Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver  Actually, this is something else I'm curious about. I've seen this co me up many times, and I am not particularly familiar with this topic in pets. Why haven't vets changed their protocols if this has been clearly established? I have a difficult time believing that vets would do something they think actively harms pets simply to make more money.
I don't know much about this either, but I've seen that sometimes you can wiggle them out yourself. It turns out I probably could have done that with Thor - he had four baby teeth removed and it was cheaper than I expected because they said none of them had roots.
I'm interested in what people think vets' motives are. Clearly, if you've had bad experiences with vets, you won't trust them, so I understand that. What is the Why behind the What, if you know what I mean?
Thanks to everyone for their responses.  |
I think one part is the "old school" vaccine schedule. Why bother to research or change it if it was regular procedure before if no-one is complaining, dying....
It also brings in a lot of money with more frequent immunizations, they charge for the vet visit, the shots..... People go to work for money for the most part. Vets included. The more money they bring in the more they make. Sad world but most professions and businesses work to make large profits no matter the costs to others.
Just like the crappy cheap pet food companies that sell really bad food for our pets, people trust them thinking that they would not make the food if it was bad. But it does not make the crappy food "good or healthy" in the end.