kayla1
-
Posts
1,284 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by kayla1
-
-
One of my dogs, Annie, has recently started chemo and I'm interested in hearing about experiences of others that have been through this.
Annie was diagnosed with MCT grade 3. A specialist surgeon was able to remove the tumour, and she is now seeing an oncologist and holistic vet. But being grade 3, the prognosis is poor. Her chemo protocol is alternating CCNU and vinblastine. I'm not sure about palladia yet. She had her first treatment last Tuesday, and she's been great with no sign of side effects. But we've hit a bump in the road this week as her blood tests have shown a very low WBC. She had started ABs anyway last week, and this will continue, and no more walks until her next blood test.
The oncologist did tell me that many dogs get no side effects, but some do. But gee it's a stressful time (for me!), and I'm guessing it's going to be a bumpy road. Do you have any experiences with chemo?
-
This is the abstract from the study, from here
QuoteCanine parvovirus (CPV-2) is an important cause of hemorrhagic enteritis in dogs. In Australia the disease has been associated with CPV-2a and CPV-2b variants. A third more recently emerged variant overseas, CPV-2c, has not been detected in surveys of the Australian dog population. In this study, we report three cases of canine parvoviral enteritis associated with CPV-2c infection; case 1 occurred in an 8-week-old puppy that died following acute hemorrhagic enteritis. Cases 2 and 3 were an 11-month-old female entire Saint Bernard and a 9-month-old male entire Siberian husky, respectively, both which had completed vaccination schedules and presented with vomiting or mild diarrhea only. Full genomic sequencing of parvoviral DNA from cases 1, 2, and 3 revealed greater than 99% homology to known CPV-2c variants and predicted protein sequences from the VP2 region of viral DNA from all three cases identified; glutamic acid residues at the 426 amino acid residue, characteristic of the CPV-2c variant. Veterinary professionals should be aware that CPV-2c is now present in Australia, detected in a puppy and vaccinated young adult dogs in this study. Further characterization of CPV-2c-associated disease and its prevalence in Australian dogs requires additional research.
-
4
-
-
I'm very sorry to hear that. What a beautiful photo of your little girl. Run free Stella.
-
...Pros & cons as in health issues
wrt your concerns about health issues you might also be interested in this thread http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/267474-vaccichecklooking-for-interested-dog-owners/.
There are statistics showing that the average live span of dogs declined over the last years by approx. 11%, despite new science, better (?) food and better (???) medical care, and there are strong hints that over-vaccination and de-sexing play a major part in the shorter life span. http://www.doglistener.co.uk/why-are-our-dogs-dying-so-early
There is nothing in that link to support your claims.
The link you have provided is an opinion piece, not an academic study. Furthermore, if you go to the original source, you'll see that the results are descriptive statistics only. So no conclusions can be drawn about any associations with desexing etc. You also cannot conclude that there is a difference in lifespan; as is noted, the surveys are not comparable because there were substantial differences in the way they were conducted.
This is why you need to review and understand the literature before using it in an attempt to support your argument.
-
this is a good start for reading: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf
and here the result of a recent study http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241
Not really. Much of the research examining risks for certain types of cancers and joint disorders is breed-specific. For example, the second article you linked to is a study of labs and golden retrievers. Findings from studies such as this cannot be generalised to other breeds. So not very helpful for the OP who is getting an SBT.
There are more recent and more rigorous academic studies reviewing current literature which conclude that, in general, the benefits of desexing likely heavily outweigh the risks. That's without even considering the benefits of reducing the number of unwanted dogs being dumped at pounds.
...and you will enlighten us and publish the links to those 'more recent scientific studies' that contradicts the findings of the papers I provided?
I'm not going to do your research for you. I have enough of my own to do. :laugh:
Also, I'm not going to post articles that I have access to as an academic, as not all are publicly available.
Before taking such a strong stance against desexing, it would be beneficial to do a more thorough and objective review of the academic literature beforehand (you will find relevant articles if you do this). Then if you decide to post study findings in an attempt to support your argument, you need to ensure that you have a good understanding of the study methodologies/limitations etc.
-
this is a good start for reading: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf
and here the result of a recent study http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241
Not really. Much of the research examining risks for certain types of cancers and joint disorders is breed-specific. For example, the second article you linked to is a study of labs and golden retrievers. Findings from studies such as this cannot be generalised to other breeds. So not very helpful for the OP who is getting an SBT.
There are more recent and more rigorous academic studies reviewing current literature which conclude that, in general, the benefits of desexing likely heavily outweigh the risks. That's without even considering the benefits of reducing the number of unwanted dogs being dumped at pounds.
