PLEASE HELP ME

Highly interested subject and unusual but much needed arguments. Keep on!

I myself do not humanize animals and find your philosophical considerations very interesting. In other places the debate is commonly dominated by the same people that might consider putting clothes on dogs so I like to hear your thoughts.

Of course I consider one should respect life, but to drag it out deterministic, then one should leave the animals in nature in the first place, and that´s not what most caudate-people actually do, is it? We keep the animals for our entertainment and amusement and to study them, not for their best, but for our curiosity.

I do not afford the high prices for vets, but then I consider myself to afford buying quite expensive animals once in a while. I have treated lots of sick caudates in a varity of ways myself but never consulted a vet except for vets that are herpetoculturists themselves. Sad, but true. More survive then if no treatment at all was offered. If I was a salamander I would never stop trying to survive if there was only a slight chance. Thats the evolutionary driving force of all living organisms.

I would also like to know why we adress pain so much evilness. Its only some 15 000 years since we as an organism was going in the direction of creating lifes with almost no pain at all. Life hurts, and that is the everyday status in nature.

Pain with fear is something totally diffetrent. Then the pain can be unbarebly. To have feel fear from an injury when there is no physical threat is only possible if the organism is of a certain level. A level when considerations of what might happend tomorrow is possible. I am sure salamanders could not have such thoughts.
 
Hi Jesper,

So how do you scale this, to be able to objectively judge how effective the self treatments are overall? How many successes equate to one death? Is there a weighted scale for length of recovery versus number of treatments? This is important to justify your argument. What were the lengths of time before death in those that died? What was the extent of the injuries in those cases? How did the injuries compare to those that survived? I am interested in hearing where you consider the break even point to be.

"Medical treatment at home" is simply placing a positive name (aka spin doctering") on it implying that a licensed practicioner is involved. As very few if any of these home remedies are based on a accurate diagnosis, home remedies is a more accurate assessment.

There is an empirical difference in rehabilitating sick animals by yourself when the major problems are the result of starvation and poor husbandry and rehabilitating animals in the example I cited above in a previous post.

Actually my comparisions are not cost based. In a discussion in ethics how do you weight cost versus quality of life? What is the cost you place on consulting for an diagnosis and prescribed treatment as opposed to hearsay where the animal has never been examined? In an ethics discussion, a cost based argument only has any value if both parties accept it for what it is, personal justification of a decision that in all likelyness is not ethical.

Actually I am not transferring anything about awareness in any form to a "lower(?) animal". It is in your arguments where the analogies are made to human life, consciousness and understanding. I made one reference to what would be required for your analogy regarding human life to be applicable.

snip "You take your pain preference and attach it to the newt and than kill it even though it would survive......"
Isn't this a big assumption on your part? Please explain how you can be assured that an animal I personally would euthanize would survive if treated by your "home remedies"? Please explain the pain threshold (or pain preference as you called it) you feel that I have defined as you have indicated that I have defined one by your statement.

So lets go back to my original statement about the quality of life and euthanasia in (and I quote) "badly injured" newts. To rephrase my statement, the deteriment to the quality of life of the animal due to the injury and lack of incentive to seek the most effective medical treatment is such that the owner may need to ethically consider euthansia.

Ed
 
Hi Mattias,
My responses are between your quotes.

snip "I do not afford the high prices for vets, but then I consider myself to afford buying quite expensive animals once in a while. I have treated lots of sick caudates in a varity of ways myself but never consulted a vet except for vets that are herpetoculturists themselves. Sad, but true. More survive then if no treatment at all was offered. If I was a salamander I would never stop trying to survive if there was only a slight chance. Thats the evolutionary driving force of all living organisms."

There is a difference in the discussion above and your statement. You have at least consulted with a vet familiar with herpetoculture often many of the inquiries for help here are before they have ever discussed anything with any vet. Whether or not the animal will heal on its own is based on the reason for the problem in the first place. There are some that even apparent recovery is a problem such as in mycobacterial infections.


