Vets Fees

[Former_Antelopee]

I've seen a lot of rescues making it so their cats can only be rehomed if the applicant agrees to keep them indoors, which I'm all for because cats are so vulnerable to harm outside and can do so much damage. They can live happy fulfilled lives inside with enrichment and a nice window to sun themselves in. Our cats were always outdoor when I was growing up and we were so lucky that they all lived to die of old age, but these days, with the horror stories I've seen and heard more and more lately - indoor is the way to go for sure. For the cats safety and that of small critters in the wild.

The "other pets" thing kind of pisses me off at times too. How exactly do they determine that a dog/cat won't get on with another animal? All animals are individuals, like people, we get along with some folks but not others. How much effort do they put into determining these things before ruling it out?

We had cats for 20+ years along side dogs, never had a problem. We waited 10 years to get another cat after our last one died at 18 and again, had to buy because rehoming centres wouldn't allow any cats be to homed with other pets/dogs.

Our youngest dog was absolutely terrified of the kitten to begin with, as she'd never know a cat and hadn't even seen one out on walk. When we first got him the other dogs weren't bothered by him at all, but she couldn't even look at him she was so scared. (He was a ballsy little menace, so he had no qualms in getting in her face trying to make friends). She would try to 'mother' him by following him everywhere, but she'd run away the second he reacted to her.

It took a couple of weeks and a lot of lying on the floor amongst the dogs with the kitten in the middle and now, they're best friends. He shares a bed with her, they're always touching noses and kissing each other and playing. But for those first few weeks I was sure we'd made a terrible mistake and that he'd have to be rehomed because she was so unconfident around him. Now, three years later - you'd never know they hadn't always been best buds!

It takes time and patience to introduce a new pet, especially of a different species, so it really does annoy me when rescues rule it out as a possibility without good reason. (Like known aggression/attacks etc)




Totally agree. There are so many amazing animals in shelters that are missing out due to stupid rehoming rules (I'm sure it's all legal ass covering!). Kills me that you can just walk into a shelter in America, sign a form and walk off with a dog. While I do believe there should be checks in place, it's madness to make it so hard while there continues to be nothing stopping any idiot buying a puppy. There shouldn't be so many restrictions on who can rehome an older dog when breeders are out there unregulated and ten a penny.

I'm with you. It just takes time and patience and effort to get a dog transitioned and trained. We got my GSD as a puppy and he was an absolute nightmare, drove me to the point of tears several times when he was in his "teens", he wouldn't do a Goddamned thing he was told and would run off all the time, but we pushed through and he ended up being the best dog and my little shadow. But my God, that first year or so....he tested me hahaha!

When I was a kid we went to a rehoming centre to get another dog some months after our dog had tragically died. Went every Saturday and Wednesday for weeks to walk him while they "assessed us", and we'd bonded and our family loved him. Then in the 11th hour the rescue then turned around and said we couldn't have him because my mother was disabled and used a wheelchair to go out for a walk!!! Of course, they'd never get away with that nowadays, but this was in the late 90's. To lets kids bond with a dog and then deny them taking him home was so cruel. It was grief on top of grief.

Stupidest thing was, even though my mom is disabled, she used to be a police dog handler and had been raised in a multi dog home her whole life. So what happened? We went out and got a puppy (and then end up collecting a couple more dogs in the following years too) who lived his best life until he was 14 years old and age took him from us. He would roll alongside my mom on her scooter with no issues. The older dog we adopted from a family member a few years later was just the same! No issues with adapting to walking alongside a wheelchair and what not.

All our/my dogs so far have lived well into old age and have been completely and utterly adored and considered probably the most important member of our family! It's really sad how so many dogs and people miss out on making those special bonds because of some dumb rules that really benefit no one in the long run.

I definitely agree about rehoming centres being too strict but I guess they have to cover themselves.
I do think some (most I’d say) make it worse for themselves. They complain about being full and not being able to take on other cases. Yet have aggressive dogs with bite histories they are trying to rehome or dogs that are so anxious they are aggressive. Imo if a dog is that anxious it cannot live a normal life then put it to sleep. It’s not a happy dog, as I said previous on a different thread behavioural euthanasia imo is underused and hate on for no reason. As long as it’s a valid reason why is it any different to using it for a health issue as at the end of the day imo it’s no different. At the end of the day these dogs are harder to rehome, probably not happy in themselves a lot of the time and that’s why they’ve ended up in rescue to begin with and they are taking up space of an animal that can be helped. Especially if the issue has been worked on with a behaviourist and not improved. I think I definitely worked this better last time I posted about it. But imo behavioural issues should be treated like health issues.
IMO some rescues keep animals alive for too long and spend too much money on trying to save or prolong the life of animals that need to be put to sleep: for example I follow a rescue who had this old stray cat that had a heart mass, yet they put it through surgery to castrate it and remove a lump from its eye, it died a few days later. That cat is now the face of their charity and they got a lot of money from using it as PR. I just don’t agree with things like that, i was surprised the vet did the surgery tbh because why bother doing them things when the cat is likely to die soon from is heart mass. It’s not like they got full price for the surgery either as they give them discount for being a charity. But obviously I don’t know the full history so I assume the vet was happy to do it after assessing everything and wouldn’t have gone ahead otherwise.