-
By Paul Newson, Interim CEO GRNSW. Extracts below, full article here
Denials, Cover-ups And A Lack Of Transparency Killed Greyhound Racing In NSW
I took up the interim Chief Executive role at Greyhound Racing NSW on 19 February 2015, only days after the disturbing and deeply troubling revelations by 'Four Corners' and associated media reports that the previous GRNSW management had scrambled to appoint "some dog whisperer with a PhD" as a way of deflecting criticism about the live baiting scandal.GRNSW was an organisation under siege, and when I tried to engage with industry I was confronted by belligerent fuelled denial. Participants were angry and indignant at what many believed was an unjust invasion of privacy. A criminal act suffered at the hands of the animal activists.
While difficult to comprehend at the time, the primary, and perhaps not unreasonable concern in other circumstances, of most participants was the uncompetitive prize money offered in NSW.
Self-interest persisted as the underlying agenda.
Very early on, participants impressed upon me the fractured and bitter nature of the industry where recriminations were rife, capable leadership was sparse and the more formal structures were encumbered by antiquated views and inertia. Mostly, participants were aggrieved and bent on righting past wrongs. The industry showed limited self-awareness, was unwilling to take responsibility and the regulator had been missing in action.
While horrific, the spectre of live baiting, whether endemic as was suggested to me or aberrant as the limited number of convictions argue, was never the issue that would be fatal to greyhound racing. The historical disregard for adequate oversight was repaired. GRNSW is vigilant and within the limits of its enforcement powers is holding industry to account.Greyhound racing might have been able to rebuild its social licence when the veil was lifted on live baiting. We all accept that mistakes can be made, even very bad mistakes, but when you won't admit your mistakes and therefore aren't prepared to change, the public decide you aren't misguided or mismanaged but you meant to do it and are therefore inherently bad and can never be trusted.
This should be the key lesson for other industries facing controversy.
Vilification of anyone who dared to be critical of them, including me, remains a fundamental feature of the industry. Not only did they deny live baiting they were outraged at the animal welfare groups and 'Four Corners' who caught them and at the public that didn't understand why what they did wasn't really so wrong after all. People kill animals for commercial gain all the time, they still argue.
Tellingly, these weren't the outliers of the industry; many were the core, high profile owners, trainers and breeders and much of the past leadership of greyhound racing in NSW.
Those who denied the systemic challenge of over-breeding, excessive injuries and unnecessary killing of greyhounds despite the mounting evidence, and fought tooth and nail against GRNSW initiatives, put themselves above the greyhound racing industry's integrity and reputation.
Attempts to tether the institutional killing of surplus greyhounds as akin to the human food chain are as naive as they are specious. The industry was even more unlikely to recover community trust when light was shone on the scale of the over-breeding and unnecessary euthanasia was revealed in the Commission hearings. If there is any blame for the loss of acceptance and support it undoubtedly lies here. From within the failure to value authentic engagement with stakeholders and adequately monitor and report across the greyhound lifecycle let down industry's salt-of-the-earth participants, the law abiders, animal welfare upholders and long-timers who love their sport.
The previous GRNSW management's failure to acknowledge and meaningfully respond to the problems in the industry also weighed heavily in McHugh's [special Commissioner] deliberations. The Commission found there was a failure of transparency and even more troubling, information was withheld from the punters and the public, both as to nature and severity of injuries and related euthanasia suffered by greyhounds at race meetings. A further death blow to trust and credibility.
There is no doubt greyhound racing makes a valuable social and economic contribution to NSW. We attempted to tell a persuasive story around this in our submissions to the Commission; however, as compelling as the story may be it couldn't overcome the voluminous evidence about callous practices. The exact amount of wastage is unimportant, everyone could see it was substantial and in any case for many people one healthy dog killed to sustain a wagering product is one to many.
Live baiting denials, the cover-up of poor practices, the lack of transparency about on track injuries and deaths, the numbers of dogs that were killed for the sport to continue and counter claims they loved their dogs deeply just didn't stack up -– every denial and every spurious argument and the divisive fighting with critics, helped to further destroy trust and credibility.
In the end a former Justice of the High Court deemed the sport in NSW was incapable of reforming itself and, sadly for the many good participants and for those within GRNSW that worked tirelessly on the reform program, this was true.
-
The point of this exercise was to HIGHLIGHT how flawed ALL figures used against greyhound racing are extremely flawed. Even McHugh admitted this, and Dawkins has now backed him up. We can’t be ending industries based on such “iffy” stats and figures, that will leave every single animal sport and industry, including pets open to severe punishment, such as being outlawed
As far as I know, the industry in Tasmania is not being shut down.