"I would also like to know why we adress pain so much evilness. Its only some 15 000 years since we as an organism was going in the direction of creating lifes with almost no pain at all. Life hurts, and that is the everyday status in nature.

Pain with fear is something totally diffetrent. Then the pain can be unbarebly. To have feel fear from an injury when there is no physical threat is only possible if the organism is of a certain level. A level when considerations of what might happend tomorrow is possible. I am sure salamanders could not have such thoughts."

Actually pain has nothing to do with the thought process. Pain is a negative stressor and as such increased the corticosteroid level in the circulatory system. If this is prolonged then the increased levels of corticosteroids depress the immune system increasing the possibility of secondary infections. If the levels of stress are not constant but fluctuate then the animal can even stress to death (for a good discussion of this in reptiles I direct you to Health and Welfare of Captive Reptiles, 1995, Chapman and Hall). As a further point, if the stress level inhibits the feeding response then the animal can suffer further problems with an inability to meet the metabolic needs of the healing process. All of these items need to be considered before undertaking any treatment regimen.

Ed
 
hmmm, go ahead and keep arguing about this, its quite funny...

...but meanwhile my newt is dieing and I have requested help on yet another topic.
 
I think some good points are brought up. We can not ignore the fact that access to a Vet who has a background in herpetology is very slim in many areas in the USA. Then you get into the fees, that are just as variable. If you ever come across a Vet who's background is in Herpetology, which includes caudates, you are lucky. And if this individual is willing to assist you with out an office visit every time, you've hit the lottery! I have not explored this in my area for many years now, because it became frustrating and the ones that would agree to see my sick animal where "exotics animal specialist", but never treated a newt before. Working in healthcare for 20 years (on people) you come to realize, medicine is not always an exact science. Some of the best treatments that have worked for me have been from other keepers. If I take my newt to a Vet specializing in herpetology, he/she will make diagnosis on signs and symptoms and give caculated guess treatment. I doubt they will do any labwork, scans, or xrays (I could be wrong) They will give it their best shot which could be very expensive and may or may not work.
I specialize in wound management. Debridement and treating wounds I can handle. I even performed some amputations on small bodied newts with success.

When you get into pain and suffering, you are really going into some uncharted territory. Even human medical practices have a ways to go to catch up with current research. I have not explored the effects of local and systemic analgesics on caudates and would be interested if herpetology Vets are using them with no ill effects.
Euthenizing is part of the husbandry, and should always be considered before undergoing futile remedies that will prolong suffering and lighten your wallet. Some keepers here post frequently asking some new keeper if they even considered taking their sick newt to see a Vet, making them feel guilty. I don't think this option is truly available or affordable compared to taking our dog or cat that is sick. The treatment on canines/felines is not only far more available, but it is cost effective (you normally see results for the money spent).
Prevention will always be key in this husbandry.
Just my 2 cents...
 
Hi Ed,

Oh well, back into the fray...

I have never claimed that I am doing a scientific study here, Ed. I am not. I am not claiming to be objective, I try my best to be objective though.
Not even physicians or vets could tell you those numbers Ed unless they are currently involved in a study.

You want to know where the breakpoint is? Which breakpoint? When to treat and when to euthanize or when I have succeeded and when I have failed?

I only use methods that are scientifically proven to be effective together with the little experience I have. I firmly believe that the death rates of the animals I treat are lower than if I had not treated them. I can only give you my word on that.

I do not have much success with highly advanced infections that is true, but I do not believe that a vet would either. Most of my help lies in providing a good healing environment and stopping local ulcers from spreading with the same broad spectrum antibiotics that I believe the vet would use. This is basic healthcare for newts to me.

Home remedies imply the use of unorthodox methods, I do not employ such methods.

