Is my interest in vet med too limited?

[kittensmeow]

Hi All,

I come from an urban background and my entire reason for wanting to be a vet is to work with small animals and their owners, in private practice. Even when it comes to small animals I am primarily interested in (i.e. obsessed with and workshipful of) cats, and ideally I would like to work in a feline-only clinic, although I realize this might not be a realistic goal.

Despite only having an interest in SA medicine I have been shadowing several equine vets for the experience and to support my application. The problem is that I really don't enjoy it. I like being in the small animal clinics and feel inspired to pursue vet med every time I am there, but whenever I am out at a farm with one of the equine vets I just feel very out of place and often quite bored. I can appreciate the value of the medical work being done but I don't really feel comfortable in that environment. Nothing against LA vets or the work they do; it just isn't my kind of thing. I simply endure it and go along for the ride in order to clock in a few more hours to put on my application.

My concern is that this doesn't seem to bode well for my vet school future, since LA makes up a large part of the curriculum, does it not? I'm worried that my somewhat narrow interest in the veterinary field will make it very difficult for me to tough out the rigors of vet school. Is there anyone out there in vet school who has a similar disinterest in LA? How do you deal with all the related work you have to do in school?

Moreover, I am a professional musician and I am a bit concerned about injuring my hands, which are my livelihood. This seems to be a risk in LA work, so would this also be a risk during vet school?

Thanks in advance for any feedback!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gwenevre]

In vet school curriculum, there will be a balance of SA, LA, exotics, wildlife, etc. You need to know all of those species to pass the NAVLE to get your DVM. You don't have to like them, but you have to learn them. During clinics, you will take a range of LA and SA rotations. You don't have to like the LA rotations, but you will have to have common professionalism while working with those animals, which I'm sure you're familiar with while shadowing equine vets!

As far as working with felines only, in my town there is a cat hospital. So a feline-only practice. It's totally do-able.

 

[Frozenshades]

In vet school curriculum, there will be a balance of SA, LA, exotics, wildlife, etc. You need to know all of those species to pass the NAVLE to get your DVM. You don't have to like them, but you have to learn them. During clinics, you will take a range of LA and SA rotations. You don't have to like the LA rotations, but you will have to have common professionalism while working with those animals, which I'm sure you're familiar with while shadowing equine vets!

As far as working with felines only, in my town there is a cat hospital. So a feline-only practice. It's totally do-able.

Pretty much sums it up. Make the most of it, do your best with the large animal clinicians despite it not being your forte, and everyone will end up happy. After vet school I'll be fine if I never touch a horse or cow for the rest of my life, but until then I'll do what's required me as best I can. No one expects everyone to want to specialize in their field, just to have a good attitude about it.

As for injuries, matter of opinion but I'd be more afraid of a cat trashing my hand than a horse...

 

[Starry-chan]

PAs for injuries, matter of opinion but I'd be more afraid of a cat trashing my hand than a horse...

Cat bites are the worst kind of bite you can get, aren't they? I heard they get infected really easily and that if you don't go to the ER for IV atibiotics, things can turn out really poorly....tho the person I heard this from had been bitten in a joint. Maybe it's different if they just got you in he muscle or something.

 

[dyachei]

Cat bites are the worst kind of bite you can get, aren't they? I heard they get infected really easily and that if you don't go to the ER for IV atibiotics, things can turn out really poorly....tho the person I heard this from had been bitten in a joint. Maybe it's different if they just got you in he muscle or something.

cat bites are pretty freaking awful. especially in joints. You can lose a finger, hand etc even if treated appropriately (though it's rare). Dogs can also do this.

 

[twelvetigers]

Yeah, cats >>> horses for hurt hands. It's a risk. That's something for you to decide about on your own.

Wanting to be a feline only vet is definitely not that abnormal (unless you are taking to a LA person, in which case you will get a look like you have three heads). At least one person in my class loves cats and went into a feline only place, and plenty of others (myself included) went into SA private practice and see plenty of cats. Yeah, doing the LA part of the curriculum kinda sucks, but the LA folks feel the same way when they sit through lectures on herpes virus and FeLV/FIV. There's always gonna be something you aren't that keen on, but you just learn it anyway and move on. And keep getting the volunteer experience as you can - they like to see that you've done a bit of everything.

 

[hazelmoo]

I think it's completely normal to have a vey specific idea of the perfect career and job type for you. I really don't see that being a problem at all as long as you go into school with an open mind and ready to learn about other species too!

 

[Filly Bay]

I think you'll be fine. Like twelvetigers said, everyone has to sit through lectures that aren't relevant to what they want to do in practice. I know a handful of people in my class wanting to focus on felines or do feline only if possible. Just try to have a good attitude and an open mind during the LA/Equine/Wildlife lectures.

