Vet Blog
11/16/09
 DVM Newsmagazine reports on rabies in the United States:
National report — The number of rabies-infected cats was almost four times that of rabies-infected dogs in the United States in 2008, according to a new report from the American Veterinary Medical Association.
Cats may be more prone to rabies because they’re vaccinated less and roam outdoors unsupervised more often than dogs, the report suggests.
The data, collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, appears in a new AVMA rabies backgrounder published online in advance of World Rabies Day, Sept. 28. The report also covers the history of rabies and its prevalence around the world as well as clinical signs, diagnosis, treatment and euthanasia protocols for infected and possibly infected animals.
Most rabies infections — 93 percent — are seen in wild animals, according to the report, but most post-exposure rabies prophylaxis (PEP) in humans is administered because of exposure to rabid or possibly rabid cats and dogs.
Researchers also warn that imported dogs carry the threat of a resurgence of canine rabies variants in this country. They point to a rabid puppy that arrived from India in 2007, and a rabid dog from Iraq imported into New Jersey in 2008.
The complete study, “Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2008” appears in the Sept. 15 issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.
A quick visit to the American Veterinary Medical Association’s website provided hard numbers. In 2008, 49 states (Hawaii is rabies free) and Puerto Rico reported 294 rabid cats, 75 rabid dogs, and two people with rabies. Both human cases appeared to spread by bats. Both people died.
Bear in mind that these numbers are relatively small. Rabies is not common in developed countries. However, it is a major threat to humans and animals in some parts of the world. In these areas, dogs are the leading source of human rabies.
Chart: American Veterinary Medical Association.
Share this entry with your pawple anywhere:
10/28/09
 Swine flu, also known as H1N1 influenza, has been dominating the news recently. The viral strain appears set to cause the first influenza pandemic in a generation. Influenza pandemics are big deals. The pandemic of 1918-1920 caused more people to die from flu than from bullets or bombs during World War One.
Influenza viruses are known for infecting multiple species–as the name would imply, swine flu developed in pigs and then spread to people.
This may lead pet owners to wonder: can cats and dogs catch swine flu?
The answer appears to be no. DVM Newsmagazine reports that there is no evidence cats or dogs can contract, carry, spread, or suffer illness from H1N1 influenza.
H1N1 influenza has been isolated from a ferret. Fortunately at this time there is no evidence that ferrets can spread the disease to people.
Although it appears we can rest easy about our cats and dogs catching swine flu, remember that cats are susceptible to an even scarier form of influenza: bird flu (also known as H5N1). Cats contract bird flu by preying upon or being fed raw bird meat. The virus does not appear capable of spreading from cat to cat. That is a good thing, since the fatality rate among cats infected with H5N1 appears to be 100%.
Fortunately, it is easy to protect your cat from H5N1. If you feed your cat commercial or cooked food and keep him indoors, his chances of catching bird flu are nil.
Share this entry with your pawple anywhere:
07/31/09
 Tomorrow the Vet Blog will return to veterinary Q&A. But today I can’t resist the following piece from DVM Newsmagazine.
San Francisco considers ban on cat declaw surgeries
Jul 16, 2009
DVM NEWSMAGAZINE
San Francisco — San Francisco may become the second U.S. city, the other is West Hollywood, Calif., to adopt legislation banning the declawing of cats for non-therapeutic reasons.
The San Francisco Commission of Animal Control and Welfare voted 5-1 Thursday to recommend that the Board of Supervisors ban the procedure. The proposed legislation is the most recent, and restrictive, attempt by the city to ban declawing. In 2003, the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution “urging pet guardians and veterinarians to discontinue the practice of declawing cats in the city and county of San Francisco.”
If approved, the city’s law could mirror one passed in West Hollywood in 2003.
The article continues:
Commissioners questioned whether declawing might be necessary for cats in households of immunocompromised persons, a common argument in favor of keeping declawing legal.
Convenience declawing is, in my opinion, set to go the way of the dodo bird, debarking, tail docking, and ear cropping. However, the last quote from the article brings up a complicating factor of declaws.