Ethics....
It is hard discussing ethics since there is no definition of correct viewpoint(although a general consensus is often seen as correct..). If my viewpoint would be to sacrifice anything possible for me to sacrifice for my ill newt I could do a lot better than what I am doing, for sure. That is not my viewpoint. I try to stay realistic. Staying realistic means applying cost efficiency to any treatment, in this case meaning that I could have helped a lot of newts with basic medical care at home instead of saving one with a vet visit.

You are indeed transferring your own pain preference when looking at a newt saying it has had enough, I will euthanize it. What source are you drawing from since you cannot rate their pain on any other scale than that of your experience of pain? My point would be to euthanize on an estimated survival chance rather than a irrational pain based judgement. Obviously you do not agree since you said that one should euthanize newts that would have survived to avoid exposing them to severe pain.

"the deteriment to the quality of life of the animal due to the injury and lack of incentive to seek the most effective medical treatment is such that the owner may need to ethically consider euthansia. "

Again estimated pain is chosen over estimated survival chance. When you consider QoL you have to include the chances of total recovery and a future healthy life as a balance to the pain of living through illness.
 
Hi Al,
"Some keepers here post frequently asking some new keeper if they even considered taking their sick newt to see a Vet, making them feel guilty."

My point exactly. This is a very ethical advice of course, but one that few will take. If we would really like to help the the majority we would provide info on what you can do yourself to a greater extent than we do today. Misuse of given advice is a fear on my part.

(Message edited by Jesper on November 23, 2004)
 
Hi Jesper,

I am posting the three responses in sequence here starting with yours.

Jesper Snip"Ah, you are comparing a high cost treatment with a low cost one! You have to compare the cost efficiency too then. Basic medical treatment is always the most cost efficient one, that's what I am aiming for."
Ed snip "So how do you scale this, to be able to objectively judge how effective the self treatments are overall? How many successes equate to one death? Is there a weighted scale for length of recovery versus number of treatments? This is important to justify your argument. What were the lengths of time before death in those that died? What was the extent of the injuries in those cases? How did the injuries compare to those that survived? I am interested in hearing where you consider the break even point to be"

Jesper snip "You want to know where the breakpoint is? Which breakpoint? When to treat and when to euthanize or when I have succeeded and when I have failed?"

As you have equated the cost effectiveness of your treatment regimen in a definative statement as to which is the most effective with no statistics to verify your statement I challenged you to define it and requested an analysis of how you determined the effectiveness of your treatment to support your claim. To determine the effectiviness of a treatment you need to be able to compare all of the questions I have asked. You have not answered any of those questions as to how you determined the break even point unless you can answer those questions you are stating opinion not fact. You are correct about vets but at least the ones I deal with will say when they are not sure as opposed to making absolute statements.

On to the rest of the response....

Jesper Snip "I only use methods that are scientifically proven to be effective together with the little experience I have. I firmly believe that the death rates of the animals I treat are lower than if I had not treated them. I can only give you my word on that."

Can you cite any references to support this claim of scientifically proven methodology? The rest of the statement is fine as it is a belief statement and does not have to be supported by any facts.

Jesper snip "I do not have much success with highly advanced infections that is true, but I do not believe that a vet would either. Most of my help lies in providing a good healing environment and stopping local ulcers from spreading with the same broad spectrum antibiotics that I believe the vet would use. This is basic healthcare for newts to me."

There have been some significant advances in microbial treatment regimens in amphibians in general and I have seen excellant results in saving animals with advanced infections. (even fair survivial rates in animals with advanced aeromonas infections).

Jesper snip "Home remedies imply the use of unorthodox methods, I do not employ such methods."

This is a belief statement and is not really accurate as any treatment even the use of topical over the counter antibiotics is a home remedy. They can include unorthodox methods but this is not a requirement as unorthodox methods used by vets can also work. I know several vets that in addition to antibiotic support prescribe the use of cold chamomile tea baths as an aid to promoting skin growth over lesions in amphibians with decreased healing times. I have also seen papaya based meat tenderizer used as a treatment by a vet to aid in removing dead tissue from wounds in reptiles. These last two treatments are unorthodox to say the least.