As an equine person, the last thing I want to hear when we finally have one lecture in a class on horses is all of the small animal folks near me saying "Ugh, we do we have to learn about horses!" The majority of the curriculum is geared towards dogs and cats (at least at my school) so I don't think it's a huge deal to learn about the larger furry friends every once in a while

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

The OP really understands how backwards the veterinary education process is because these issues have been brought up in veterinary academic circles now for over twenty five years as whether omnicompetence among major species makes any sense at all. It used too 40-50 years ago but almost every veterinary academic who controls the curriculum seems to keep pushing this Luddite vision of the professional duties expected of a veterinarian even though they are highly specialized as an MDs. This is one reason why I think more graduates feel they have to do internships, which are now almost required in some fields like equine practice, but that just adds to the cost of education. The truth is that there is a limit to what anyone, no matter how smart they are, can cram in and actually learn to apply effectively and safely. Richard Halliwell, who taught at Edinburgh and Penn, wrote this article, VETERINARY EDUCATION : TIME TO ABANDON THE CULT OF COVERAGE for the Canadian Vet Journal in 1999 on the National Library of Medicine. It is really a sign of the backwardness and intellectual dishonesty of the profession that they continue to ignore this for decades. Interestingly, the Belgian Veterinary School at the University of Ghent solved this by keeping a core curriculum but then allowing the final 2 years completely tracking along a class/species track like equine, food animal or companion animal which was suggested to the US veterinary schools over twenty years ago in the PEW Report on Veterinary Medicine in 1989.

 

[LadyOtheFarm]

My understanding was that many of the schools I was looking at do track during their final 2 years. I'm one of the nuts that would be happiest in a mixed animal practice as I loved parts of large, small, exotic, avian, and wildlife medicine, but the schools that I know the most about track students into predominantly food animal, equine or small animal medicine. (Though the food animal kids I know complain that there are nowhere near as many specific classes for them as for small animal...)

It may not be as segregated as I think though since I get all this from students complaining about one aspect or the other of the programs.

 

[SocialStigma]

I am a small animal veterinarian and knew going into vet school that I was 100% only interested in SA practice. I actually hated learning about pigs and chickens in vet school because I knew the information would never be useful to me post-vet school. Everyone sits through classes that they find boring, most people in vet school aside from the mixed animal people will have some sort of species preference. Luckily I attended a school that has fourth year streaming..so I haven't touched a horse/cow since 3rd year and all of my clinical rotations were with small animals.

 

[Lab Vet]

I disagree with the idea of specializing early on. I'm a lab animal person, but I enjoy learning about all species covered in the curriculum. Several of our food animal profs have pointed out that, no matter what your specialty, veterinarians are considered to be the 'go to expert on all things animal.' This means that a client may show up at the door to your SA clinic, asking your opinion about confinement stalls in commercial pork production or the presence of antibiotics in meat. It's important for all veterinarians to have at least a basic understanding of these issues, and the ability to convey the facts to the general public. That responsibility alone should motivate your desire to be attentive in your large animal classes.

To the OP...have you ever worked directly with cows, pigs, poultry, etc.? How do you know that you won't enjoy this work if you've never tried it? Vet school is a lot about exploring the many opportunities that are out there. I routinely attend seminars and wet labs related to all sorts of specialties. The way I see it, this extracurricular exposure supplements my core education. I like the idea of the veterinarian as generalist. Since when did we as a profession become so species-centric? I get that technology advances as a pretty rapid clip, but it's wise to remember that back in the day, veterinary medicine was established for the express purpose of caring for the health of economically important species- namely, food animals and working horses. Companion animal medicine didn't come a long until much later.

I would also add to the OP, that if you intend to attend a state-funded school of vet med here in the US, it is likely that much emphasis will be placed on food animal species that are important to the state in which you reside. There will be talks on global and local demand, pricing strategy, production costs, etc. Veterinary medicine at it's introductory levels (which is what vet school is) is broad by design.

I would argue that yes, your focus is too narrow. Many SA people on this board (who have already graduated, and are way ahead of me) seem to disagree, so perhaps mine is no longer the majority opinion. It irks me when I hear people in my class (and yes, most of these folks do fall into the SA camp) complain re: learning about non-SA species. Vet school is an amazing experience and remarkable opportunity to broaden yourself.

If you simply 'grin and bear' 1/3 to 1/2 of your vet school curriculum because you only want to work with cats, is it really worth doing? What if that career path doesn't work out for you? Lab animal is my first love, but if it doesn't happen to work out, I have other areas of interest that would also make me happy. Any time a person's focus is too narrow, he or she sets him/herself up for disappointment because things are rarely what we project them to be in our minds. Setting specifics on a pedestal often ends in disillusionment.

It's not my goal to dissuade you from the profession. Just remember, when you graduate from vet school you're an 'animal doctor.' Remember, real doctors treat more than one species.

 

[DVMDream]

Meh, you have to learn it all. You don't have to be interested in it all, but you do have to suck it up and learn it. Yeah, I didn't care much for the food animal side of things. I had a little more interest in equine things and my top interest is small animals.

Horses are kind of like giant herbivorous cats though in some ways... I mean, at some level medicine is medicine and you can learn a lot from any species.

The only thing you really need to be aware of is your attitude while learning the things you don't care about. I don't give a rat's ass about pigs. And I definitely could care less about birds. But going around complaining about "why do I need to learn this" will only get you incredibly dirty looks from those who are interested in pigs or birds. I pick these two species in particular because if any small animal person thinks it is bad with all the "non-important" things they need to learn, those interested in pigs and poultry have it worse. There just are not near as many lectures on pigs and poultry as there are on cats/dogs, horses and cattle.

