Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:30:18 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]You've whimped out Arlo[/quote]

Laughed out loud.

Yes, I guess I did. I'm just acutely aware of how starkly things can read, and even though I know JGW has a hide like a rhinoceros in full kevlar body armour, in a nuclear bunker, I wouldn't want him or anyone else to think that was said without a very large grin on the face.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:22:23 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

JGW, note last comment was accompanied with a smiley (and a large one on the author's face when writing).

[/quote]You've whimped out Arlo it was much better before you diluted it, to think I gave you 5 stars.

As I mentioned before, although I may be giving myself too much credit (as if!), I take responsibility for this, I took the content of one VDS case and used it as the basis of an article in the Vet Times. The Members Only moniker appeared after that.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:17:04 GMT

JGW, note last comment was accompanied with a smiley (and a large one on the author's face when writing).

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:15:42 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]Who, on this site would like content takne elsewhere without asking first?[/quote]

Honestly JGW, you do have quite a penchant for making a mountain, don't you!

It's only a neeeeewwwsletter. If you don't like the Which? analogy, it's not so different to discussing a story read in a newspaper.

I would agree with you if anyone had actually lifted the story and republished it here, verbatim. But that isn't what has happened. Someone has simply recounted the story in their own words. That's what happens in life. Talking of which, you need to get one.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:14:05 GMT

I think the difference with AA is they don't ask their members to keep the magazine confidential VDS do so as far as I'm concerned it's disloyal to discuss with non-members

Wynne

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

J G Wray — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:48:10 GMT

[quote user="alison howell"]It would be more like if an AA member were to lend out their membership magazine. The person borrowing it would not get the insurance. So there must be another reason for the Members Only, of which I'm not quite sure. [/quote]

It was you that gave the detail of the VDS content wasn't it? If you're not sure then why didn't you ask VDS first? You could ask them now of course.

Who, on this site would like content takne elsewhere without asking first?

VDS know their subscribers. That's their strength.

JGW

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

vs0u — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:38:10 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]I subscribe to Which? magazine. Members of VDS discussing matters reported in its newsletter is no different to me telling you that Which? magazine reports in a recent addition that Siemens make a very good dishwasher.[/quote]

I don't know if it's quite the same because if you were to send us all a copy of Which magazine, they might lose out on some potential customers, whereas it costs x£ to join the VDS for a year where x is large, and most of that is not going on 2 sides of a4 of advice they send out three times a year (entertaining though it is).

It would be more like if an AA member were to lend out their membership magazine. The person borrowing it would not get the insurance. So there must be another reason for the Members Only, of which I'm not quite sure.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

vs0u — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:27:57 GMT

[quote user="Cat Henstridge"]I also thought it was a little far fetched to think a single vets comment on a social networking site would spark an internet campaign[/quote]

It does seem odd - say I posted on facebook that I think cigarettes should be illegal as they cause cancer - could I get sued by a tobacco company?

Surely you are allowed to state an opinion based on personal experience/observation?

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:27:33 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]Hmmm, the VDS has been around since 1865 dealing with the vicissitudes of vets. [/quote]

Surely the point isn't how long the VDS has been around. The point is only how long social media has been around. I mean, the VDS could have been around since the Cretaceous era, and it would still have no more experience of social media sites than I do!

I subscribe to Which? magazine. Members of VDS discussing matters reported in its newsletter is no different to me telling you that Which? magazine reports in a recent addition that Siemens make a very good dishwasher.

Actually, there's a nice plug for Which magazine.

And whilst we're at it, this thread is a good plug for the VDS. See, you get a newsletter with content that everyone is talking about. Join the VDS today!

Any organisation that isn't delighted by its members talking about it elsewhere (in neutral or positive terms) must be run by crackpots. I am sure VDS is not!

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

J G Wray — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:57:48 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="J G Wray"]Social media is one of their limits. If they felt it were a space used responsibly, i.e. low risk then they would probably be willing to help, but that's not their experience so far[/quote]

I doubt VDS has any experience so far that social media is high risk for vets. I think they are basing their decision on the fear that it might be high risk.