Jesper snip "Ethics....
It is hard discussing ethics since there is no definition of correct viewpoint(although a general consensus is often seen as correct..). If my viewpoint would be to sacrifice anything possible for me to sacrifice for my ill newt I could do a lot better than what I am doing, for sure. That is not my viewpoint. I try to stay realistic. Staying realistic means applying cost efficiency to any treatment, in this case meaning that I could have helped a lot of newts with basic medical care at home instead of saving one with a vet visit."

No matter what anyone says ethics are individual. The correctness of the ethics is the result of mob rule.
So the question that leaps out from your statement above is what do you do with the newt(s) that on inspection you feel are not going to survive your home remedies? (The cost analysis is already addressed further up in the response?) At what point do you decide that the animal will not survive? When it actually dies?

Jesper Snip "You are indeed transferring your own pain preference when looking at a newt saying it has had enough, I will euthanize it. What source are you drawing from since you cannot rate their pain on any other scale than that of your experience of pain?"

To rephrase your statement, the continual exposure of pain on the animal is self transfer because the animal has no effective method to communicate pain? That is how I interpret your argument here. By this argument, should we disregard analgesia for any animal that cannot effectively communicate its level of pain to us as the assumption that the animal is in pain is an irrational assumption? This is the obvious corollary to your statement (for some analysis I refer you to Machin, K. L. 1999. Amphibian pain and analgesia. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine. 30 (1):2-10.) .
The opposite argument requires that as the animal cannot effectively communicate its pain to us we are ethically obligated to consider it which is why I have made a strong argument for the use of anaelgesics.


Jesper snip "My point would be to euthanize on an estimated survival chance rather than a irrational pain based judgement. Obviously you do not agree since you said that one should euthanize newts that would have survived to avoid exposing them to severe pain."
"the deteriment to the quality of life of the animal due to the injury and lack of incentive to seek the most effective medical treatment is such that the owner may need to ethically consider euthansia. "

You have made an opinion statement as it is not backed up by any facts or even any of my statements. Actually you have failed to read my statement closely and are again jumping the gun with assumptions (which I indicated in a previous post and you then cited a statement that proves my point and not yours). In the statement you cited above the only recommendation I made for euthenasia is that this should be considered as an option } by the owner of a animal based on the type of injury and the willingness to seek treatment of the injury as opposed to letting the animal suffer in pain. I have given no other indication of any recommendation for euthenasia (which is an assumption you have made continually throughout your arguments).
As I understand your reference to pain, you indicate that inclusion of the effects of pain on the animal is irrational and has no bearing on the potential survivial rate of an animal (because it has no effective method to communicate its pain to its owner) and as such has no bearing on the determination if an animal needs to be euthanised. As the amount of pain an animal is in can effect its survivial rate see my post to Mattias for the argument.

Jesper snip "Again estimated pain is chosen over estimated survival chance. When you consider QoL you have to include the chances of total recovery and a future healthy life as a balance to the pain of living through illness."

Again you have failed to understand the statements see the above arguments.
 
Hi Al, Jesper,

snip "Some keepers here post frequently asking some new keeper if they even considered taking their sick newt to see a Vet, making them feel guilty."

My point exactly. This is a very ethical advice of course, but one that few will take. If we would really like to help the the majority we would provide info on what you can do yourself to a greater extent than we do today. Misuse of given advice is a fear on my part."

I am not sure the laws outside of the USA but if anyone residing in the USA diagnosis a problem and/or describes a treatment regimen for the problem then they are illegally practicing medicine in the USA and all that is required for the person to be arrested is for someone to complain to the licensing board. They are also liable in civil lawsuits if the treatment does not provide the person with the results desired.
The recommendation to seek the assistance of a veterinarian is the best advice a resident of the USA can make to protect themselves legally.
One of the vets at work would not hesitate for a moment to complain to the board if they saw treatment recommendations that they considered inappropriate.
So at least overhere it is not an attempt to scare anyone or put ethical pressure on them but simply doing what the laws require.

