[Felvtalk] Realities of Pet Litigation and Yogi update....

ROBERT CHAPEL bchapel at optonline.net
Thu Oct 6 08:52:44 CDT 2016


Amani..

I'm sorry I brought the topic up.... both for not realizing that it 
could spur many " offshoot" conversations and the apparent reality that 
pets lives are not considered important enough to punish those who do 
not pay sufficient attention to their care ( likewise the the penalties 
for animal abuse or the " necessary" killing of an aggressive dog ( we 
can get sent to jail for being TOO mean to someone whose intention it is 
to Rob us but apparently there is no such thing as " excessive " force 
if you don't know how to handle an angry dog.... often times one that 
YOU angered....... it's very disheartening.... I guess I imagined with 
the uptick in fondness for all things " pet " and the addition of laws 
addressing abuse and neglect that these issues were being taken more 
seriously in the court......   but....  We all know that getting ones 
money back from the interior decorator who put up the wrong color 
curtains trumps having your beloved pet killed by a neighbor who "says" 
it was threatening his out of control obnoxious 3 year old who kept 
throwing apples at it.... ( I am assuming all pet related incidents end 
up ( if at all) in Civil Court, or small Claims??..... and PLEASE... no 
need to respond..... just venting my spleen upon learning that we have 
not come as far as I had hoped....
*******  Was going to have Yogi's Right eye removed today but over the 
past couple of days his mood has brightened and there " seems " to be a 
bit of resolution in the clarity of the lens and surrounding 
Hyperemia...... His appetite is fabulous and he is more energetic..  As 
my decision was based on his discomfort weighted against the very real 
risk that he would not make it through the surgery I decided to postpose 
the surgery until such time as I feel that his suffering would warrant 
an operation that could be equivalent to " putting him down".... He's 
such a ratty little thing and really looks the part of a Leuky cat but 
he's MY boy and I love having him around....

Bob


On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 11:53 PM, felvtalk-request at felineleukemia.org 
wrote:

