temporarily stupidly or irrationaly. But you weren't to know that, or suspect interested in my meaning; far easier to have a dig based on previous posts that you didn't agree with, eh? Again, your wont, but it does make you appear ...

Re: Metro vet

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:00:22 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]Calling him a 'tool' is out of order and adds nothing to the discussion.[/quote] And insulting Emma Goodman-Milne when she has nothing to do with the OP is downright cowardly. Have you ever had a good word to say about anyone David or are you just an inveterate troll? Whoops sorry was that an insult?

Re: Metro vet

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 12:09:38 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]No excuse. Initial assessment stands. Mr Guthrie, appears your trigger finger was a little too itchy. Again.[/quote]

I disagree. I'm firmly with Alex.

You are entirely at liberty to form your own judgement of people, and I would be the last person to argue it. However, if your opinion of someone is insulting, you are NOT at liberty to post it here. I draw a distinction between being critical and being insulting. The former is fair game. The latter is not. In this case, you could reasonable criticise Mr Inglis if you felt so inclined. Calling him a 'tool' is out of order and adds nothing to the discussion.

Re: Metro vet

Alex Gough — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 10:47:22 GMT

I think he isn't the only one in breach of the GtPC, pretty sure the RCVS would take a dim view of someone calling a colleague a tool on a public forum, assuming you are using it in the urban dictionary definition as: "One who lacks the mental capacity to know he is being used. A fool. A cretin. Characterized by low intelligence and/or self-steem." and not the freedictionary.com definition of: "

1. A device, such as a saw, used to perform or facilitate manual or mechanical work.

a. A machine, such as a lathe, used to cut and shape machine parts or other objects.

b. The cutting part of such a machine.

3. Something regarded as necessary to the carrying out of one's occupation or profession: Words are the tools of our trade.

4. Something used in the performance of an operation; an instrument: "Modern democracies have the fiscal and monetary tools . . . to end chronic slumps and galloping inflations" (Paul A. Samuelson)."

Don't suppose the narcisstic fool would be too pleased with the description either.

Alex

Re: Metro vet

David Mills — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:41:27 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

[quote user="Rajat"]an we invite him here so we can express our feelings by PM?That way insults are not expressed publicly.[/quote] I do not necessarily condone what was purportedly written by Jo Inglis but may I suggest that we invite him here, not so we can insult him personally, but so that he can defend himself, otherwise everyone is jumping to conclusions from something written in a journal which, as I am fully aware from personal experience, does not necessarily reflect the authors original intention or indeed may even have been ghost written.

[/quote]

1. He has been - one of those most shudderful expressions - a media vet for a loooong time so should know better.

2. If he had any integrity and some junior arts editor had so dramtically perverted his apparent good intentions to the extent he was in breach of the GtoPC, he woulkd resign immediately from his possibly well numerated post. Reminds me somewhat of his ex wife - just give it up for God's sake, V in P was 15 years ago

3. This is a regular column so see 1) or 2) above.

No excuse. Initial assessment stands. Mr Guthrie, appears your trigger finger was a little too itchy. Again.

Re: Metro vet

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:13:08 GMT

Re: Metro vet

Bob Russell — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:56:56 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

I haven't read the column, but from what has been reported here, it seems there's ground for complaint to Royal College for bringing the profession into disrepute by writing something which the reptile experts consider grossly inaccurate

Wynne

[/quote]

Nope it is a vets opinion! Just not one that the exotics experts consider correct! If the RCVS get involved every time vets disagree Belgravia Square will have to move to offices the size of the DVLA!

A daft thing for him to say but sadly not unusual in the profession.

Re: Metro vet

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:18:41 GMT

Wynne

Re: Metro vet

Rajat — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:33:34 GMT

Can we invite him here so we can express our feelings by PM?That way insults are not expressed publicly.

Why has he not advised a consult with a vet familiar with tortoises, because that's what most of us GPs who don't see many tortoises would do and are used to doing routinely. Why should it be different for a practising vet?

Interested to know whether he comes under the umbrella and DC of the RCVS like us lot, or do you not need to be a practising/non practising member to dish out advice in a newspaper column while calling yourself a vet..?

Re: Metro vet

Mark Rowland — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:10:21 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="David Mills"]Mr Inglis, bit of a tool if truth be told[/quote]

I heard he thinks pretty highly of you too.

Seriously, personal insults not allowed on this site, as you know Mr Mills.

[/quote]

It was a judgement based on what I know of him, that is, the self-publicising column he writes in a free newspaper. It is an opinion - what better way to judge a man than by his actions? Not really a personal insult, more a statement of truth as indicated.

[/quote]

Absolutely, I would happily give anyone who gave out such cras advice as this such a label, based on the fact that he is offering counsel on a subject he clearly knows nothing about, cannot be bothered to find out about and risking the life of the animal as a result, be he a member of the public or (worse imo) a veterinary surgeon ( who can access the proper advice very easily).

Re: Metro vet

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:20:48 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="James Laidlaw"]Thanks for perpetuating that sentiment to the public Mr Metro Vet.[/quote]

None other than Mr Joe Inglis. Surprised he'd write that - he's been in the media for long enough to know better. But maybe a sub editor added it.

[/quote]

Been in the meeja for long enough to know what they want written.

Re: Metro vet

David Mills — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:43:59 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="David Mills"]Mr Inglis, bit of a tool if truth be told[/quote]

I heard he thinks pretty highly of you too.

Seriously, personal insults not allowed on this site, as you know Mr Mills.

[/quote]

Re: Metro vet

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:42:31 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Mr Inglis, bit of a tool if truth be told[/quote]

I heard he thinks pretty highly of you too.

Seriously, personal insults not allowed on this site, as you know Mr Mills.

Re: Metro vet

David Mills — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:23:02 GMT

Mr Inglis, bit of a tool if truth be told, has previously told someone in the metro their vet's diagnosis was worng and the letter writer should seek a second opinion. He's almost as bad as the narcissistic fool in the Sunday Times

Re: Metro vet

Mark Holmes — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:48:26 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

As far as the 'expensive' comment, maybe that is a good thing. Tortoise issues can rarely be diagnosed in a consult so maybe people should expect us to do more than just give them a shot of multivits and baytril!

[/quote]

Things are only "expensive" if their value does not justify their cost. Otherwise they are costly.

Re: Metro vet

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:41:25 GMT

That article is just wrong in every way!!!!

That tortoise needs to go the the vet ASAP - 3 weeks with its eyes closed FFS! It is probably already dead! (yep - I have seen those...!)

They are best kept in open enclosures indoors or preferably outdoors when the weather is good.

Am I the only vet who doesn't rave about tortoise tables? If you live in Florida, great. If you live in the UK, especially the North, not so great. They need to be kept in a warm room 24/7 365 - how many people are doing that? I see so many dying tortoises that 'must be OK because I have a tortoise table'. As far as putting them outside being best - words fail me! There will be people rushing to put their hatchling outside because the sun peeped from behind the clouds for a couple of minutes!