 

[kazizzle]

Does anyone have any experience of vets recommending optional extras for an operation? My whippet is needing two lumps removing and the vet has sent me the invoice saying “I have included having intravenous fluids and pre-op blood sample due to his age. These are not compulsory but strongly recommended given his age.” Has anyone any experience of this? Is this necessary or are they just trying to make a bit of extra money?

I was recommended this before my cat was spayed. I emailed the vets and asked if it was necessary and they said just recommended so I didn't bother as she was only 1 and had a general check up just a week or so before as we were new clients and they wouldn't do the spay without seeing her first. Vets visits are very stressful for her (and us as she doesn't like to be touched, picked up or held) so I didn't want to put her through more than needed and it wasn't clear if they would do it on the same day or if she would have to come in the day before.

She ended up needing loads of vet visits after her op though as she picked up fleas during that initial consultation (I'm assuming because she didn't have them at that initial appointment but did a week later when she went in for the op!!) and then had an allergic reaction to the flea bites so the poor girl had to go back multiple times for steroids and antibiotics on top of having her stitches checked. Traumatised for life. Also more money for the vets there...

 

[Saddlesoap]

Yes, I've mentioned this earlier in the thread. The written prescription fee with my vet is £25, but even that added to the online drugs is still dramatically cheaper than what the vet will charge directly.

Just purchased a repeat of one dog's medication today and what the vet last charged me was £140. Bought online for £23, including express delivery. Even with the prescription charge on top it's still well under half price of what the vet wants to charge. So again, where is that extra money going? Because it simply cannot be on wholesale prices when the consumer can get it direct at such a reduced price, and must be pure profit.

Nothing wrong with profit, of course, but when it comes to the fact pet owners are over a barrel and it forces them to make very hard choices, it leaves a very bad taste in the mouth.



Thought you couldn't be bothered to debate this anymore? Or is that only when the counter argument is too strong?

There's absolutely no way vets are paying more from wholesalers that the public pay from online sites. That's not how wholesale works in any sector.

While VAT is charged on pet medication, most business get to write off VAT on purchases, and if that's the case for Vets too (I don't know, I'm not an account) then that would make it even cheaper for them as well. If not, it's still an outrageous markup.

So it takes 10 mins to write process a prescription and it's a £25 charge. So £2.50 a minute to click a couple of buttons and hit print/sign/scan/email, right? Especially when it's a repeat prescription where there's absolutely no 'expertise' needed in establishing what drugs/dosage are needed.

10 minutes is exceptionally generous too. I do similar tasks day to day in my job, and there's no way it even takes 10 minutes, 5 on a go slow!

That's an absolutely outrageous charge, and if you didn't work in this sector, I'm pretty sure you'd likely agree too!

Sorry, I didn't realise I couldn't change my mind Silly me.

You've still not told me what tablets you're buying for 25p. I'm genuinely intrigued to do a cost comparison.

Quote;
There's absolutely no way vets are paying more from wholesalers that the public pay from online sites. That's not how wholesale works in any sector.

I'm certain you must know better, when you don't work in the sector, but just out of interest I looked at a few examples for you;

Apoquel 5.4mg at Animed Direct is 95p for a single tablet, you can buy 100 tablets for £95
From our wholesaler, we pay - to the wholesalers -£93.95.

Propalin 100ml at Animed Direct is £28.25, our wholesalers sells us it for £38.87

Cardisure 5mg, 100 tablets at Animed Direct is £93.00, at our wholesalers it's £115.96.

Now, I have no idea why this is possible, but these prices above are fact, straight off our wholesaler ordering platform.

All sorts of businesses charge administrative fees. Insurance Companies, Banks, Landlords. Why shouldn't vets charge? If there was a problem with the medication, or dosing, or something, the client would still ring us, and we'd give the support for free.

