To not do everything my vet tells me to do?

[BettySuarez]

We have 1 cat and 1 dog and both are up to date with flu vaccines (cat) plus Parvo and Kennel Cough (dog) plus both are regularly wormed and de-flead etc.

At the vets this week, cat was having booster jabs and vet was trying to persuade me to also have her vaccinated against Feline Leukaemia (?sp).

When I declined - she tutted at me

A I being unreasonable to think that 'enough is enough' and that I can't mitigate against every virus or threat that our pets might face?

I have always considered myself to be a responsible pet owner but surely a line has to be drawn somewhere.

So, should I hand myself in now to the RSPCA?

Yanby - plus: If they can vaccinate against lukemia in cats, then why not humans?

Beaver, that was my thought too - 'I'll vaccinate my cat against leukaemia when I can also vaccinate the kids'

I know its not exactly the same thing and that animals and humans face different risks but I just struggle to share the sentiment tbh

It's a social responsibillity dilema

The reason your cat will probably not catch it without vaccination, is because they've persuaded most other people to vaccinate

Same qs measles etc in kids innit

Also, expensive business if cat does catch diseases that they are vaccinated against

It's not the same disease

YANBU

I am sure you listen to vet's advice when it doesn't involve £££, when its directly related to your pets' care... which is right.

As soon as £££ is involved you have to balance their advice with your own judgement.

Don't be made to feel guilty. On the whole I think most vets are pretty bloody amazing (I have to think that as my best mate is one!) but they do run a business too... like dentists, sometimes they are pushing treatments for the sale, sometimes because you actually need it. You have to use your judgement.

Even if you vaccinate your cat can still get it so save your money. As for the tutting I would have, metaphorically, ripped her head off her shoulders.

What a peculiar stance. By all means consider the possible side effects and so on of the FL jab but to say that you'll "vaccinate my cat against leukaemia when I can also vaccinate the kids'' is pretty odd IHMO. Would you also say that you'll vaccinate your elder DC against something only when you can vaccinate your baby too in a case where there was no jab for an infant?

The vet was rude to tut at you but then again she's the one who sees animals dying and has to try to save them. She'd have done better to explain in detail the pros and cons of the jab and her reasons for advocating it.

They only need a booster every three years from the age of three apparently. FL is bloody horrible so for the sake of about £45 (mine had boosters yesterday) personally I'd rather be on the safe side.

I know it's not the same disease - I did make reference to that in earlier post

I would tutt at
You too

I have mine done against FL. I just save up for their jabs.

Love the comment about leukaemia in children. Feline leukaemia virus (FeLV) is a virus that causes several different cancers and other problems in cats. It is perhaps badly named as it doesn't just cause leukaemia. Cats can (rarely) get leukaemia with no viral cause. In humans a virus causing lymphoma/leukaemia has not been found otherwise they would vaccinate for it of course. It is TOTALLY different to childhood leukaemia. Yes it is a lot less common now because the vaccine is very effective. You are NBU to refuse, it is your decision but it isn't that expensive and infection is fatal in most cases.

I am not confusing Feline Leukemia with Human Leukaemia - I know that they are not the same thing but I just feel that I have to draw the line somewhere (from a financial point of view I guess).

Yes but the fact is you CAN vaccinate against FeLV, and with over 35% of the pet cat population showing raised IgG antibody levels indicating prior exposure, why run the risk of exposing an animal you presumably care for to an infection which would make it very ill at best and which, worst case scenario, would prove fatal, when you could prevent it?

Fruitcake - get your facts right. If a cat does not already have FeLV then the vaccine is very effective at preventing the infection. They can still get leukaemia but this is very rare in cats.

YABU.

FL is a horrble disease so if you can protect your cat against it you should. Mine was the first to receive the vaccination in our area.

You'd need to have the FL vac if you needed to use a decent cattery.

Although as an owner it is completely your decision regarding any treatments given to your pet, please be aware that of the 3 infectious diseases that cats are routinely vaccinated against in this country (Flu, enteritis and feline leukemia), feline leukemia is the one that will almost inevitably prove fatal no matter what age the cat is when it gets infected. The only cats not at risk for it are those that stay indoors permanently. If yours is an indoor cat, then YANBU.

aldiwhore - I also agree that most Vets are bloody brilliant. Our last Vets surgery were amazing when our older cat was run over. He was PTS unfortunatley but I always felt that the staff looked after us as a family as much as they did the cat.

This is a new surgery that we have registered with due to a house move last year and I just feel that everytime I walk in, we are being pressurised to spend more money. I know it's a business however!

Maybe I shouldn't allow this to cloud my judgement, that and the fact that they now have a new range of toys and bedding in pastel colours (which I would associate with newborn babies of the human variety).

I am crap at explaining myself

I can understand not wanting to feel pressurised into 'spend spend spend'...I just feel the welfare of your cat and that of any cats s/he might come into contact with is not the area in which to economise. It's one thing saying "no, I don't want to switch to your recommended expensive food, thank you" when they're perfectly happy and healthy on supermarket's own brand (or whatever you feed) or "no, I don't need a cat bed in baby pink, thanks" but "no, I don't want to listen to your five years of specialist training and safeguard my cat's health, and by doing so risk having to pay substantially more in probably-futile treatment and ultimately putting the cat to sleep before its time, thanks" is a false economy.

Look for another vets, if you feel they are only interested in the business side of practice. There certainly are some like that.

Doesn't detract from fact you should get the vaccination though

Before vet administered the FL vac she wanted to do a blood test to see if cat had the virus.

To me that was pointless. The blood test would just be a 'snapshot' - the cat could have picked up the virus the next day.

So I declined the pre-vac test and kust insisted on the vac - on the basis that if she already had it the vac would be useless but if she didn't already have it the vac would be worthwhile.

As she's now 14 I doubt that she does have the virus.

I have noticed that my local vet is much more edpensive for vacs that the in-house vet at Pets at Home. So we are gradually moving our animals care to the PAH practice.

I once paid for my cat to have blood tests to see if he would survive a routine op to extract a couple of teeth. They got the results, did the op (actually taking about 10 teeth in the end) and then told me that his kidneys were damaged as 'he hadn't really been up to it'. He was really ill for a long time. Just as he was getting better he had an accident, the vet prescribed something or other. I took it home and, for some reason, googled it. There were massive contraindications for cats with previous kidney problems. When I took it back the vet agreed it may well have killed him.
That sequence of events did make me question the standard of care he was getting.
He still has all his vaccinations though, it's not occurred to me that they may be a waste of money.

There are definitely some vets that push all sorts of extras, and I would consider getting a second opinion from another practice. We've got two vet practices locally, and the one that's part of a large regional chain is notorious for trying to sell eg dog psychology sessions.

I think vets are getting very commercial.

I've been advised that my 14 year old cat needs to have her teeth scaled.

For that she would need a GA.

I've declined to do it. Mainly because I feel she's too old to be put through this, plus the dangers of GA at her age.

My friend's cat had no end of prpblems after she had a scaling and had to have several subsequent ops to remove teeth.

Perhaps I'm wrong to refuse?

If the vet recommended the vaccine for the good of the cat taking into account the cats circumstances then YABU. But if the vet just told you to vaccinate as that is practice policy (i.e. to sell as many vaccines as possible) then YANBU and you shold change practice. For all we know you have an indoor cat that has no danger of picking up the virus at all. If the vaccine was not reccommended before why now unless the cats circumstances have changed?