mobile - desktop |
Available Now at RodentPro.com! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Stuart McArthur on January 13, 2002 at 16:09:08:
In Reply to: Re: This sounds like a similar person we all know and love... posted by EJ on January 13, 2002 at 13:06:28:
: You really can't consider this a 'Dangerous' method. Worthless, possibly, but not 'Dangerous'.
: In the case of RNS, the method Justin described does seem to work for whatever reason and is far from dangerous.:
You mean it sort of works surely!
You do read the other bits I write dont you? If we are talking about some other aspect of mycoplasma treatment then I can see where you are coming from. In the areas where I have made a response on this list we were talking about elimination of pathogenic agents and prevention of disease transmission in and between collections. When I know things to have been inaccurate I have said "Not So!".
We were not talking about average isolated cases we want to see improve. If we want to talk about that then fine. Forget prevention of disease spead etc.
We were talking about mixing of carriers, recrudescence and losing your collection because you buy in disease carriers. At least - introducing nasty bugs that plague you for a long time at best.
Claiming cases are cured and pathogens eliminated and then selling them on as clean animals is "dangerous".
This is the dangerous I was talking about.
OK?
Putting stuff in nostrils which doest eliminate the pathogen is generally pretty safe [as long as its without claims of efficacy].
OK?
These animals still have the problem. They are still potential sources of future infection.
My charges are not expensive and tests available are always offered as a lot of people who have brains want them. I dont mind people saying no thank you, or sorry I cant afford it - or lets do our best without that.
You dont know you have mycoplasma without a mycoplasma test.... or do you? I asked if we had done a confirmatory test. If these animals are endangered and more expensive than a pedigree dog I cant see why one shouldnt do as thorough a job as one would with a posh dog.
Better tortoise owners dont like diseases.
If I charge a client I would want to have treated the animal to the best of my ability with whatever budget the client has available and is prepared to pay. Some clients (? most) would presumably like to see the agent eliminated - not stuff squirted up nostrils that we know doesnt really work. Thats why they bother coming to our clinic. They would be pretty "pissed" with me if I falsely pretended that stuff up the nose is good value for money. It might be the best available and most practical in some cases. I though you guys would want the best for sick chelonians... why settle for second best and ignore that better exists? My approach isnt expensive! Unless you only want to spend $10 to treat a $400 sick tortoise that is dreadfully rare.
Anyway... I think I have made the same point a dozen times now and I dont know if you get it. I will rest my case for now as I have much other to do.
Stu
Subject:
Comments:
Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
AprilFirstBioEngineering | GunHobbyist.com | GunShowGuide.com | GunShows.mobi | GunBusinessGuide.com | club kingsnake | live stage magazine
|