The last time I declawed a cat was several years ago. The cat was owned by an elderly gentleman who had diabetes. The owner’s skin was very thin, and the cat’s claws, even when well trimmed, frequently cut through his skin accidentally. The cat was not aggressive, but even the action of making “kitty dough” on the owner’s lap could send the man to the emergency room.
The owner decided he had two choices: give the cat up (which often is a euphemism for put the cat to sleep) or declaw the cat.
My decision to perform the surgery was not ethically cut and dried. I was careful to utilize state-of-the-art pain management for the procedure. The man and the cat were able to continue enjoying their lives together.
I hope that any laws banning declawing of cats make considerations for such instances.
Share this entry with your pawple anywhere:
07/30/09
 Banfield, The Pet Hospital is an international chain of veterinary practices. The practices are often associated with PetSmart stores.
Banfield is the largest chain of veterinary hospitals in the world. The corporation owns more than 700 pet health care centers.
I didn’t realize that, until recently, tail docking and ear cropping were available at Banfield outlets. They aren’t any more.
Here is an excerpt from an article found at DVM Newsmagazine’s website.
Banfield discontinues cosmetic ear cropping, tail docking
Jul 27, 2009
DVM NEWSMAGAZINE
Portland, Ore. — Banfield, The Pet Hospital will discontinue ear cropping and tail docking surgeries, the company reports today.
Banfield’s decision follows an extensive review and subsequent approval by its Medical Standards Board, which is described as an internal panel of experienced veterinarians responsible for evaluating all medical standards and procedures.
In July, heated discussion about cosmetic surgeries erupted at the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) meeting in Seattle where its governing body reaffirmed its position against ear cropping and tail docking.
“After thoughtful consideration and reviewing medical research, we have determined it is in the best interest of the pets we treat, as well as the overall practice, to discontinue performing these unnecessary cosmetic procedures,” explains Karen Faunt, DVM, MS, Dipl. ACVIM, vice president for medical quality advancement for Banfield. “It is our hope that this new medical protocol will help reduce, and eventually eliminate, these cosmetic procedures altogether,” Faunt adds in a prepared statement released today.
Share this entry with your pawple anywhere:
07/28/09
 I freely recognize that I practice veterinary medicine in one of the most progressive places in the world. Just a couple of states over, things are quite a bit different.
In November, 2008 the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) adopted an official policy against cosmetic ear cropping and tail docking. It turns out that some vets in Utah aren’t happy about that.
Here’s an excerpt from an article in the July, 2009 issue of DVM Newsmagazine.
AVMA’s hard line too hard?
Call for softer stance on cosmetic surgery among resolutions facing convention delegates
Jul 1, 2009
By: Christina Macejko
DVM NEWSMAGAZINE
SEATTLE — The Utah Veterinary Medical Association (UVMA) wants the AVMA to lay off the “hard-line slant” it took when the policy on ear cropping and tail docking was changed late last year and is asking the House of Delegates (HOD) to soften the policy.
In November 2008, the American Veterinary Medical Association’s (AVMA) executive board changed the policy to read, “The AVMA opposes ear cropping and tail docking of dogs when done solely for cosmetic purposes. The AVMA encourages the elimination of ear cropping and tail docking from breed standards.”
While the association was not necessarily in favor of the practice before, the policy change, for the first time, explicitly states its opposition to it.
It’s a move that UVMA says was made under pressure from outside groups.
“One of the reasons the Animal Welfare Committee suggested a change to the executive board was to bring the policy more into line with the American Animal Hospital Association and other countries,” UVMA explains. “We are the American Veterinary Medical Association, not any other and do not need to apologize for our positions.”
I have said repeatedly that I believe ear cropping and tail docking as well as debarking and declawing will wane in availability in coming years. Each year fewer vets are willing (or even able) to perform these surgeries.
New graduates from veterinary school generally abhor the procedures. Older vets who have no moral qualms with the surgeries (and who evidently run the show in Utah) are retiring every day.
The demographic shift will settle this debate in time. Meanwhile, the ethical wrangling over the procedures continues.
Share this entry with your pawple anywhere:
|
|
|
DVM Newsmagazine reports on rabies in the United States:
You have questions. 