> Send Felvtalk mailing list submissions to
> 	felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	 
> http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	felvtalk-request at felineleukemia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	felvtalk-owner at felineleukemia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Felvtalk digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10 (Amani Oakley)
>    2. Re: Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10 (Amani Oakley)
>    3. Re: FW: FW: Continued Improvement for Bogey on Stanzolol
>       (Amani Oakley)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 19:46:14 +0000
> From: Amani Oakley To: Margo ,
> 	"felvtalk at felineleukemia.org"	
> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
> Message-ID:
> 	
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> You are correct Margo. No vet would consider experimenting if he 
> thought his client might blame him later for things going wrong. But 
> again, that presumes that a whole lot of people seriously 
> misunderstand the realities of litigation and have bought the 
> insurance companies' spin that there are all these crazy people who 
> will sue at the drop of a hat. Sadly, that is probably true.
>
> Amani
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Felvtalk [mailto:felvtalk-bounces at felineleukemia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Margo
> Sent: October-05-16 6:21 AM
> To: felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
>
>
> Funny, my thought was that a Vet would be LESS likely to try anything 
> even slightly out of the norm with a potentially litigious client. 
> That they would go strictly "by the book" in order to be able to 
> defend what they did, should here be a problem.
>
> But then, there are Vets and there are VETS. "My" Vet has her last day 
> at the practice Friday for maternity leave, and won't be back until 
> January. I have no idea what I'll do. She says she'll be available by 
> phone and email, but I have my doubts. Although I DO think she'll be 
> bored ;)
>
> Margo
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ROBERT CHAPEL Sent: Oct 4, 2016 9:03 PM
>> To: felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
>> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
>>
>> Amani...
>> I don't know how things work in Canada but I KNOW that were I a 
>> lawyer I would get more cooperation from my vet....? As Vets begin to 
>> charge more and more and?large corporations begin to?buy up small 
>> practices here in the states the model is now?moving toward the 
>> downside of human medicine.... discrete scheduling time periods to 
>> maximize profits...
>> little time to " discuss" options and an aversion to moving on to 
>> topics that could cause spending extra time.....? As prices rise so 
>> do? owner resentments at not being " cared about" or listened to just 
>> as in human medicine..... and that( at least in the US) is when 
>> lawsuits are most likely to be filed.... Most of us can forgive a vet 
>> making a mistake when we feel he/she has put real thought and concern 
>> into a Tx plan but putting our pets at risk because an alteration in 
>> plan causes him to have to step outside his comfort zone( and spend 
>> some extra time
>> thinking) or simply doesn't appear to care.. That doesn't fly when we 
>> are paying Hundreds of dollars to save our precious pets..
>> Malpractice lawyer pet owners ( or patients in human medicine) are 
>> likely surreptitiously treated with great care when moving through 
>> waters fraught with potential for terminal errors..... and likely get 
>> a bit more cooperation from their vets...?? I am glad for your cats 
>> that you ARE in the profession that you now are...
>> So... it is , in my opinion, both good fortune and a dose of 
>> deferential caution that gets you the kind of cooperation you get 
>> from your vet?????? Yeah.... I'm pretty jaded at this point? : )?? 
>> That is why I HAD to retire a bit early....
>>
>> ?
> .
>
> _______________________________________________
> Felvtalk mailing list
> Felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 20:03:51 +0000
> From: Amani Oakley To: "felvtalk at felineleukemia.org" Subject: Re: 
> [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
> Message-ID:
> 	
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Boy, did that not make sense when I re-read it!
>
> Just to be clear, I was trying to say that most people DO NOT sue at 
> the drop of a hat, but insurance companies have spent a lot of money 
> trying to convince everyone, that we have an over-litigious society. 
> If you look into the spin that people have been hearing for so long 
> about nutty folks suing for everything, you will be shocked at the 
> truth. (For anyone interested in the topic, I highly recommend a 
> documentary called "Hot Coffee" to you. Watch it and be amazed at what 
> you will learn.)
>
> As I mentioned to Bob, I can tell you, as a lawyer, that litigation 
> involving injured or killed pets is almost non-existent because it 
> would never be economically feasible to proceed with such litigation, 
> unless the client is a billionaire and doesn?t care about spending 
> money because there is no way that a court would award that much, even 
> if you were able to prove that a vet was negligent AND that BUT FOR 
> the vet's negligence, your animal would not have been injured or died. 
> Obviously, with a FeLV cat, that second arm of the test is almost 
> insurmountable since you would have to lead evidence that, more likely 
