Okay Elaine. Let's go over a few things again. Now I am going
to take quotes from you totally out of context in some cases
and totally intact in others so you may take issue with that if
you wish but it is easier to respond to all of your articles with
one from me rather than clutter up the net with 100 articles from
1:>I am aware that you keep crowing about the question of cancer in
>humans being some kind of deciding factor in the best way to make
>decisions about a sick pet.
It seems that you aren't accepting the idea that many people treat
their pets as members of the family and would make decisions about
their medical treatment in a manner very similar to the human
members of the family.
2:>If I were very old, and did come down with a cancer where the only
>possibility for a cure was a horribly disfiguring surgery, I may
>not persue that treatment.
Now this I am glad you included. First, at least you are willing to
accept the same philosophy for yourself as for your dog. However,
I must again take issue with your ever-present theme of
"a horribly disfiguring surgery" This is simply not the case in
****most**** cases. It is true that a portion of your body is often
removed in a tumor removal but that does not make you a horrible
mutant (a term you used before).
Concerning your comments about vets: True, vets are indeed business
people as are all self-employed folk. However, to automatically assume
that all business people put profit undoubtedly before the best interest
of others is simply not true. Perhaps in big old San Diego people
have forgotten what is right and wrong but the rest of us don't think
so. Again, however, in your post about vets I see the following
"It would take weeks of vaccinations and tail docks to earn as much
as one single Frankenstein operation and a chemo."
What gives with the Frankenstein thing, give it a rest please!
Also in the same post: "I am argumentative, and get a kick out a
good argument." Yes well so do I but I have yet to see a good argument
come from your console (so to speak). You are without a doubt
combative and rather unwilling to engage in decent and logical
argumentation. If that is what you consider argumentative then we
Case in point: you wrote (in a single post with no point what so ever)
"You couldn't have said it better yourself? Bet you could if you
put out the effort to try." What the hell is this supposed to mean?
You just couldn't wait to clutter up the net with more nonsense and
Basically, you have been excessively rude and are amazingly opinionated
for someone with appearantly no information and even fewer facts. Not
all cancer surgeries result in physical deformation and even those that
do the result is many more months or years of happy life. Cancer surgery
is not as experimental in many cases as some would think. Early tumor
removal is always the best bet but chemotherapy and surgery together can
indeed help a sick dog live a longer and happier life. Not all cancers
can be cured. Not all can be effectively treated. Not all dogs should
be put through the unhappy experience it is, but not all sick dogs should
be put down either and many people are more than happy to trade in a few
green-backs to see their dog live longer and be a part of the family
So finally, if you don't like what I write then by all means don't read
it, just as you have said to the net in general about your writings.
However, when you have offended so many of a group there comes a point
when your input it no longer wanted, needed and eventually tolerated.
Take that as you will. I now know that none of this will sink in or
appearantly make any sense to you so I suppose this will be the last
time I make such an attempt. (to the delight of the regular rpd readers
I am sure) Have a nice day :-)
| Michael Buening |