A question has been asked if anyone read the article on MRSA in the December issue of 'Dogs Today?https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,322#msg-322Tue, 21 Apr 2026 09:48:18 +0000 Phorum 5.2.23 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,2675#msg-2675 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,2675#msg-2675Thank you for your suggestion, received in quadruplicate!
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetFri, 04 Aug 2006 08:03:30 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,2667#msg-2667 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,2667#msg-2667 BMF Ask The VetThu, 03 Aug 2006 22:06:40 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1183#msg-1183 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1183#msg-1183See my reply elswhere on the site.
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetFri, 29 Jul 2005 08:00:05 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1178#msg-1178 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1178#msg-1178 BARBARA BURNS Ask The VetThu, 28 Jul 2005 18:57:15 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1088#msg-1088 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1088#msg-1088
Only a laboratory test can confirm MRSA.
If you think that your cat infected you, or your boyfriend, you must get your veterinary surgeon to take a sample from the cat's injuries and send it to a laboratory. Have the wounds on the cat healed OK?
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetSun, 26 Jun 2005 07:32:42 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1087#msg-1087 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,1087#msg-1087 amanda Ask The VetSat, 25 Jun 2005 19:27:32 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,841#msg-841 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,841#msg-841Yes, I did see the article.
Research into MRSA on all fronts is essential.
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetWed, 18 May 2005 20:06:49 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,838#msg-838 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,838#msg-838 Non Professional Ask The VetWed, 18 May 2005 14:53:55 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,820#msg-820 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,820#msg-820I use the term 'Professional' as meaning someone in what used to be called a 'learned profession' i.e someone whose skills have been learned
to the satisfaction of his/her professional colleagues, and who is subject to regulation and discipline by those colleagues. I would include the medical, dental and nursing professions, accountants, architects, civil engineers, lawyers and barristers, schoolteachers, ministers of religion, amongst others.
I do not include, for example, 'professional' rodent operatives, 'professional window cleaners, 'professional' road sweepers, however admirable and essential these occupations are in today's society.
What precisely do you mean by an 'orphan' profession? The Royal College's foundation charter is well over 150 years old - hardly a 'new' profession.
I note that you seem to have researched my CV pretty thoroughly, even having identified me as a member of VAAJ. You clearly prefer to remain anonymous!
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetThu, 12 May 2005 11:48:40 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,819#msg-819 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,819#msg-819 Non Professional Ask The VetThu, 12 May 2005 10:46:00 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,818#msg-818 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,818#msg-818Sorry if I did not make my point clearly enough - the great majority of the public DO NOT employ professional people on a face to face fee paying basis - few employ architects, lawyers mostly on legal aid or via CAB, and dentists, only a proportion of their fees are payable direct.
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetThu, 12 May 2005 08:22:47 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,817#msg-817 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,817#msg-817Actually, I don’t consider vets to be mercenary for having a profitable business; I have no problem with the reality that a vet has to make money in order to provide the service he or she does, but it is really not correct to say that vets are the only provider of services for which clients have to pay; anyone who has consulted a dentist, architect, lawyer or private doctor will have had to pay for those as well and accept the premise of fees for service. That’s not my point, though. Although professional accountability is through the courts, those who work for the NHS are accountable to their employers for their practice as well, and this serves to put the employing Trust in the position of advocating for, and representing, the interests of the patient. This is not the case in veterinary practice, and MRSA, has become a crossover issue that illustrates how difficult it can be to get a meaningful response from a vet when questions are asked. This is more a question, in my view, of culture rather than obstinacy, but I believe that it has to change.]]> Mark D Ask The VetThu, 12 May 2005 08:03:27 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,816#msg-816 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,816#msg-816(and I do wish that contributors would not hide behind pseudonyms!)
Yes, I sat on the Preliminary Investgation Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Sugeons for 8 years, 3 as vice-chairman and 3 as chairman, and in that time I looked at hundreds of cmplaints made against veterinary suregons by members of the public.
I can promise you that every single complaint is scrutinised very carefully. In the first instance the Head of Professional Conduct - a Barrister, not a veterinary suregon - determines whether or not the complaint comes within the RCVS's jurisdiction. If he thinks that it does it is forwarded to the Chiarman and Vice-chairman of PIC ( both veterinary surgeons) who consider the complaint, and both have to agree that it is either unfounded or not serious enough to be taken on to Disciplinary Committee. In either case a full and detailed response is made to the complainant explaining why.