Ed
 
I just read through your arguments and I will post an answer to them, just a quickie first:
About the practice of medicine...

"if anyone residing in the USA diagnosis a problem and/or describes a treatment regimen for the problem then they are illegally practicing medicine in the USA and all that is required for the person to be arrested is for someone to complain to the licensing board"

So I guess you cannot do anything to improve your health then. You cannot diagnose yourself with headache and go to a pharmacy to buy aspirine and self-medicate this?

It is illegal diagnose a bacterial fish disease and then to go to a pet shop to buy some tetracycline to apply?

If that is so, why do pharmacies supply medication over the counter and why can pet shops sell medications?

This sounds absurd to me.
 
I can diagnose myself and my own pets I cannot diagnose anyone else or anyone else's pets. Depending on the problem, I may not be able to legally treat them (see below) without a prescription from a vet or a doctor.
If the pet store employee tells you that the fish has a bacterial infection and then sells you a medication for it it is illegal and is considered practicing medicine without a license. I can however decide that my fish have a bacterial infection myself and choose the antibiotic off the shelf and purchase the medicines (not diagnosed by anyone else) and legally treat my fish at this time (although the FDA is looking to remove the over the counter antibiotics used in treating fish and other pets as in most cases they just foster antibiotic resistance). Technically I cannot recommend treatments to anyone.
There are exceptions to this on a state by state basis (and I believe for licensed pharmacists but once again licensing requirements) as for example I cannot purchase syringes and enrofloxin in my state without a prescription. Another example is that regardless of my background/experience or training I cannot legally vaccinate my cat or dog for rabies. Only a vet can legally vaccinate a dog or cat for rabies in New Jersey. The fact that I vaccinated cats and dogs under a vet's supervision for more than two years does not matter.

Ed .
 
Hmm, strange since when you diagnose a fish yourself it is not self-diagnosis(ownership thing?). So diagnosis and amputation at home of a newt is strictly forbidden over there then I assume?
So you can diagnose and treat yourself and any non-human that you own :D and only with medications(ie non surgical treatments)?

Hmm, so where does the boundary go when it comes to giving advise? E.g. "When my newt had similar symptoms as your newt has now, I diagnosed it with this disease and treated it this way. It recovered quickly."
 
Yes you can self diagnose at home and medicate at home within the laws (like the vaccination example I noted in the above post). I am not sure where the line is drawn regarding surgeries. We have a number of humane laws that could make it difficult to justify surgery on your own animals (however these tend to only be enforced for furry animals) if someone complained.

If you notice I usually will only comment by saying I have used x to treat this when I have seen it (for example I have used hypertonic amphibian ringers to stabilize bloated animals but you should probably see a vet). I normally do not say, you have red leg caused by Aeromonous hydrophilia (which is not correct as there are multiple different species of bacteria that cause red-leg). The thing that will get you in trouble here (if caught) if someone complains is recommending dosages of medication (for example recommending the use of enrofloxin to treat bacterial infections at the rate of 5-10 mg/kg IM every 24 hours for 7 days at a minimum).

Ed
 
Ok, back to the main post (PART 1)

Basic health care is more cost efficient than advanced health care, I need no references for that more because it is so evident and there are no disputes of it. Defining what basic health care is is another story. I think it is unnecessary to go into that, most of us have a rough picture of the difference between a basic medical treatment and advanced medical treatment.

As I have already said, I am not trying to say that I am publishing a case report about my animals.... If I were to ask my physician those same questions you ask me, he wouldnt be able to answer them either. Thus I do not see the point.
I am telling you my OPINION of the results of my treatments. Why debate something that is already so clear?

I have said that basic medical care is the most cost efficient care, general consensus, and that I preform basic medical care for my animals.
What do you question? Basic medical care isn't very complicated and I believe it is reasonable to say that I have success with it in the same way that you have success with treating a headache with aspirine. Sure it would be nice if I could prove something here but I simply cannot, is it impossible to assume that I actually have some success with using antibiotics and cleaning wounds without being a vet?
 