> than not, had it not been for the negligence of the vet, the cat would 
> have been fine. This is quite a hurdle when dealing with a cat with a 
> serious and usually fatal infection like FeLV.
>
> And by the way, even if money was no object and a client wanted to 
> take litigation forward and pay for it with no chance of remuneration 
> at the end of the case, most lawyers wouldn?t take it on because they 
> would very likely be very badly abused by judges, who would be angry 
> that "precious" court time was being "wasted" on a cat. You don?t want 
> to be the lawyer who gets dumped all over by an angry judge, saying 
> you are wasting their time with a frivolous lawsuit. Sadly, that is 
> how one like this would likely be seen.
>
> Amani
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Felvtalk [mailto:felvtalk-bounces at felineleukemia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Amani Oakley
> Sent: October-05-16 3:46 PM
> To: Margo; felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
>
> You are correct Margo. No vet would consider experimenting if he 
> thought his client might blame him later for things going wrong. But 
> again, that presumes that a whole lot of people seriously 
> misunderstand the realities of litigation and have bought the 
> insurance companies' spin that there are all these crazy people who 
> will sue at the drop of a hat. Sadly, that is probably true.
>
> Amani
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Felvtalk [mailto:felvtalk-bounces at felineleukemia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Margo
> Sent: October-05-16 6:21 AM
> To: felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
>
>
> Funny, my thought was that a Vet would be LESS likely to try anything 
> even slightly out of the norm with a potentially litigious client. 
> That they would go strictly "by the book" in order to be able to 
> defend what they did, should here be a problem.
>
> But then, there are Vets and there are VETS. "My" Vet has her last day 
> at the practice Friday for maternity leave, and won't be back until 
> January. I have no idea what I'll do. She says she'll be available by 
> phone and email, but I have my doubts. Although I DO think she'll be 
> bored ;)
>
> Margo
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ROBERT CHAPEL Sent: Oct 4, 2016 9:03 PM
>> To: felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
>> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 10
>>
>> Amani...
>> I don't know how things work in Canada but I KNOW that were I a 
>> lawyer I would get more cooperation from my vet....? As Vets begin to 
>> charge more and more and?large corporations begin to?buy up small 
>> practices here in the states the model is now?moving toward the 
>> downside of human medicine.... discrete scheduling time periods to 
>> maximize profits...
>> little time to " discuss" options and an aversion to moving on to 
>> topics that could cause spending extra time.....? As prices rise so 
>> do owner resentments at not being " cared about" or listened to just 
>> as in human medicine..... and that( at least in the US) is when 
>> lawsuits are most likely to be filed.... Most of us can forgive a vet 
>> making a mistake when we feel he/she has put real thought and concern 
>> into a Tx plan but putting our pets at risk because an alteration in 
>> plan causes him to have to step outside his comfort zone( and spend 
>> some extra time
>> thinking) or simply doesn't appear to care.. That doesn't fly when we 
>> are paying Hundreds of dollars to save our precious pets..
>> Malpractice lawyer pet owners ( or patients in human medicine) are 
>> likely surreptitiously treated with great care when moving through 
>> waters fraught with potential for terminal errors..... and likely get 
>> a bit more cooperation from their vets...?? I am glad for your cats 
>> that you ARE in the profession that you now are...
>> So... it is , in my opinion, both good fortune and a dose of 
>> deferential caution that gets you the kind of cooperation you get 
>> from your vet?????? Yeah.... I'm pretty jaded at this point? : )?? 
>> That is why I HAD to retire a bit early....
>>
>> ?
> .
>
> _______________________________________________
> Felvtalk mailing list
> Felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
> _______________________________________________
> Felvtalk mailing list
> Felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 03:53:06 +0000
> From: Amani Oakley To: "felvtalk at felineleukemia.org" Subject: Re: 
> [Felvtalk] FW: FW: Continued Improvement for Bogey on
> 	Stanzolol
> Message-ID:
> 	
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Amy
>
> I mentioned in a later post that it might be more efficient to call 
> some online vet compounding pharmacies in your area and asking them if 
> they know of any vets who prescribe it. They may not be willing to 
> give you names because of ?privacy? concerns, but explain that you are 
> looking for a new vet, and ask if they would be willing to run it by 
> any potential vets, that the pharmacy can give out his/her name.
>
> Otherwise, I think you may be looking for a needle in a haystack. 
> Moreover, I would guess if there is stigma or caution being exercised 
> by vets regarding prescribing Winstrol, then calling them up cold and 
> asking if they will prescribe it for your cat, may well make them 
> quite nervous.
>
> Amani
>
> From: Felvtalk [mailto:felvtalk-bounces at felineleukemia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Amy Glunt
> Sent: October-01-16 10:07 PM