 

[DVMDream]

Since when did we as a profession become so species-centric? I get that technology advances as a pretty rapid clip, but it's wise to remember that back in the day, veterinary medicine was established for the express purpose of caring for the health of economically important species- namely, food animals and working horses. Companion animal medicine didn't come a long until much later.

Except we aren't "back in the day" anymore. We have added companion animal care and it happens to be a big part of what veterinarians do. I often wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric. There is no way that anyone can have the knowledge to care for and treat every species besides the human being. And I think we do a bit of a disservice to patients when we try to fool ourselves into thinking "oh well I am veterinarian and I learned about goats in vet school. Sure I haven't seen a goat or read anything about goats in 15 years, but I am a vet and therefore I can treat it." It is kind of silly. I get that idea of the generalist, heck I want to do GP work, but I know that I can't make a good GP for cats, dogs, horses, cows, sheep, pigs, goats, guinea pigs, etc. I do know that I can be a good (at least I hope so) GP for cats and dogs. I do know that I feel comfortable with those species. I do know that I have enough interest in those species to keep learning and keep up on new advances in medicine. Just like one of my classmates has an interest in doing the same thing for poultry and my roommate wants to do that same for pigs and another one of my rotation mates wants to do the same for horses. We have our interests. Just like (nearly) every person here would agree that "humans are gross" some of us are bored by pig medicine and production medicine and you know what... that is completely ok. Some others don't want to deal with Mrs. Jones and her precious Pomeranian named Fluffy... and that is ok. Since when should veterinarians not have somewhat specific interest that boils down to them only work with one, two or maybe three species? And shouldn't that more narrowed focus allow them to be more knowledgeable in those species that he/she is interested in.

 

[Starry-chan]

I'm one of the nuts that would be happiest in a mixed animal practice...

I don't think you're nuts I think you would have a lot of variety!

 

[CalliopeDVM]

..... Nothing against LA vets or the work they do; it just isn't my kind of thing. I simply endure it and go along for the ride in order to clock in a few more hours to put on my application.

My concern is that this doesn't seem to bode well for my vet school future, since LA makes up a large part of the curriculum, does it not? I'm worried that my somewhat narrow interest in the veterinary field will make it very difficult for me to tough out the rigors of vet school. Is there anyone out there in vet school who has a similar disinterest in LA? How do you deal with all the related work you have to do in school?

Moreover, I am a professional musician and I am a bit concerned about injuring my hands, which are my livelihood. This seems to be a risk in LA work, so would this also be a risk during vet school?

Thanks in advance for any feedback!

Yeah, join the club........we all had to learn things that didn't really interest us. Some of them are worthwhile (in the scientific/comparative anatomy sense) and some won't be we worthwhile to the rest of your life, but that's life and vet school. Some people are bored sitting through the small animal classes, and know they will never see a cat as a patient. Some are bored through the equine classes, some through the avian classes and (through my experience) almost everyone is bored through the swine classes. Getting through those rigorous classes is just one of the hoops you jump through, and everyone does it (but everyone's hoops are different). You learn the stuff, do the work, and move on.

Injuring your hands? Far more likely with small animal work than with large animal work. In LA work, your major joints and back are more at risk; in SA work, it's more your hands and face (the parts that are closest to the patient).

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I feel like my hands are the last thing I worry about around large animals (think feet, legs, spine, brain), although your hands can easily be injured as well. Wanting to work in SA isn't a narrow interest. Wanting to work in a cat-only clinic a bit narrow, and it might be harder to get a job at a cat clinic right out of school since those aren't as common. You're in a more realistic spot than you realize.

 

[Lab Vet]

Except we aren't "back in the day" anymore. We have added companion animal care and it happens to be a big part of what veterinarians do. I often wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric. There is no way that anyone can have the knowledge to care for and treat every species besides the human being. And I think we do a bit of a disservice to patients when we try to fool ourselves into thinking "oh well I am veterinarian and I learned about goats in vet school. Sure I haven't seen a goat or read anything about goats in 15 years, but I am a vet and therefore I can treat it." It is kind of silly. I get that idea of the generalist, heck I want to do GP work, but I know that I can't make a good GP for cats, dogs, horses, cows, sheep, pigs, goats, guinea pigs, etc. I do know that I can be a good (at least I hope so) GP for cats and dogs. I do know that I feel comfortable with those species. I do know that I have enough interest in those species to keep learning and keep up on new advances in medicine. Just like one of my classmates has an interest in doing the same thing for poultry and my roommate wants to do that same for pigs and another one of my rotation mates wants to do the same for horses. We have our interests. Just like (nearly) every person here would agree that "humans are gross" some of us are bored by pig medicine and production medicine and you know what... that is completely ok. Some others don't want to deal with Mrs. Jones and her precious Pomeranian named Fluffy... and that is ok. Since when should veterinarians not have somewhat specific interest that boils down to them only work with one, two or maybe three species? And shouldn't that more narrowed focus allow them to be more knowledgeable in those species that he/she is interested in.