One must also bear in mind that the disciplinary authority of the RCVS was defined by Parliament in the Veterinary Surgeons Act defining what issues are subject to the jurisdiction of the RCVS.
Allegations of professional negligence do not fall into this category, unless the negligence is so serioous as to amount to professional misconduct.
Negligence is a matter for the civil courts, who can award damages if the complaint is upheld, whereas the RCVS cannot.
Explaing to an aggrieved owner why the RCVS cannot take up complaints where the complainer accuses the veterinary surgeon of professional negligence is one of the most difficult tasks the Professiona Conduct Dept. of the RCVS has to undertake.
Whenever a complaint is taken up by the College - and most are- permission is sought from the complainant to forward his/her complaint to the veterinary surgon concerned. The response from the veterinary surgeon is given just the same consideration as the complaint in deciding whether to progress the issue further.
If you go on the RCVS web site - RCVS.org.uk - you will be able to read reports of recent disciplinary hearings. The dice are definitly not loaded in favour of the vet!
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetWed, 11 May 2005 13:17:31 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,815#msg-815 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,815#msg-815Hi, Mark,
Thanks you for details of your background.There is one very significant difference between our respective professions, which DOES have major effect upon our relationship with our clients/patients. Veterinary sursgons in practice are providing a service FOR WHICH FEES ARE CHARGED.
Sadly, there is an increasing perception in the public mind that veterinary surgeons should work on a 'no cure, no fee' basis.
Fo many members of the public, the veterinary surgeon is the only provider of professional services for which they have to pay (cf doctors, dentiists, architects, lawyers, etc)
Veterinary practices are businesses, and must be run on proper business lines, otherwise there would very soon be no practice. All the overhead costs of running the practice - purchase and maintenance of premises, including 'commercial' rates, staff wages and salaries, pensions, medicines and equipment all have to be paid for out of fees before there are any 'profits' for the partners.
Only veterinary suregons working for animal welfare charities have the luxury of not having to balance what is the cost of the proposed course of treatment against the client's willingness/ability to pay.
I think that you will probably regard the above as being very mercenary - but veterinary practices DO go bankrupt if they allow altruism to overtake business principles.
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetWed, 11 May 2005 12:58:05 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,814#msg-814 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,814#msg-814 Non Professional Ask The VetTue, 10 May 2005 09:28:14 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,813#msg-813 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,813#msg-813
No not a vet; I've been a registered nurse and researcher for over thirty years and my main areas of interest are person-centred care, particularly in the care of people with dementia. I've researched treatment outcomes, clinical effectiveness and cultural effects on staff and patients. I guess the interesting thing for me is that the issues involded in working with pet owners are closely paralleled by the inssues involved in working with relatives of people with dementia, and in particular the issue of MRSA which is now probably endemic in nursing homes. I have spent a long time looking at the way those relationships work, and my interest in veterinary care comes from the experience I had last year of seeing a pet die from a post-operative infection. I understand very well the difficulty health professionals have in bringing distressing news and information to relatives (and this is also a feature of veterinary practice)- it's one of the most difficult things we do - and I have sometimes been dismayed at the approach my colleagues have taken, but I believe that it's the dialogue that matters first and foremost, and the message second. Neither side finds it easy, and the only hopeful route involves the refusal to abandon the effort.]]> Mark D Ask The VetMon, 09 May 2005 16:04:33 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,812#msg-812 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,812#msg-812Thank you for your interesting comments.
Are you a practisimg veterinary surgeon yourself?
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetSun, 08 May 2005 14:24:27 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,811#msg-811 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,811#msg-811You know, people reading our exchanges on this could think that we don’t agree on the issues! Actually, I think our views are a lot closer than they seem. I don’t see this necessarily as an issue of blame, but one of professional response.
