- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,906
- Reaction score
- 5,385
I also question at what point we are going to have to stop the whole no "non-emergency" appointments. I mean, yes, for the next few weeks that is probably ok, but we can't indefinitely stop spaying and neutering animals (increases certain health risks to keep them intact after a certain age). Can't be leaving ear infections hanging about forever. Eye issues can't wait forever. So on and so forth. There are many things that aren't emergencies but they can't wait. I'd argue with puppy/kitten season coming we can't just not vaccinate these young animals.
At some point, our field is going to have to recognize that we still have to take care of the animals too. This is definitely not a straightforward answer. Yes, PPE definitely needs to be conserved for human medicine right now. But the last predictions I have read from actual epidemiologists and experts in pandemics are saying we are looking at 18 months of this at minimum and we can't stop basic animal care for that extended length of time.
I've also heard of canceling of things like TPLOs, etc and while, yes, that is "elective" waiting for 18 months to do a TPLO is going to make a TPLO rather useless by then.
I do agree with you that animals do need to be taken care of at some point. Yes those are obviously all services I absolutely believe in and preach everyday, but those are for days where the world we live in can afford to provide the best for our pet population. Until the exponential curve stops and things start to die down and we are no longer at risk of millions of people dying, all of those things are still frivolous IMO. We don’t know where we are going to land currently as far as worst case scenario is, and I think there’s enough evidence out there that allowing the economy to essentially collapse by forcing people to stay home is currently justified for the projected toll on human life. As long as the situation continues to be as serious as it is, I don’t care if that dog never gets a TPLO. As horrible as it sounds, the worst thing that will happen to an animal if they cannot get adequate care is that they will end up euthanized (and yes, I do think euthanasia is the one absolutely essential service that we need to continue to be able to provide). I don’t think we’re at the point where we can’t provide care for sick animals, but I do think everything else we can provide for our patients are on a continuum of what we should perceive to be essential, and I think we need to be ready to move the cutoff point along that continuum based on the level of human suffering we are encountering. And plus, outside of increasing exposure, many of the things we do currently to care for sick pets don’t necessarily use up essential supplies and we currently have plenty to get by. If we really get to the point where the human hospitals are out of resources and the death toll reaches a scary point, I think I’m going to have to be ok not being able to provide Lifesaving care for even my own pets... and I’m someone who spends 10k+ trying to do anything and everything to try and save them. Hopefully we never get there. Once things calm down and we know that using resources for an animal won’t be endangering human life, by all means we need as much business as we can get to keep the profession going. I am especially worried about the support staff, as they will be SOL when vet clinics close their doors. Many hospitals will not survive and their doors may be closed for good. Hell, I can’t afford to be unemployed forever. And that is why I still show up at work so that we can try to protect especially our vulnerable staff that I feel responsible for. But at the same time, I feel wrong doing it. This is a really hard one. I feel super conflicted.