I don't dispute some prices at some practices are extortionate, but sometimes (as I except in your 'friends' bladder cancer case), their bills are expensive because they want the work ups.

Vets Now do seem eye wateringly expensive, but it's hard to have a balanced arguement about it when numbers are being thrown around with no context to the treatment given. Part of the reason so many practices use alternative practices for emergency care is because vets and nurses are leaving the profession in droves because of burnout and general practices can't get staff.
---

It's possible, but I cannot believe what goes for 25p a dose for us would be charged as £7 for a vet.

Here you go with that 25p again which drug is it?
---

I would expect vets buy direct from the manufacturer too, which should be significantly cheaper. I know my vet has a wealth of pads and pens with various drugs logos on them, having dealt in a similar field before I know those items usually come directly from the drug reps. Who always tend to offer decent savings or deals to get their products into circulation. I wouldn't expect it's much different in the veterinary sector.

Some drugs we can, yes and (my practice), passes those savings to the client. Loxicom is an example of this.

 

[ranchdistressing]

You've still not told me what tablets you're buying for 25p. I'm genuinely intrigued to do a cost comparison.

Clavaseptin, for one. You want me to provide invoices? Would that stop you pissing on my shoes and claiming it's raining?

I'm certain you must know better, when you don't work in the sector, but just out of interest I looked at a few examples for you;

Apoquel 5.4mg at Animed Direct is 95p for a single tablet, you can buy 100 tablets for £95
From our wholesaler, we pay - to the wholesalers -£93.95.

Propalin 100ml at Animed Direct is £28.25, our wholesalers sells us it for £38.87

Cardisure 5mg, 100 tablets at Animed Direct is £93.00, at our wholesalers it's £115.96.

At this rate it's around a 25% increase on what the public pay, so I think you need a new wholesaler. They're clearly taking the piss out of your practice. The very definition of 'wholesale' is that you get products cheaper than the general public. Makes absolutely zero sense that you'd be paying more.

All sorts of businesses charge administrative fees. Insurance Companies, Banks, Landlords. Why shouldn't vets charge?

Do I have to keep saying this?

Because if you don't like your insurance, your bank, or your landlord - you've got options. There are NO options other than to go to a vet. There is zero competition in the veterinary sector, therefore they have pet owners to ransom as there is absolutely no alternative (other than letting the animal suffer/die) than to pay the fees the vet sets.

If I have a credit card that's charging me extortionate interest rates, I look for another credit card with a cheaper offer and transfer my balance. Maybe with a supermarket bank, maybe with a high street bank, maybe with a bank that exists only online....there are OPTIONS!

If my dog/cat gets sick, sure, I can shop around for a better quote (but honestly, who is going to do that, especially if the animal is acutely ill!) but I can't go and find an alternative to veterinary medicine/treatment.

I am fine with paying a price that covers overheads, I'm not disputing that AT ALL. What I am disputing is the fact it's absolutely sick to profit off ill animals and vulnerable owners and it's very clear this is what some vets are happily doing.

Some drugs we can, yes and (my practice), passes those savings to the client. Loxicom is an example of this.

That's funny. I just bought Loxicom today and had I got it from the vet there certainly wouldn't have been any savings passed on based on the savings made.

All good throwing wholesale prices around - and actually the markup isn’t that bad - but it doesn’t necessarily show the markups for customers too

I don’t mind paying for consultations, but to pay for extra 10 minutes (generous btw) for someone to click some buttons and push print is a bit of a laugh. My vets normally takes a min to do that at best

My thoughts exactly! It's all well and good quoting the wholesale price, the issue is the markup and what the client actually gets charged, which I guarantee is at least 50% more than the purchase price.

Exactly this. It takes barely a few minutes to print a prescription, so charging £25 for a print off is absolute black and white extortion/profiteering and nothing better. If you did a costing for the paper/ink/internet access/labour it wouldn't come close to that much either, so where's the money going? Someone is cleaning up!

I'm not at work right now, so can't check.
My point regarding the wholesaler prices was to demonstrate that online pharmacies can sell them cheaper than we can buy them for.

Convenient. How can you access the wholesaler's prices if you're not at work? Didn't think we had work from home RVN...

Again, I think you need to suggest finding a new wholesaler because the entire concept of wholesale is getting it cheaper than Average Joe can buy for. So something isn't adding up here at all.

Oh, and we'll wait while you get back to us with what the client pays on top of these wholesale prices....