Pet owners, like relatives of patients in hospital, are not part of our magic circle; they don’t understand our terms and jargon and, for the most part, they are excluded from our own reasoning process and simply presented with bald alternatives and asked for a decision based on what we tell them the consequences will be. Post-operative infections do arise from a number of causes, it’s true, and cannot always be prevented, but if the first and only thing an owner is told is that it couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the vet or the practice then that simply generates confusion and distress. If, however, vets were helped more to understand that their style and approach can have as profound emotional effect upon owners as their actions, then they could prevent much of the conflict that arises from treatment failures or complications. Of course, pet owners also have to accept that vets are not all-powerful, but at present they are the ones left in the dark and feeling the guilt. Let them into the reasoning process, no just the cold facts, and they are likely to be more understanding themselves.]]> Mark D Ask The VetSun, 08 May 2005 10:16:55 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,805#msg-805 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,805#msg-805I think that the sore on the dog's leg is very unlikely to be an MRSA infection - but it would do no harm for the veterinary surgeon to be asked to send a sample to a laboratory for culture.
This sounds to me - but remember I have only your description to go on - like a 'lick granuloma' . This is caused and maintained by the dog persistently licking at one spot. It is really a neurological problem - often in the first instance produced by boredom. Again the vet could do a biopsy and get it checked at a laboratory.
In any case, after going on for so long, it might be a good idea to get it referred to a veterinary dermatologist - there are plenty around.
Walter
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetFri, 06 May 2005 07:59:19 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,803#msg-803 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,803#msg-803My daughter is in isolation right now. She is believed to have MRSA. The results are not back yet. All signs go to MRSA. At home they have a chocolate lab that has had a large open sore on this paw. The vet has never done a culture. The sore has been there for over a year. He has been treated with several antibotics--with no success. What we are wondering is there any chance that this animal has MRSA? We did talk to the vet and he said the chance is less than 1 percent. Our whole family is very concered of her returning home when this is over and getting this back from the dog. Please let me know your thoughts on this. Also I would like to mention the dog has been wearing a cone for months and at times is able to get to the sore and continues to lick when possible. But the point is that the sore never heals. We know that animals sometimes do this because of nervousness, but shouldn't this have healed by now? Thank you very much. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely, Tammy

]]> Tammy Ask The VetThu, 05 May 2005 20:07:32 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,801#msg-801 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,801#msg-801When something goes wrong, SOMEONE is to blame - is that your point?
I do not recall EVER attributing a post-op infection ( happily, I seem to have had very view in the light of your comments) to the owner!
There are several possible causes of peri-operative infection in veterinary surgery:
Animal skin is very much more difficult ro cleanse and sterilize preoperatively than is human skin
Dogs sustain a transient bacteraemia when they defecate, with the very real risk of infection of surgically traumatised tissue.
Dogs and cats tend to lick their surgical wounds - and there mouths are very far from sterile, being meat-eaters. (cats particularly have severely infected, and infectious, mouths).
Operating under an 'antibiotic umbrella' is now frowned upon, but in the human field where there is an identifiable risk of peri-operative infection is is still practised.
Surgical asepsis is difficult ( sometimes impossible) to achieve, and adds considerably to the cost of surgery, already a contentious issue with veterinarian's clients, ( but compare veterinary surgery fees with private human surgery fees, remembering that the same skills and aseptic protocols are required.)
So, it can be very difficult to identify the precise cause of post-operative infection when there are so many possible alternatives. A veterinary surgeon may well be totally innocent of malpractice when the operation site becomes infected, and refusing to 'come out with his hands up' as you seem to wish, would be wholly innappropriate.
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetThu, 05 May 2005 12:19:46 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,800#msg-800 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,800#msg-800I am quite sure that vets do think about their treatment failures and do not wish to repeat them, but it is certainly the experience of pet owners that vets are extremely reluctant to acknowledge even the possibility of a failure on their part. This is particularly apparent when vets are asked about post-operative infections, and the pattern is that a vet will first attribute the infection to the owner, and then to the animal itself (as you did earlier in this thread). As far as MRSA is concerned, the majority of companion animal infections occur in orthopaedic surgical wounds, yet the pattern of response from vets is to deny absolutely the possibility that the operating surgeon had any responsibility. In none of the cases that have come to light in PETS-MRSA.COM has a vet even acknowledged the possibility that the way the procedure was carried out might have had some part to play in the infection.
What pet owners need from vets is honesty, not a list of every conceivable cause of infection regardless of probability. If vets want their concerns with treatment failures or post-operative infections taken seriously then they have to demonstrate that concern rather than keep it a secret.