[/quote]

Hmmm, the VDS has been around since 1865 dealing with the vicissitudes of vets. Vetsurgeon.org and social media have been around for, ahem how long? It has raised a matter in its members only newsletter about indiscretion on social websites by the people they've been working with since 1865 and some vets have, well put its membership restricted content online.

They know their members don't they?

JGW

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Cat Henstridge — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:23:05 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]

Cat

"Three full day vet courses for only £700+vat!"

I assume thats CPD and not an attempt to compete with The University of Surrey's latest venture?

[/quote]

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Mark Holmes — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:21:23 GMT

Cat

"Three full day vet courses for only £700+vat!"

I assume thats CPD and not an attempt to compete with The University of Surrey's latest venture?

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Cat Henstridge — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:14:12 GMT

To be honest when I read that story I just assumed it was made up (unless they all are? I thought they were real) as an example of not getting into trouble on social networking sites. Not only are there several pages on FaceBook dedicated to rubbishing certain flea products, an example, and I am sure plenty of their members are from the veterinary profession, there is loads of information and comment on the internet about it's effectiveness (or lack thereof) and potential side effects. I also thought it was a little far fetched to think a single vets comment on a social networking site would spark an internet campaign and that the source could be traced that easily but maybe I'm wrong!

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Anthony Todd — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 11:22:59 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]I doubt VDS has any experience[/quote]

I find the VDS newsletters required reading to prevent my, and others, falling into the same traps.

I just wish they were all on-line and searchable as, AFAIK, they aren't ,so all I can say or think is "I read somewhere that..."

Password and membership protected though.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 11:07:09 GMT

Thanks Alison.

Hmm, well I haven't seen the post, but I was a flea specialist in a past life (marketed Program for 15 years), and my first reaction is that I would have called the manufacturer's bluff and told them to go whistle. There is plenty of documentary evidence that certain flea products can cause fits and death, and suing a vet, aside from being pretty damaging in itself, would a) likely give greater publicity to the dangers of the product, and b) fail.

But of course, I'm saying that as an unqualified armchair lawyer with a better than average understanding of flea treatments and nothing to lose. I would probably feel differently if I was the the vet being complained about or the VDS.

Ironically, because of social media I am sure we would all know about it if a vet had already been sued for something published on facebook. That being the case, I doubt very much your observation is correct JGW:

I doubt VDS has any experience so far that social media is high risk for vets. I think they are basing their decision on the fear that it might be high risk.

That said, social media and the law surrounding its use is in its infancy, and I agree with you that it is sensible for a mutual not to take any risks.

Not that I think the risk is very high. Most people have enough common sense to know that if they slag something off in the public arena, be it social media or on Speakers Corner, there may be consequences.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

vs0u — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:51:27 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]Wish someone would tell me approximately what the story in the newsletter was all about. [/quote]

The vet in question had treated a cat for the side effects of this particular over the counter flea product (which is well known to cause some severe side effects including fits and death in some cases). He then posted on facebook that he didn't think the product should be allowed to be sold over the counter. This post was then picked up by several other people. The manufacturers complained but following a grovelling letter from VDS accepted an apology and didn't sue. VDS now saying they may not cover claims resulting from social network sites (in the newsletter they also mention a couple of other cases - one where someone gave case details out and another where someone had behaved unprofessionally with a client and then posted it on their status!)

I think they have a point although I think most of us would agree that the flea product in question shouldn't be sold at all - it's not even very effective at killing fleas!

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:46:29 GMT

Sorry Arlo You're not a member so you'll have to remain out of the loop on this one

Wynne

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:40:00 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"] I didn't think I needed to attach a tongue in cheek smiley in the post Arlo, I assumed you'd recognise sarcasm when you read it![/quote]

Sorry, I did read the majority of your post as I think you intended - had me chortling away at my desk - I just took your first sentence to read that the VDS was saying or suggesting you can't discuss or share something written in its publication, which would be absurd of them.

