Quote:
2 hours ago, ~~~ said:
They still encourage you to spay and neuter. How strange you'll trust a vet except when it comes to this. Suddenly the pattern breaks there.
You are jumping to conclusion not in evidence, yet again. I have previously stated my general distain for (modern) vets. They have adopted the Human Medicine business model; you get a computer print-out longer than your arm listing line item charges, preying on the "My pet is my furry child" mindset. I have been told by several vets "We don't do sheep, just buy another sheep, it will be less expensive than treatment". My last vet bill ran $2000, for a bitch I dearly loved. She was fine, they said. Then she wasn't, cremated in the last 20 minutes so there's no body. Reaction to a shot. (I personally suspect they suspected she was being "abused" (sex) and decided she needed "rescuing".) So yeah, I have learned how to set broken legs (successfully), broken shoulder (ram fell off of the roof), treat pyo successfully with hi-dose antibiotics rotated for 30 days or until symptoms disappear, (my success with vets treating pyo was less than stellar; one died 10 days later from bloat, the other didn't survive anesthesia). Pretty much anything but surgery. BTW, my out-of-area vet from the old days (works for gov't now) trusts me with controlled substances and a brick of rabies vaccine. So my faith in vets recommending the $250 money-pot of s/n as what's best for the dogs is rather limited. Best for the vets? Best for the casual "furry child owner"? Maybe. Best for the dogs is highly suspect.
Actually, my Vet that I've had for over 40 years doesn't recommend s/n in all cases. His likelihood of telling you to is less than mine is. You assume all vets recommend it. In fact, you assume too much in this entire discussion, like the only reason zoos keep their animals intact is for sex. That may have been true for Tippy and Shadow, but is it for EVERY zoo? Doubtful. I smell sour grapes more and more in your posts, and have begun to doubt my first impression that you might have something of substance to offer the forum. Again, provide some debatable evidence, debate rather than whine when it's questioned, or just take your circus someplace else. I think I'll be directing moderation staff to delete your posts as well as ban your clone accounts from here out otherwise.
sw
Sorry to sound like a broken record, but I again suggest everyone consider looking into Ovary-Sparing Spays for females (removes the uterus so no pyo, no puppies but hormones are intact so no lethargy) and vasectomy for males (still has balls, hormones not affected but shoots blanks).
Overpopulation is a problem, so is pyo. These solves those without harming hormones, energy levels, etc.
Both are a lot more expensive than traditional spays/castrations, but I think a better fit. I would not do a full spay or castration without very specific reasons (ovarian tumors/cancer, testicular cancer, etc.)
Quote:
15 minutes ago, Eagle said:
Sorry to sound like a broken record, but I again suggest everyone consider looking into Ovary-Sparing Spays for females (removes the uterus so no pyo, no puppies but hormones are intact so no lethargy) and vasectomy for males (still has balls, hormones not affected but shoots blanks).
Overpopulation is a problem, so is pyo. These solves those without harming hormones, energy levels, etc.
Both are a lot more expensive than traditional spays/castrations, but I think a better fit. I would not do a full spay or castration without very specific reasons (ovarian tumors/cancer, testicular cancer, etc.)
Actually, I've been looking for you to weigh in on this, open a "third point of view" you might say.
sw
I am not sure what more to contribute but to maybe re-encapsulate my views with the quick points of pros and cons of different options for females:
Option 1 - No alteration
PROS: Hot to think about as a zoo, no hormonal disruptions, no direct cost (but puppies are expensive and timeconsuming to deworm, vaccinate, clean up after, etc.), no risk of surgical complications
CONS: Risk of pyometra, risk of cancer, risk of unplanned litters, bloody drips in heat
Option 2 - Tubal ligation
PROS: Lowered risk of pregnancy
CONS: May not be effective (can still get pregnant), Risk of pyo, Risk of cancer, bloody drips in heat (females), Delicate surgery (easily botched by inexperienced surgeons resulting in complications), can be expensive since it isn't a common surgery, hard to find a vet willing to do it, risk of surgical complications
Option 3 - Ovariectomy (removal of ovaries but leaves uterus)
PROS: Risk of pregnancy eliminated; No heat cycles whatsoever; less stuff removed so less drastic surgerywise than a full spay
CONS: Hormonal changes (risk of permanent lethargy, depression, lowered metabolism, may lose interest or even receptivity to sex), Risk of pyo, can be expensive since it isn't a common surgery, hard to find a vet willing to do it, recovery period, risk of surgical complications
Option 4 - Ovary-Sparing Spay (removal of uterus but leaves ovaries)
PROS: Risk of pregnancy eliminated; No blood drips (but still has heat cycles), Hormones intact (so won't cause lethargy, depression nor affect metabolism)
CONS: Risk of cancer, heat cycles (can cause issues in some females such as false pregnancies that may not be pleasant), can be expensive since it isn't a common surgery, hard to find a vet willing to do it, recovery period, risk of surgical complications
Option 5 - Full spay (ovariohysterectomy -- removes uterus and ovaries)
PROS: Risk of pregnancy eliminated, risk of pyo eliminated, risk of unplanned litters eliminated, risk of ovarian cancer eliminated, common procedure so tends to be cheapest option and easy to find a vet, no heats at all (so eliminates issues some females may have)
CONS: Loss of hormones (risk of permanent lethargy, depression, lowered metabolism, may lose interest or even receptivity to sex), recovery period, risk of surgical complications
There are cases, even for a zoo, that a full spay may be called for. Some bitches have complications with heat cycles, including aggression. However, I think for most cases, an OSS will do -- but I well know its expensive ($1,000+ is the quote I got from the one area vet I found) and hard to find a vet willing to do one (most are full spay only and will try to talk you out of anything else). I think for me and my future companions, unless there is cause for a full spay, I will opt for an OSS.