That's fair. I won't argue you there. I have a soft spot in my heart for history, so it's important to me to know how veterinary medicine originated as a profession. It's a proud tradition to uphold, and I consider that part of my personal responsibility. I suppose it boils down to how you view the purpose of veterinary education. To me, vet school is very much an 'introduction to the profession.' You're right- I certainly won't consider myself to be a qualified generalist for every species when a graduate (far from it). From where I sit, the true nuts-and-bolts learning will come from your OTJ training post-graduation. That's where you'll learn to be a skilled practitioner in SA, LA, exotics, poultry, or whatever you choose to do. That being said, as a veterinary student, I do think it's important to be broad. School (in my opinion) is not the time to specialize. When I attend classes (or labs, etc) I approach these exercises with the expectation to expand my knowledge base. This doesn't make me an expert, by any stretch of the imagination. No student is an expert the day he or she graduates. I agree with my food animal profs that veterinarians are expected (whether or not that expectation is justified) to be a qualified source of information concerning animal 'issues' in the public eye (welfare, antibiotic use, etc.). How can I expect to relay the facts to this person if I don't know them myself. More to the point, how can I form a reasonable opinion about them if I know nothing of the industry, or biology of affected animals?

There are many folks who agree with you, that vets should move the way of specialization. Even human MDs don't do that, though. A 3rd year medical student doesn't leave school as a cardiologist. He or she rotates through many specialties before deciding on an area of focus. Yes, it's true- vet med is different because there aren't compulsory residencies. That fact alone makes the training (and expectations) different.

I suppose I'm just old school. I'd be one of those folks on the faculty committee fighting tooth and nail for a broad curriculum, while younger faculty members would likely be pushing for specialization. To each his or her own

 

[Starry-chan]

Except we aren't "back in the day" anymore. We have added companion animal care and it happens to be a big part of what veterinarians do. I often wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric.

I can see the value of specialization. If I was gonna be a vet (I'm not but if I was), I'd probably be happiest doing just canine sports medicine because I'm so into dogs, dog sports, and the musculoskeletal system. And because I love cats and horses but I'm allergic to cats and wouldn't want a horse to kill me, hehe.

 

[DVMDream]

There are many folks who agree with you, that vets should move the way of specialization. Even human MDs don't do that, though. A 3rd year medical student doesn't leave school as a cardiologist. He or she rotates through many specialties before deciding on an area of focus. Yes, it's true- vet med is different because there aren't compulsory residencies. That fact alone makes the training (and expectations) different.

You are kind of comparing apples to oranges here. Because this isn't an appropriate comparison of a 3rd year med student to a 3rd year vet student. I'm not saying that we need a bunch of vets leaving vet school as cardiologists, dermatologists, etc, etc as you are implying. We still do internships and residencies for those things as we should be. The LARGE difference between vet med students and human med students is that a 4th year vet med student is expected to have broad knowledge of ALL species (minus humans) and a med student is expected to have broad knowledge of one species. That is the major difference. I am not even suggesting we have more and more specialties in vet med. I don't think we need neonatal specialists in vet med. I don't think we need to break down oncology into radiation oncology and medical oncology and surgical oncology and pediatric oncology.

I am simply stating that I don't wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric.. not specialty centric. There is a big difference there. In that there will be some vets that do small animal, some that do poultry, etc, etc. I don't believe that it would work. It would be near impossible to implement. And then those that start off as food animal vets have no small animal work back-up should they get severely injured. However, that is also somewhat why I don't wonder if we should get more species-centric... you can't go from doing 85% of your work on cattle and the other 15% on other food animals and expect to jump back into small animal after 20 years of never doing small animal medicine. But this does happen and I often wonder if (at times, not all the time, but at times) it isn't a detriment to our patients and profession. I am looking at say... the Dr. Polesque types.

 

[Lab Vet]

You are kind of comparing apples to oranges here. Because this isn't an appropriate comparison of a 3rd year med student to a 3rd year vet student. I'm not saying that we need a bunch of vets leaving vet school as cardiologists, dermatologists, etc, etc as you are implying. We still do internships and residencies for those things as we should be. The LARGE difference between vet med students and human med students is that a 4th year vet med student is expected to have broad knowledge of ALL species (minus humans) and a med student is expected to have broad knowledge of one species. That is the major difference. I am not even suggesting we have more and more specialties in vet med. I don't think we need neonatal specialists in vet med. I don't think we need to break down oncology into radiation oncology and medical oncology and surgical oncology and pediatric oncology.

I am simply stating that I don't wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric.. not specialty centric. There is a big difference there. In that there will be some vets that do small animal, some that do poultry, etc, etc. I don't believe that it would work. It would be near impossible to implement. And then those that start off as food animal vets have no small animal work back-up should they get severely injured. However, that is also somewhat why I don't wonder if we should get more species-centric... you can't go from doing 85% of your work on cattle and the other 15% on other food animals and expect to jump back into small animal after 20 years of never doing small animal medicine. But this does happen and I often wonder if (at times, not all the time, but at times) it isn't a detriment to our patients and profession. I am looking at say... the Dr. Polesque types.