Wish someone would tell me approximately what the story in the newsletter was all about. JGW says something about a vet getting into trouble on a social media site. Which one? Facebook? This one? And what was the offence?

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Bob Russell — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:31:21 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

As the VDS newsletter is marked for Members Only of course we cannot reveal any of the details in it here but suffice to say that the animal in question suffered symptoms typical of those which would be expected with an adverse reaction from the active ingredient with which we are all familiar in the product which was given a pseudonym so we don't really know what it is and the defendant merely reported those symptoms as a fact. Although we can't of course comment on here about this because only 85% of us are members of the VDS it is a safe question to ask what the manufacturers, who we can't name because we don't who they are, have to complain about if the product they sell contained the substance we can't name even though we know the side effects are well recognised, Get it?

[/quote]

Sir Humphrey is clearly alive and kicking (allegedly)!

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

An On MRCVS — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:53:13 GMT

(not at home and forgot password)

The VDS newsletter is about the one thing I miss from my days in practice :( Used to be a good laugh. Why can't they put it online behind a screen so that only vets can read :(

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

james herriot lied — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:13:38 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

As far as I understand the law, we are all perfectly entitled to report and discuss something that has been written about elsewhere, provided it is in our own words (and doesn't therefore infringe copyright). And of course, doesn't break the law or, if you're sensible, open you up to libel proceedings.

[/quote]

There is, as a defence in defamation, a 'fair comment' clause, where one can report on findings from certain bodies - what is said in court, stuff like ofsted reports, and certain expressions of opinion. But there's no defence which involves 'something that somebody else said' as an absolute argument in its own right. Repeating something that has been written elsewhere, which is in itself defamatory, is an offence in its own right - generally referred to as publishing.

Libel laws in this country are an absolute disgrace, and I'd urge everybody with an interest in EBM to acquaint themselves with Simon Singh's libel reform campaign, which is currently pushing for change as the issue is going through parliament. In particular, he's addressing the lack of a public interest defence which would allow medical journalists and researchers to print truths which are unpalatable to those with deep pockets. The government aren't really listening, as per.

Costs of bringing / defending a libel case in this country are 140 - that's a hundred and forty - times that of the global average, and are an anomaly in western law in that the person in the dock is responsible for demonstrating that there hasn't been a defamation, rather than it being the complainant's duty to prove that it has - so it can be very hard to defend. I'd suspect that the VDS didn't want to spend a whole year's worth of income from premiums on one case, so sensibly advised settlement to the company's satisfaction.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:28:26 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[What? As far as I understand the law, we are all perfectly entitled to report and discuss something that has been written about elsewhere, provided it is in our own words (and doesn't therefore infringe copyright). And of course, doesn't break the law or, if you're sensible, open you up to libel proceedings.

[/quote] I didn't think I needed to attach a tongue in cheek smiley in the post Arlo, I assumed you'd recognise sarcasm when you read it!

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

J G Wray — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:08:05 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"] Get it?[/quote]

Um well, no, note really, because you're being too literal. VDS are distancing themselves from responsibility, from a claim, if they are asked to support a MRCVS, if something does go legal or lead to a RCVS complaint. VDS will help if there's veterinary context,but have chosen to limit their liability, as is their prerogative. Social media is one of their limits. If they felt it were a space used responsibly, i.e. low risk then they would probably be willing to help, but that's not their experience so far, so they've issued a cautionary tale. Since VDS is a mutual I'm pleased they are taking this line. Use social media in a particular way and you're on your own, the rest of the profession doesn't have to help seems fine to me.

JGW

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 18:46:45 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]As the VDS newsletter is marked for Members Only of course we cannot reveal any of the details in it here[/quote]

What? As far as I understand the law, we are all perfectly entitled to report and discuss something that has been written about elsewhere, provided it is in our own words (and doesn't therefore infringe copyright). And of course, doesn't break the law or, if you're sensible, open you up to libel proceedings.

Re: Who reads the VDS newsletter?

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 18:31:44 GMT