Quote:
|
I don't think in this case the spending "twice as much" is a negative thing - since it's not wasteful spending. It's chemo therapy, and LP surgery, and fixing broken legs that otherwise wouldn't be fixed.
|
Thanks for posting the link to the article.
I don't think it's a negative thing at all to provide your pet with the health care he/she needs.......back when I was a kid in small town Kansas, if a pet became critically ill there was no choice except to put the animal to sleep humanely. We had no access to advanced surgical centers (the vet program at KState was oh so far away), and most families simply could not afford the additional expense.
If you think about it from a research angle, there are many reasons that people who have pet insurance are likely to spend twice as much on the health care of their pets. Without more information, you can't really infer cause.........