Yup. I can agree with this. You're right about the comparison- MD and DVM training are different in almost every way. I also agree that a bovine vet who had been doing that work for 35 years couldn't simply jump into modern SA practice and be ready to go in a week. It would take quite a while to get that individual up to speed on the current state of the art. You've made some good points here. Thanks for the input.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

Except we aren't "back in the day" anymore. We have added companion animal care and it happens to be a big part of what veterinarians do. I often wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric. There is no way that anyone can have the knowledge to care for and treat every species besides the human being. And I think we do a bit of a disservice to patients when we try to fool ourselves into thinking "oh well I am veterinarian and I learned about goats in vet school. Sure I haven't seen a goat or read anything about goats in 15 years, but I am a vet and therefore I can treat it." It is kind of silly. I get that idea of the generalist, heck I want to do GP work, but I know that I can't make a good GP for cats, dogs, horses, cows, sheep, pigs, goats, guinea pigs, etc. I do know that I can be a good (at least I hope so) GP for cats and dogs. I do know that I feel comfortable with those species. I do know that I have enough interest in those species to keep learning and keep up on new advances in medicine. Just like one of my classmates has an interest in doing the same thing for poultry and my roommate wants to do that same for pigs and another one of my rotation mates wants to do the same for horses. We have our interests. Just like (nearly) every person here would agree that "humans are gross" some of us are bored by pig medicine and production medicine and you know what... that is completely ok. Some others don't want to deal with Mrs. Jones and her precious Pomeranian named Fluffy... and that is ok. Since when should veterinarians not have somewhat specific interest that boils down to them only work with one, two or maybe three species? And shouldn't that more narrowed focus allow them to be more knowledgeable in those species that he/she is interested in.

I wonder how a more species-centric program would be designed, though. More or less, it seems like schools just teach for the NAVLE sometimes. We'd need different boar exams, right? Would more seats be added if the entire class is broken up into smaller groups that track from day one? These are all hypothetical questions, and I definitely don't disagree with your ideas. I just wonder if such a program would be feasible if only a few schools moved towards it.

That's fair. I won't argue you there. I have a soft spot in my heart for history, so it's important to me to know how veterinary medicine originated as a profession. It's a proud tradition to uphold, and I consider that part of my personal responsibility. I suppose it boils down to how you view the purpose of veterinary education. To me, vet school is very much an 'introduction to the profession.' You're right- I certainly won't consider myself to be a qualified generalist for every species when a graduate (far from it). From where I sit, the true nuts-and-bolts learning will come from your OTJ training post-graduation. That's where you'll learn to be a skilled practitioner in SA, LA, exotics, poultry, or whatever you choose to do. That being said, as a veterinary student, I do think it's important to be broad. School (in my opinion) is not the time to specialize. When I attend classes (or labs, etc) I approach these exercises with the expectation to expand my knowledge base. This doesn't make me an expert, by any stretch of the imagination. No student is an expert the day he or she graduates. I agree with my food animal profs that veterinarians are expected (whether or not that expectation is justified) to be a qualified source of information concerning animal 'issues' in the public eye (welfare, antibiotic use, etc.). How can I expect to relay the facts to this person if I don't know them myself. More to the point, how can I form a reasonable opinion about them if I know nothing of the industry, or biology of affected animals?

There are many folks who agree with you, that vets should move the way of specialization. Even human MDs don't do that, though. A 3rd year medical student doesn't leave school as a cardiologist. He or she rotates through many specialties before deciding on an area of focus. Yes, it's true- vet med is different because there aren't compulsory residencies. That fact alone makes the training (and expectations) different.

I suppose I'm just old school. I'd be one of those folks on the faculty committee fighting tooth and nail for a broad curriculum, while younger faculty members would likely be pushing for specialization. To each his or her own

Comparing med students to vet students is comparing apples to oranges. The whole "Real doctors treat more than one species" thing isn't entirely ridiculous. I'm not saying medical doctors aren't real doctors or that vets are better than them, but when you compare med to vet students, vet students are expected to have a working knowledge of around 8 species (lumping dairy and beef) at the time of graduation/NAVLE, more if your program requires exotic rotations. Who's expected to hit the ground running after graduation? Veterinary students. You'd think it'd be the opposite.

Also, fun fact-Missouri decided to do away with compulsory medical residencies if the new grad worked in underserved rural areas. The opponents (aka other doctors) of the law basically said that new grads from medical school are dangerous and don't have the skills they need to practice medicine. That boggles my mind. How can new veterinary grads be able to practice medicine immediately, yet new medical grads are considered a danger? I'll admit that I'm more or less unaware of how medical school curriculums are designed, but it's still crazy to think about.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

You are kind of comparing apples to oranges here. Because this isn't an appropriate comparison of a 3rd year med student to a 3rd year vet student. I'm not saying that we need a bunch of vets leaving vet school as cardiologists, dermatologists, etc, etc as you are implying. We still do internships and residencies for those things as we should be. The LARGE difference between vet med students and human med students is that a 4th year vet med student is expected to have broad knowledge of ALL species (minus humans) and a med student is expected to have broad knowledge of one species. That is the major difference. I am not even suggesting we have more and more specialties in vet med. I don't think we need neonatal specialists in vet med. I don't think we need to break down oncology into radiation oncology and medical oncology and surgical oncology and pediatric oncology.

I am simply stating that I don't wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric.. not specialty centric. There is a big difference there. In that there will be some vets that do small animal, some that do poultry, etc, etc. I don't believe that it would work. It would be near impossible to implement. And then those that start off as food animal vets have no small animal work back-up should they get severely injured. However, that is also somewhat why I don't wonder if we should get more species-centric... you can't go from doing 85% of your work on cattle and the other 15% on other food animals and expect to jump back into small animal after 20 years of never doing small animal medicine. But this does happen and I often wonder if (at times, not all the time, but at times) it isn't a detriment to our patients and profession. I am looking at say... the Dr. Polesque types.