M]]> Mark D Ask The VetThu, 05 May 2005 09:59:12 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,799#msg-799 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,799#msg-799 Angela Ask The VetThu, 05 May 2005 08:53:23 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,795#msg-795 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,795#msg-795Maybe preventing and treating illness on a world-wide scale is just as important as preventing world hunger. Horses for courses. When farmers in Europe are being paid NOT to produce food, it is the politicians who should be blamed for not getting it to where it is needed, not the 'drug companies' developing new medicines for treating diseases such as AIDS.
Please try again with Dr Scott PARK.
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetWed, 04 May 2005 18:50:24 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,794#msg-794 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,794#msg-794Apologies to Dr Freda Scott-Parker.]]> Angela Watts Ask The VetWed, 04 May 2005 16:03:25 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,791#msg-791 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,791#msg-791Try "Dr Scott Park."
Dr Sisson was talking about the situation in America. Possibly veterinarians there are more cautious about giving a good prognosis when they may be sued if the animal dies in 3 months and not in 2 years!
Veterinarians can only work- and prognose - within the parameters with which thay are familiar.
It would be great to have a nation wide, or better still, international, data base on which all the cases of heart disease could be recorded. Why not one for renal failure, liver failure, arthritis, epilepsy, malignancies and all the other illnesses that veterinary surgeons encounter daily?
Why not indeed - but who would pay for it?
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetWed, 04 May 2005 08:03:42 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,784#msg-784 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,784#msg-784Only last week Vol 35 2nd May Vet Times, front page, 'Heart Disease research branded 'Meaningless'. Conflicting vet stiories and inconclusive research data have been blamed for the profession's tendancy to overestimate the severity of heart disease. Dr David Sisson blamed 'underpowered' studies, with 'no basis in fact', for overly severe prognosis offered to owners of animals suffering heart disease, leading to more animals being EUTHANISED than necesary,simply because of a 'more dismal outlook than reality would justify' Dr Sisson goes on to blame inability to offer accurate diagnosis due to limited studies on small control groups. The difference he says between animal and human studies, is average animal study consists of about 30 cases, human studies entered details of around 3,000 to 4,000 patients.
So like Mark D. I don't know how Ms Parker-Scott can downplay the risks for pets of MRSA, or yourself . Lets hope Ms Parker -Scott doesn't put off any of the entreprising companies very quickly offering 'fashionable' MRSA testing kits.]]> Angela Watts Ask The VetTue, 03 May 2005 14:50:29 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,775#msg-775 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,775#msg-775I do not agree with your implication that veterinary surgeons have a cavalier attitude towards their treatment failures.
During many years in clinical practice I was just as concerned when I retired as when I was a starry eyed new graduate convinced that I was God's gift to the animal kingdom if a case did not turn out as I wished, or if an operation did not go as planned - and no-one is infallible. I always wanted to know (and I think that most veterinary surgeons do too) why things did not go as well as expected, in order to do better next time.
Walter]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetSun, 01 May 2005 15:51:26 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,772#msg-772 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,772#msg-772
]]> Mark D Ask The VetSun, 01 May 2005 09:18:57 +0000 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,771#msg-771 https://www.vetclickforum.co.uk/read.php?7,322,771#msg-771I dispute that my demand for proper diagnosis of suspected MRSA infections is a 'red herring'.
There are other causes of post-operative infection than MRSA - I know from personal experience having suffered a post-op Strep infection myself a few years ago.
MRSA is very 'fashionable' at present, and it is very tempting to be in fashion.
It is also fashionable in some circles to 'knock' science, as you seem to be doing when you say that 'the scientific model is too susceptible to manipulation to be reliable' . Reputable scientists ( and I would like to think that the great majority are) are more concerned with the seach for truth than many who just want a 'quick fix'.
There was an excellent articles on MRSA in veterinary practice in a recent issue of the Veterinary Times (11th April) quoting Dr Freda Scot-Park, incoming president of the British Veterinary Association, calling for more research on the route of spread of MRSA, and it has recently been reported that Professor David Taylior of the University of Glasgow Veterinary School is working closely with the Communicable Diseases (Scotland) unit investigating all suspected cases of MRSA which are brought to his attention.
When the problems associated with MRSA infection are evnetually sorted out, it will be the scientists who will be responsible, in the same way that scientists eradicated smallpox throught the world, polio in western countries
and TB in British cattle until 'conservationts,, flying in the face of all scientic evidence obtained political support to ban the proper culling of badgers in infected areas.
W]]> Walter Beswick Ask The VetSun, 01 May 2005 08:05:52 +0000