> To: felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] FW: FW: Continued Improvement for Bogey on 
> Stanzolol
>
> I think it would be really great if we could all compile a list of 
> vets that prescribe the stanzolol, perhaps by state. That would be a 
> really great resource for people who are looking for this information. 
> I'm calling around my city tomorrow to see if I can find any vets who 
> will prescribe it for my cat.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 1, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Sherri Godschalk > wrote:
> Had to shorten this?hope it doesn?t post twice as it went to the 
> moderator because of size.
>
> Good to know about the liver test. I will NOT mention it to my vet.
>
> Since this whole process has started for Bogey and I, I often wonder 
> what logic is used when saying that the side affects from taking the 
> Stanzolol are liver issues, but the side effect of not taking it, is 
> death. I know for me personally, if I was sick and facing this 
> decision, I know what I would do without question. Believe it or not, 
> I read that exact paper you are describing when Bogey was first 
> prescribed the Stanzolol. (Google search) I felt pretty defeated 
> (although many of the terms were over my head) after reading it. I did 
> not notice the dosages though. Doesn?t sound like a very scientific 
> study does it. Maybe we should start our own. Post the names of vets 
> who are willing to prescribe it as well as the results each person has 
> with their pet that is taking it. There again, I am way out in front 
> of myself here because Bogey is not thriving but she did just run into 
> the room with a Q-tip in her mouth (her favorite toy) and 60 days ago 
> she could barely walk into the r
>  oom without laying down. She has also steadily gained weight. Over a 
> pound which doesn?t sound like much but she barely weighed 5 pounds to 
> begin with. Life is still happening here.
>
> It does seem like there is secrecy surrounding vets prescribing 
> Stanzolol. Almost like I am scoring some heroin or something. (no I am 
> not a drug user) From what you found with your other cat, clearly this 
> could be a positive choice for inoperable tumors, and or life 
> extending treatment for senior pets. At any rate, I feel luckier each 
> day that my current vet values the life of my cat enough to try to 
> save her. It sounds like your vet is terrific and that you have a 
> great, long relationship with them. I hope to have the same, one day.
>
> Sherri
>
> From: Felvtalk > on behalf of Amani Oakley >
> Reply-To: >
> Date: Friday, September 30, 2016 at 8:29 PM
> To: "felvtalk at felineleukemia.org" >
> Subject: [Felvtalk] FW: FW: Continued Improvement for Bogey on 
> Stanzolol
>
> Sherri
>
> I wouldn?t recommend you run the liver enzymes. If they rise (and they 
> often do) it will cause your vet to try to get you to stop the 
> Winstrol.
>
> I was running a full biochemistry profile along with the full 
> haematology profile on Zander. So tests like ALP, AST, ALT, TBili and 
> DBili are indicators of liver function. With Zander, they rose 
> sharply, but there was simply no other option but to continue. I had 
> done all my research, tried out the two most likely new and promising 
> therapies (LTCI and Interferon) and they were not at all (I mean AT 
> ALL) helpful. So, discontinuing the Winstrol meant certain death for 
> Zander. I am so glad I ignored the liver enzymes. They settled down on 
> their own, and Zander never had any liver problems after almost a FULL 
> YEAR on Winstrol.
>
> I had another cat with a nasal sarcoma, who was 16 when she got the 
> sarcoma and a tiny skinny thing. I put her on Winstrol because again, 
> there were no really good options. Again, I had a great response, with 
> it upping her appetite dramatically, and keeping the sarcoma in a 
> shrunken state with far less discharge and swelling than prior to the 
> administration of the Winstrol. Her liver enzymes went through the 
> roof and the vet (a very good friend of mine who is the head of vet 
> oncology and a brilliant man) knowing how I feel about Winstrol, just 
> asked if I would agree to discontinue the Winstrol to see if the liver 
> enzymes would reduce. (Very gently. He knew he was on thin ice.)  I 
> did, for a few weeks, then put her back on. She lived to age 19 with 
> that sarcoma, because the Winstrol kept her eating, and happy and 
> strong.
>
> One of the smart folks on this chatline, recently sent me what was 
> likely the stupid vet research publication which likely started the 
> whole ?liver? scare. Look it up because I cannot attach it to this 
> email as it will not go through. The title is, ?Hepatotoxicity of 
> stanozolol in cats? by Kenneth R. Harkin, et. al. in JAVMA, Vol. 217, 
> No. 5, September 1, 2000. Bizarrely, in this study, the authors put 
> the cats on a ?loading dose? of 25 mg intramuscularly, then 2 mg a day 
> by mouth, every 12 hours. So, just for starters, you see that for some 
> reason, they started the cats on TEN TIMES the normal dose, and them 
> kept them on at least TWO TIMES the normal dosefor the rest of the 
> study. Even then, here are some telltale pieces of information:
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Felvtalk mailing list
> Felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Felvtalk mailing list
> Felvtalk at felineleukemia.org
> http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Felvtalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 17
> ****************************************
>



More information about the Felvtalk mailing list