Sniped. This is what happens when I take too long to try to articulate my thoughts...

 

[hazelmoo]

Except we aren't "back in the day" anymore. We have added companion animal care and it happens to be a big part of what veterinarians do. I often wonder if we shouldn't be more species-centric. There is no way that anyone can have the knowledge to care for and treat every species besides the human being. And I think we do a bit of a disservice to patients when we try to fool ourselves into thinking "oh well I am veterinarian and I learned about goats in vet school. Sure I haven't seen a goat or read anything about goats in 15 years, but I am a vet and therefore I can treat it." It is kind of silly. I get that idea of the generalist, heck I want to do GP work, but I know that I can't make a good GP for cats, dogs, horses, cows, sheep, pigs, goats, guinea pigs, etc. I do know that I can be a good (at least I hope so) GP for cats and dogs. I do know that I feel comfortable with those species. I do know that I have enough interest in those species to keep learning and keep up on new advances in medicine. Just like one of my classmates has an interest in doing the same thing for poultry and my roommate wants to do that same for pigs and another one of my rotation mates wants to do the same for horses. We have our interests. Just like (nearly) every person here would agree that "humans are gross" some of us are bored by pig medicine and production medicine and you know what... that is completely ok. Some others don't want to deal with Mrs. Jones and her precious Pomeranian named Fluffy... and that is ok. Since when should veterinarians not have somewhat specific interest that boils down to them only work with one, two or maybe three species? And shouldn't that more narrowed focus allow them to be more knowledgeable in those species that he/she is interested in.

I agree.. I deeply offended one of my friends who wants to be a large animal vet by saying that I wouldn't feel comfortable taking my dogs or cat to a strictly large animal vet, and that I would rather take them to a small animal vet. She is more of a generalist in thinking that all vets can take care of any species, but when in comes to my dogs or cats, I would rather go to a vet that sees mostly dogs or cats. And if I had a horse, I would want them to go to a vet who is used to seeing mostly horses. And I wouldn't take my snake to a vet that is not experienced with snakes unless I absolutely had to! (Thank goodness for VIN though)

 

[DVMDream]

I wonder how a more species-centric program would be designed, though. More or less, it seems like schools just teach for the NAVLE sometimes. We'd need different boar exams, right? Would more seats be added if the entire class is broken up into smaller groups that track from day one? These are all hypothetical questions, and I definitely don't disagree with your ideas. I just wonder if such a program would be feasible if only a few schools moved towards it.

Yeah, my previous post was stating that I don't think it would work out. I don't think more seats would be added... it would just be (hopefully) x number of seats out of 100 for food animal, x number for small, etc. But I really, really do not see it working out like that. And if something like that were attempted, what happens to all the currently licensed vets? Grand-fathered in as being licensed for all species? Yeah, definitely not something that would happen.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I agree.. I deeply offended one of my friends who wants to be a large animal vet by saying that I wouldn't feel comfortable taking my dogs or cat to a strictly large animal vet, and that I would rather take them to a small animal vet. She is more of a generalist in thinking that all vets can take care of any species, but when in comes to my dogs or cats, I would rather go to a vet that sees mostly dogs or cats. And if I had a horse, I would want them to go to a vet who is used to seeing mostly horses. And I wouldn't take my snake to a vet that is not experienced with snakes unless I absolutely had to! (Thank goodness for VIN though)

It's kind of funny, some large animal vets are happy to at least vaccinate companion animals. Small animal vets don't do that with horses or food animals typically. I did work for a vet that said she'd go see a large animal for an emergency if needed, but that's it.

 

[Caia]

Meh, I know a number of equine vets that take their dogs to a companion animal vet. In regards to staying up to date, I would expect that way more of a vet in that field than one that wasn't. I prefer to think of it as having the latest knowledge in that area vs. not being competent, but that's me.

 

[hazelmoo]

It's kind of funny, some large animal vets are happy to at least vaccinate companion animals. Small animal vets don't do that with horses or food animals typically. I did work for a vet that said she'd go see a large animal for an emergency if needed, but that's it.

I can't wait to learn about everything, because I feel like I should know the basics for all common species, just in case of emergency! But I don't see myself working on large animals on a regular basis!

 

[DVMDream]

I can't wait to learn about everything, because I feel like I should know the basics for all common species, just in case of emergency!

Would you really want someone who "just knows the basics" to be working on your dog/cat in an emergency?? An emergency situation is when you need someone that has the depth of knowledge and is familiar with and comfortable with that species. That isn't the time for the person who "knows the basics". I would most definitely not feel comfortable treating a cow in an emergency situation. Hell no. Give me a hit by car dog and I am good to go. A cow with a true emergency.. nope. A horse with a true emergency.. hell no. And this isn't just directed at you, I just happened to quote your post. This also applies to what PP mentioned above about the vet she worked with stating they would go see a large animal in emergency. That had better be one hell of an emergency where there is absolutely no one more experienced and more prepared available to care for that animal. At least for me.