I will define how I see home remedy and how I differentiate it from the methods I use.

I use methods and drugs that have been proven to be effective in clinical trials. Again the general consensus thing.
Home remedies I look upon as "things" that people do and use that is not proven to be an effective treatment, I consider a lot of the drugs that are recommended here as home remedies.
Yes some physicians use home remedies, especially specialists... I am very well aware of this and they usually defend that use by the lack of alternatives and that these treatments are based upon experience. Fine, it is not science based though.


"The correctness of the ethics is the result of mob rule."
Indeed, ethics are unethical ;)

"So the question that leaps out from your statement above is what do you do with the newt(s) that on inspection you feel are not going to survive your home remedies? (The cost analysis is already addressed further up in the response?) At what point do you decide that the animal will not survive? When it actually dies?"

-Experience based decision on the outcome of earlier treatment of the same type of injuries illnesses.
 
Ok, obviously we have different view on pain:
Human pain is made very difficult since we are aware and can extrapolate our present situation into a future(fear as you told Mattias). Thus humans kill themselves while animals do not.
You should interpret the statement as:

We interpret the animals exposure of awkward positions etc, that through experience we associate with situations in which it is reasonable to assume we are dealing with pain, as pain.

Pain as experienced by a human is intimately associated with anxiety and regret(fear), at high levels of pain these even seem to take over from the actual physical pain.
Most humans thus would associate an animal in pain with our feeling of anxiety and regret(fear), actually I think we are more or less unable to uncouple these feelings from physical pain.

Thus we think:
We should euthanize this animal because it is in pain. Then we have obviously transferred our preferences of pain to an animal that might see pain from an entirely different perspective.

"As I understand your reference to pain, you indicate that inclusion of the effects of pain on the animal is irrational and has no bearing on the potential survivial rate of an animal (because it has no effective method to communicate its pain to its owner) and as such has no bearing on the determination if an animal needs to be euthanised."

I have said nothing about pain not affecting the survival chance. To me it is obvious that pain must decrease the chances for survival in any patient(through cortisol stress etc).

However, what I have said is that it is more irrational to decide the treatment from the pain you interpret than from the actual physical injury or disease!

"If the person will not seek the assistance of a vet in the case of badly injured animals they should probably consider euthenasia as opposed to dragging out the pain and suffering of the animal until it either heals or passes away."

Has changed to:
"To rephrase my statement, the deteriment to the quality of life of the animal due to the injury and lack of incentive to seek the most effective medical treatment is such that the owner may need to ethically consider euthansia."

I still think this is wrong even though you rephrased it somewhat more soft. The survival rate is what is important! The physical pain is only a secondary reason to lower survival rates.
Sure you define the damages a bad, but you do not even mention the survival chance!
 
Hi Jesper,
Been busy will have to respond later however you may not want to use anxiety or fear in your definiton as these have been used as a description of a behavioral and/or physiological response to conditioned negative stimuli (such as a repeated stress or interaction that induces pain). As caudates and other animals can be conditioned to different degrees (feeding reactions are an excellant example) it would be a lapse of judgement to discount it. More later.

Ed
 
Well as far as I know there are no exact definition of anxiety or fear(as it is a subjective emotion) and thus I tend to use it rather freely. To define my use of anxiety here I would say that ability to be aware of a future is a necessity to undergo this emotion. Then to put the present pain in perspective to the future and relate the effect of your present pain to future events etc. I do not believe that a newt go through this.

As you say the instinct is to get away from pain, and if flight is made impossible this will stress the animal - I wouldn't personally define this as anxiety. Isn't this reaction is a pure limbic system reaction? I would define anxiety as a cerebral cortex reaction put in effect by the limbic system(amygdala in specific(both cases)).

That's how I generally think of the difference between instinctive stress and anxiety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    There are no messages in the chat. Be the first one to say Hi!
    Back
    Top