No industry is being shut down 'based on such iffy stats and figures'. The NSW greyhound racing industry is being shut down due entirely to its own failings. In the decades during which it has been operating, it has failed utterly in its responsibilities in relation to animal welfare. There have been plenty of opportunities for the industry to reform, but it has failed to do so. The opportunity to clean up the industry has now long since slipped away.
-
The article and report is available here
Greyhound death toll report reveals 1,600 dogs died in Tasmania over three years
More than 1,600 racing greyhounds have died in Tasmania over the past three years, including 500 because they were unsuitable for racing, according to government figures obtained by the Greens.Injury was responsible for another 488 deaths, while 400 were destroyed because they were deemed unsuitable for re-homing, a Department of Primary Industries document shows.
The Greens obtained the document via Right to Information.
Earlier this year, nine dogs were killed in one day in the north west, and in 2013 more than 30 dogs were killed on a single day in Launceston.
-
"I don't use the word "pet." I think it's speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship enjoyment at a distance." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223. - See more at: http://www.naiaonlin...ts-movement#Own
It was coined by Ingrid Newkirk the president of PETA as the reference above. And you will find the words began to be used in the 90s
The term 'companion animal' wasn't coined by Ingrid Newkirk. The term was in use long before PETA was even founded.
I don't see any problem with companion animal being used as a descriptive term.
Good luck with your research, Clare.
-
I've been told the same thing, that there's not much you can do to avoid recurrences. My old girl Kayla had several episodes - one episode had a long recovery time but she recovered to about 90% eventually. She always had a head tilt after that. She also had physio and regular acupuncture, which helped her move more freely.
Maxie also has transient (not geriatric) vestibular episodes with unknown cause. The specialists have said as long as he continues to recover quickly after each episode then there is nothing to do, and no way of avoiding future episodes.
So, apart from keeping her as healthy as possible, I think it's mainly a matter of managing episodes as they occur. Hopefully it's a one-off and she won't have any further episodes.
-
Personally, assuming it hasn't spread, I would probably opt for surgery.
One of my dogs Maxie had a soft tissue sarcoma removed. He had a CT scan first to make sure it hadn't spread. The surgery was very complicated due to the location of the tumour, so it meant removing a lot of tissue and rib, replacing the abdominal wall with mesh, and reconstructing with skin grafts. Maxie is really active and loves ball playing, so obviously I was beside myself with worry. But I needn't have been, because all went smoothly and Maxie was fine! The specialist surgeon got clean margins and the surgery was a complete success.
Of course he had restricted exercise during recovery. So I replaced all his toys with ones that had grip, so they wouldn't slip out of his mouth and he wouldn't be tempted to make any sudden movements to grab them. I started off just handing him the toys and not throwing them, then gradually built up to little throws, then bigger throws etc. I slept on a mattress on the floor in the lounge room for weeks so he wouldn't be tempted to jump on the bed etc. All up it was about three months before he was running without restriction. He was given the all clear a little bit sooner, but I held off for the three months for my own peace of mind!
So surgery has given Maxie quality, and quantity, of life. :)
As others have said, the best thing would be to see the oncologist to get all the information. Then you can make an informed decision. All the best.
-
With a baby on the way, perhaps consider a session with a behaviourist - something like this
A behaviourist could help you deal with the current issue and also give you the tools to hopefully prevent any further issues when the baby arrives.
-
Actually you're just confusing classical conditioning with operant conditioning. Pavlov is always on your shoulder.
By the way, clarifying your statements with "IMO" does not make you right.
...that's why it is called 'opinion'...and everyone is entitled to his/her own :)
You are indeed. Those who understand the science have taken considerable time and effort trying to explain learning theory. My opinion is that you are not interested in gaining any further knowledge - look up confirmation bias in Wiki.
...and belief perseverance.
-
Willem - not quite. Positive punishment ADDS something to DECREASE the likelihood of a behaviour occurring again. If anything it's -P BUT "punishment" doesn't describe the dog's emotion but the outcome.
hm, IMO it depends on what becomes the 'normal' scenario. A dog used to treats (or a pat) if he makes the right choice get used to it...I recall my dog and she comes as she knows she gets the treat, and sometimes she even comes without having here called, sits in perfect heel position and her eyes asking me, 'hey where is my treat, that was a perfect recall...come on..'...so this behaviour becomes the 'normal scenario' after intensive training. If she does a lousy job I can 'add' the scenario where I refuse to give here the reward...IMO a positive punishment once the good behaviour pattern with the reward is established.
