Actually, she was open to further diagnostic testing. At the time,
Spencer was so weak, and my pocket book is so stretched, that she just
figured that whatever it is, based on her experience, treatments would
only buy him a limited amount of time. That doesn't explain why she
isn't more willing to treat him now without the diagnostic testing
though. I am choosing to assume it's because she doesn't want to put
him through treatment when she doesn't expect a long term favorable
outcome. I feel that way myself to a degree. I left messages for my
vets yesterday and no one returned my calls. I know they are very
busy. Being a specialty clinic, they have nothing but crisis cases and
emergencies all day long. Most of you are familiar with the client
liaison, Michelle Rose, from this clinic. She's the angel that put
together the VO FDA package for other people's vets. She's been on
vacation through all this. When she's around I have someone to call
that can catch the vet's sleeve and whisper in their ears. Spency and I
are definitely at a disadvantage without her help. Usually too, these
doctors work directly with "GP" vets, I don't have a GP vet, it's just me.
My miracle cat, Timothy Arthur Bumble, is sitting on my lap, purring
away, reminding me that I'm not alone. I have him and I have all of you.
Nina
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nina, I woke up this morning thinking how ironic it is that the
internist does not want to try chemo without a definitive diagnosis
but wanted to pts without one. If it is cancer it is lymphoma, given
where it is and how it responds to steroids. If she thinks it could be
something other than cancer, then why did she want to pts without
further diagnostic tests first? There is something really wrong with
that picture. I don't think it's just here, I think it's lots of
vets. They find it more ok to pts than to treat in any way that is
not completely by the book.
Michelle