 

[Starry-chan]

I can't wait to learn about everything, because I feel like I should know the basics for all common species, just in case of emergency!

I love your enthusiasm

 

[hazelmoo]

Would you really want someone who "just knows the basics" to be working on your dog/cat in an emergency?? An emergency situation is when you need someone that has the depth of knowledge and is familiar with and comfortable with that species. That isn't the time for the person who "knows the basics". I would most definitely not feel comfortable treating a cow in an emergency situation. Hell no. Give me a hit by car dog and I am good to go. A cow with a true emergency.. nope. A horse with a true emergency.. hell no. And this isn't just directed at you, I just happened to quote your post. This also applies to what PP mentioned above about the vet she worked with stating they would go see a large animal in emergency. That had better be one hell of an emergency where there is absolutely no one more experienced and more prepared available to care for that animal. At least for me.

I completely agree, but in case if I was stuck on a hiking trail in the middle of nowhere and there was a horse with some sort of emergency, it would be important for me to know the basics to be able to do anything! If there was no one else around, I would hope that if someone was a veterinarian they would know what everyone has to learn to at least try to help.

Edit: I wouldn't feel comfortable either, but if I HAD to, I would still try if it were a life or death situation!

 

[DVMDream]

I completely agree, but in case if I was stuck on a hiking trail in the middle of nowhere and there was a horse with some sort of emergency, it would be important for me to know the basics to be able to do anything! If there was no one else around, I would hope that if someone was a veterinarian they would know what everyone has to learn to at least try to help.

Edit: I wouldn't feel comfortable either, but if I HAD to, I would still try if it were a life or death situation!

You need drugs and supplies in life/death situation. You won't have those on a hike. The best you might be able to do, is assist in getting the animal to help or getting help to the animal. I mean, besides basics of applying pressure to bleeding wounds. CPR on a large animal just really isn't possible without equipment.

 

[Caia]

You need drugs and supplies in life/death situation. You won't have those on a hike. The best you might be able to do, is assist in getting the animal to help or getting help to the animal. I mean, besides basics of applying pressure to bleeding wounds. CPR on a large animal just really isn't possible without equipment.

ninja'd! lol

 

[Caia]

If you came across a car or trailer wreck even...you would still need the appropriate drugs for that animal. Beyond basic first aid and helping round up animals, not much can be done.

 

[hazelmoo]

You need drugs and supplies in life/death situation. You won't have those on a hike. The best you might be able to do, is assist in getting the animal to help or getting help to the animal. I mean, besides basics of applying pressure to bleeding wounds. CPR on a large animal just really isn't possible without equipment.

Ugh, I have a lot to learn in vet school! I always think of the crazy things in the news or TV shows with human doctors puncturing someone's throat with a pen when they have a life threatening obstruction or if they can't breathe or something.. Or when they splint s leg with random materials they find in the wild... Lol

 

[Minnerbelle]

I completely agree, but in case if I was stuck on a hiking trail in the middle of nowhere and there was a horse with some sort of emergency, it would be important for me to know the basics to be able to do anything! If there was no one else around, I would hope that if someone was a veterinarian they would know what everyone has to learn to at least try to help.

Edit: I wouldn't feel comfortable either, but if I HAD to, I would still try if it were a life or death situation!

Honestly, the most helpful thing I could do in a situation like that is get out of the way and call for help.

The horse owner and her trail riding friends would likely be way more helpful than me. That horse either needs to be transported where it can get help, or someone with drugs/equipment needs to come by. Until then, safe handling of the horse is the most important thing, and I can assure you that a lay horse person will be able to do that far better than I can. I think it would be dangerous to assume that what little you learn in vet school makes you qualified to do a lot of things just because you're licensed to do so.

I'm not sure what life or death situation I would ever be helpful in. I could maybe draw an x on a large animal's head to let an officer know where to aim and shoot. But that's about it.

 

[missdarjeeling]

Yeah, we have a few clients who are equine vets. I saw one of them a while back when she brought in her cat. I went into the appointment expecting her to know almost everything, and it kind of caught me off guard when she had to have our doctor explain the bloodwork results. It seemed obvious after the fact -- why would an equine vet need to remember enough details about cats to interpret bloodwork results? It was kind of an "oh, duh" reminder that having had to learn everything in vet school once doesn't mean you'll forever be capable of comfortably practicing on every species you once worked on. I guess I still tend to kind of agree with the generalists to some extent, but my opinion has changed a little with time. Like with other fields of study, I'm sure there's a lot of value in learning and establishing a wide knowledge base, especially since you're exposed to new areas, but there doesn't seem to be much payoff in terms of practical knowledge. I mean, all of us learned about plants in first year biology class, and the process probably contributed to our overall education, but how many of us have retained enough knowledge to answer someone's questions about plant vascular systems without reaching for some kind of reference material?