For males I know of basically have 3 options:
Option 1 - No alteration
PROS: Hot to think about as a zoo, no hormonal disruptions, no direct cost, no risk of surgical complications
CONS: Risk of testicular cancer, risk of siring unplanned litters, risk of aggression
Option 2 - Vasectomy (cuts the tube that carries sperm from testes into ejaculate; testes are still present)
PROS: Dog still has balls so pretty close to leaving him intact for hotness, no hormonal disruptions, no risk of siring puppies
CONS: More delicate and complicated than a castration so probably higher risk of surgical complications, hard to find a vet and likely to be much more expensive than a castration, risk of testicular cancer, risk of aggression
Option 3 - Castration/neutering
PROS: No risk of siring puppies, no risk of testicular cancer; cheaper, easier to find a willing vet and very low risk of complications versus vasectomy, reduces risk of hormonal aggression
CONS: Loss of hormones (risk of lethargy, depression, loss of metabolism), some loss of zoo hotness, may lose interest in or even receptivity to sex
Quote:
2 hours ago, silverwolf1 said:
In fact, you assume too much in this entire discussion, like the only reason zoos keep their animals intact is for sex.
Why else would they? Zoos are the only humans who I've met that are against spaying and neutering and they just happen to be the ones that have sex with them.
Quote:
2 hours ago, silverwolf1 said:
You assume all vets recommend it.
Considering basically all the vets do the surgery they obviously aren't against it at least.
Quote:
2 hours ago, silverwolf1 said:
I smell sour grapes more and more in your posts.
As I said, I have zero reason to be jealous of you (or anyone here). I had a head start because I got my own animal while I was young and because I have enough access to other animals. Not sure why you want me to be envious so badly.
Quote:
2 hours ago, silverwolf1 said:
Again, provide some debatable evidence
Oh so you're allowed to throw my evidence away but I always have to accept the one that supports your opinion? That's funny.
Quote:
1 hour ago, Eagle said:
Sorry to sound like a broken record, but I again suggest everyone consider looking into Ovary-Sparing Spays for females (removes the uterus so no pyo, no puppies but hormones are intact so no lethargy)
They still get mammary cancer though, which has an extremely high chance.
Quote:
19 minutes ago, Eagle said:
Option 1 - No alteration
PROS: Hot to think about as a zoo
Quote:
19 minutes ago, Eagle said:
Option 3 - Castration/neutering
PROS: No risk of siring puppies, no risk of testicular cancer; cheaper, easier to find a willing vet and very low risk of complications versus vasectomy, reduces risk of hormonal aggression
CONS: Loss of hormones (risk of lethargy, depression, loss of metabolism), some loss of zoo hotness, may lose interest in or even receptivity to sex
Yet somehow I'm the clown here... That's complete nonsense.
*shrug* I listed it because its an issue for some. Its not a high factor for me. My take on zoophilia is in the minority even among zoophiles. There's no point in my denying its a factor for most zoos.
Quote:
3 minutes ago, bepis said:
They still get mammary cancer though, which has an extremely high chance.
I'm not sure what short of a deka-mastectomy would eliminate the chance of mammary cancer. I'm not aware of anyone whom has all mammary glands removed from a dog to prevent it.
Quote:
3 minutes ago, Eagle said:
*shrug* I listed it because its an issue for some.
Which is what I've been saying. That is complete selfishness. That's not zoophilia because it's not love.
And it's pretty dumb... How can someone be less sexy if they're altered and you can't even see it?
Quote:
3 minutes ago, Eagle said:
I'm not sure what short of a deka-mastectomy would eliminate the chance of mammary cancer. I'm not aware of anyone whom has all mammary glands removed from a dog to prevent it.
Normal spays stop dogs from getting mammary tumors.
OK, let's try a couple of new reasons for not castrating.
- Study the screw worm fly eradication program. It's not as effective because dogs are serial breeders but you will prevent some litters in homes with unbroken females.
- The are cultures that just will not accept a "sissified" dog. You will spectacularly increase your penetration into these areas (which have some of the highest percentages of free roaming dogs) if you try to sell no puppies but full cojones.
|