You add/remove a stimulus, not a 'scenario'. The stimulus in your example is treats. You are withholding the treats, which as others have already explained, is negative punishment.
-
Sending my condolences to everyone who lost a special friend this year. Christmas can bring up all the feelings. I lost both my dogs this year, rather suddenly to cancer. Bella in February then her daughter Heidi in November. I've been too sad to talk about it but this morning was one of the hardest. This is the first Christmas I have truly spent alone in 30 years, I miss my dear girls so much. I am grateful to have been blessed to have them, they were such beautiful dogs. Sending hugs to others missing someone and season's greetings.
Here are some little pics of them snuggled up together, a common sight.
Pic 1/ Heidi and Bella. Pic 2/ Bella and Heidi. Pic 3/ Heidi, top cuddles Bella.
Such beautiful girls.
Just devastating to lose both. I'm so sorry LabTested.
-
Gee that's a tough situation to be in.
You've got some great advice here already. Good luck and I hope Nellie continues to improve. Sounds like he is very lucky to have you!
-
May your beautiful girl be forever in your heart.
-
The RSPCA is simply getting with the times and acting based on the numerous studies that show that low cost or free adoptions do not impact negatively on the outcomes of those pets, or their worth to their owners. Studies have also shown that pets given as gifts are less likely to be given up compared to animals purchased from breeders, pet shops or animal shelters.
Time to throw out the crappy old rhetoric and get pets out the front door, rather than out the back in a body bag. Nothing like killing them to 'protect' them from the 'irresponsible public'!
http://www.teamdog.com.au/need-talk-free/
“Dogs who came from an animal shelter, friend, or pet shop or who had been a stray were at increased risk of relinquishment compared with dogs who entered households as gifts”.
The findings of the study in your link do not support your assertion that low cost/free adoptions have no negative impact on outcome.
The researchers in this study found that dogs obtained at no cost, or at a cost less than $100, were at an increased risk of relinquishment.
It's good to provide links to studies, but beware of confirmation bias.
-
Thank you for your thoughts and kind words.
I had been really struggling with thinking about the right timing for Kayla - when I lost Coco, he became very sick quite quickly and he made it very clear when it was time. But with Kayla, it's been a very gradual decline with lots of ups and downs.
-
My first dog, my heart dog.
Even though I knew this time was coming, I still can't believe you're not here. Age caught up with you in the end, and today it was time for you to run.
You were the best dog I could ever have hoped for. I can't put into words how much you meant to me, gorgeous girl.
Run free now with Coco, and enjoy endless cuddles from Mum. I'll see you again Kayla, in time.
Love you so much, my beautiful girl xxxx
-
Sorry to hear this, Sheridan.
Run free together Mini and Grumpy.
-
If mine have an empty tummy morning vomit, then they'll jump off the bed first and vomit on the carpet.
They've always been really good though - they sleep when I do and get up when I do, and if they do get off the bed or ask to go outside during the night then there's usually a good reason.
Plus this time of year, it takes a lot for Annie to crawl out from under the doona. :laugh:
-
If it were me, I wouldn't be waiting until morning.
Late one night I noticed Annie's eye wasn't right, so I took her to the after hours vet immediately. Turned out to be uveitis, thought to be caused by trauma (not sure how, I didn't see it happen), so luckily we caught it very quickly and she was fine.
Hope it turns out to be something easily fixed.
Chemo Experiences
in Health / Nutrition / Grooming
Posted
I'm not sure of the cancer treatment programs that you mention, but the goal of cancer treatment in dogs is to provide both quality and quantity of life. If the dog is suffering from the stress and the strain of any treatment, then I would question whether that treatment is the best option. I decided to pursue chemo with Annie after much research, and with the knowledge that it will provide her with the best possible opportunity to enjoy both quality and quantity of life. It has been stressful for me, but I'm lucky in a way because Annie's treatment has coincided with my long service leave so I'm home most of the time and can spend a lot of time with the dogs.
Yes, it is expensive. Maxie had cancer surgery a few years ago at a cost of $7k. He is alive and well today thanks to the skills of a brilliant surgeon. Annie's surgery and treatment has already cost more than that, and I don't regret it for a minute. Sure it would be nice if it wasn't so expensive, but it is what it is. My dogs are my family and I will do my best for them.
I agree that diet is important, and Annie is moving to a higher protein/fat and lower carb diet (raw food should not be given to dogs undergoing chemo). I'm glad your horse had good quality of life. One of the first things that the oncologist told me was that whatever I had fed her/given her/done with her did not cause her MCT. I think that was really helpful in alleviating concerns about whether I had somehow contributed to her illness.