Anyway, back on topic, if wanting to focus on SA is too limited, I'm screwed, too. In all honesty, though, I had this conversation with two of the doctors at work recently, and neither of them had any interest in LA either. One of them was terrified of horses. They put in the effort and work they needed to put in to get through class, and that was the end of it. They did fine in their classes, passed the NAVLE, and got jobs in SA. So it's certainly doable. No one's ever going to like every aspect of the curriculum, so it's just a matter of having the discipline to suck it up, take it seriously, and do your job. Like everyone else has said, it's always a good idea to remain open-minded and keep a good attitude towards learning about things you weren't originally interested in. You never know what might happen or where your interests will lead you (that's how I ended up doing Slavic linguistics my first time around ). I'm looking forward to the prospect of working with species other than cats and dogs because, hey, when else am I going to get a chance to do this?

 

[twelvetigers]

I'm fine with learning about every species in years 1-3. You need that to pass boards anyway. But man, if we could pick to NOT do food animal or equine stuff during 4th year, that would be awesome. I would have had time to take cardio instead, maybe do some dentistry... way more useful to me than the others. And equine med took me way out of my comfort zone...

 

[Minnerbelle]

To the OP, just wanting to do SA in practice is not a problem, as that's kind of the default in terms of what jobs are out there. At some point in your career it should also be feasible to do feline only, though I wouldn't advise it straight out of school. I've not heard of a case where someone was dead set on SA but had to take a some other kind of vet job because they couldn't find a position (though there are increasingly more people who are having a hard time finding a position period). It happens all the time when someone is dead set on other species or specialty... but ends up needing to take a SA job all the time (even equine!) but not really the other way around.

 

[CalliopeDVM]

To the OP, just wanting to do SA in practice is not a problem, as that's kind of the default in terms of what jobs are out there. At some point in your career it should also be feasible to do feline only, though I wouldn't advise it straight out of school. I've not heard of a case where someone was dead set on SA but had to take a some other kind of vet job because they couldn't find a position (though there are increasingly more people who are having a hard time finding a position period). It happens all the time when someone is dead set on other species or specialty... but ends up needing to take a SA job all the time (even equine!) but not really the other way around.

That was me - wanted to do avian/exotic, but I had to go with the available jobs.

 

[kittensmeow]

Wow, I'm delighted to see so many detailed responses, and have enjoyed reading the various 'mini-threads' that have diverged into other topics! This is all very encouraging and I feel much less concerned about my situation (except for the idea that cats might destroy my hands and face...YIKES!) I foster cats/kittens from a local shelter, some of whom are borderline feral, and I've escaped any physical harm thus far, but I do adopt a very cautious approach when handling some of them. I'll be doubly on guard during tonight's play session, after reading some these posts!

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Heck, I always bring my dog and cat in to see the community practice/small animal service here. Part of me feels a bit odd about it because sure, I am a DVM.....but I haven't dealt with hands-on medicine in over 5 years now. I mean sure, I still remember quite a bit, but I wouldn't trust myself on the subtleties anymore.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

The real problem in implementing this is that you will have to get all states to agree to use a similar system for licensing and certification of competency in a specific field which really is what board exams do for all of the specialists. Different states have their own degree of backwardness where if you are just trying to get licensed to do the same thing you have done for years, they can require you to take NAVLE and pass it, of course, you probably forgot all of the information on pigs and chickens but still that could keep you from getting a license to do small animal practice that you have done from corporate to emergency practice. If you need to move to another state to find a job or buy a practice later in your career, I do not think a state board should be able to keep you out if you are essentially competent in the state you are leaving. I am all for periodic recertification in your arena of practice through testing to make sure you are keeping current, but make that all you need to move to a new state as long as your record is clean.

 

[that redhead]

I'm one of those people who loved learning about and loves now working with everything. I'm currently working as an SA GP but I have a strong equine background and LOVE me some small ruminants. I did my friend's goats' CIDRs just the other day...she knows I'm not an LA practitioner, but I'm fresh enough out of school that I remember these things and love the opportunity to work outside my normal bounds. One day I'm going to have a backyard chicken vet business, too, but that's a bit down the road right now. I like the "catch-all" potential of the career.

That all being said, as long as you aren't one of those vocal whiners about learning species and topics outside of your interest and can put your head down and make it through, you'll be fine. Whether or not you'll be able to do that is something only you know.

 

[Marc12]

In vet school curriculum, there will be a balance of SA, LA, exotics, wildlife, etc. You need to know all of those species to pass the NAVLE to get your DVM. You don't have to like them, but you have to learn them. During clinics, you will take a range of LA and SA rotations. You don't have to like the LA rotations, but you will have to have common professionalism while working with those animals, which I'm sure you're familiar with while shadowing equine vets!

As far as working with felines only, in my town there is a cat hospital. So a feline-only practice. It's totally do-able.

 

[Marc12]

.

 

[LyraGardenia]

In vet school curriculum, there will be a balance of SA, LA, exotics, wildlife, etc. You need to know all of those species to pass the NAVLE to get your DVM. You don't have to like them, but you have to learn them. During clinics, you will take a range of LA and SA rotations. You don't have to like the LA rotations, but you will have to have common professionalism while working with those animals, which I'm sure you're familiar with while shadowing equine vets!

As far as working with felines only, in my town there is a cat hospital. So a feline-only practice. It's totally do-able.

Is there a reason you re-posted Gwen's earlier post?

 

[Devastating]

Is there a reason you re-posted Gwen's earlier post?

I think he meant to quote the post/reply and made a mistake. I've seen it happen on other threads

 

[Gwenevre]

I was wondering why I had deja vu reading that post