 

[Snippysnips]

Does anyone have any experience of vets recommending optional extras for an operation? My whippet is needing two lumps removing and the vet has sent me the invoice saying “I have included having intravenous fluids and pre-op blood sample due to his age. These are not compulsory but strongly recommended given his age.” Has anyone any experience of this? Is this necessary or are they just trying to make a bit of extra money?

Yeah, I was recommended my rabbit get pre-op checks like a blood test before he went in, am probably a different experience to you as since my insurance was covering it then I just went for it

I'd say go with your gut feeling, if you would prefer the extra checks then it's best, my rabbit got the all clear but it did put my mind at rest they had checked him before hand, but if you feel he will be fine an has never had any bother then leave it, it really is just a check, I've had pets go on for operations before without it an in my case they were also fine

 

[WhippetGood]

How old is he? Generally I would recommend my patients get bloods done if they are 8 years or older because organ function deteriorates with age and we don't want the liver and kidneys compromised if dealing with anaesthetic agents and other drugs.

It's tricky though because younger animals aren't immune to problems. I have had owners of younger animals opt for bloods and it flag problems that warrant further investigations. Not commonly though.

Nearly all our patients get fluids. I can't remember off the top of my head, but I think it's only an additional £10. Fluids help to prevent hypotension (low blood pressure). Low blood pressure for extended periods can cause organ damage.

He’s 9 so my gut feeling is to stump up the extra and go for it - thanks so much everyone for your replies!

 

[ranchdistressing]

Absolutely agree with your comments about rehoming. This is why I have cats from a breeder which I do feel bad about but I couldn't rescue as I lived in a flat at a time, then when I wanted a second one, I couldn't get one as they all either had to go to a home where there are no other pets or had to be allowed to go outside. As I don't want to have an outdoor cat it's almost impossible to rescue, considering all the other requirements too

I've seen a lot of rescues making it so their cats can only be rehomed if the applicant agrees to keep them indoors, which I'm all for because cats are so vulnerable to harm outside and can do so much damage. They can live happy fulfilled lives inside with enrichment and a nice window to sun themselves in. Our cats were always outdoor when I was growing up and we were so lucky that they all lived to die of old age, but these days, with the horror stories I've seen and heard more and more lately - indoor is the way to go for sure. For the cats safety and that of small critters in the wild.

The "other pets" thing kind of pisses me off at times too. How exactly do they determine that a dog/cat won't get on with another animal? All animals are individuals, like people, we get along with some folks but not others. How much effort do they put into determining these things before ruling it out?

We had cats for 20+ years along side dogs, never had a problem. We waited 10 years to get another cat after our last one died at 18 and again, had to buy because rehoming centres wouldn't allow any cats be to homed with other pets/dogs.

Our youngest dog was absolutely terrified of the kitten to begin with, as she'd never know a cat and hadn't even seen one out on walk. When we first got him the other dogs weren't bothered by him at all, but she couldn't even look at him she was so scared. (He was a ballsy little menace, so he had no qualms in getting in her face trying to make friends). She would try to 'mother' him by following him everywhere, but she'd run away the second he reacted to her.

It took a couple of weeks and a lot of lying on the floor amongst the dogs with the kitten in the middle and now, they're best friends. He shares a bed with her, they're always touching noses and kissing each other and playing. But for those first few weeks I was sure we'd made a terrible mistake and that he'd have to be rehomed because she was so unconfident around him. Now, three years later - you'd never know they hadn't always been best buds!

It takes time and patience to introduce a new pet, especially of a different species, so it really does annoy me when rescues rule it out as a possibility without good reason. (Like known aggression/attacks etc)

I do agree about the rehoming, it's ridiculous the hoops you need to jump through an it's sad that more an more animals are being left in shelters because people are being forced to go to breeders which aren't always legit because some breeders are disgusting an cruel

We wanted to re-home a dog an were told we could only have a elderly dog as since we hadn't had a dog then we weren't "experienced" enough to have a younger dog (my mum grew up all her life with dogs) an while now I do agree it's nice to re-home the elderly dogs at the time me an my brother were kids, we wanted to play an take them long walks an kick a ball etc something you can't do with a 14/15 year old, in the end we did manage to "re-home" a dog, his ad was in the pet shop an he had been abused an the new owners wanted to give him away as they couldn't deal with his behaviour due to his trama, he was 18m an we sadly lost him just before his 16th but the fact is, we managed, he was trained by myself as I was learning as I had wanted to be a animal handler, yes it was hard work with his behaviour (no fault of his which I understood) but we got there, an it just makes me angry at the amount of animals being left an missing out on incredible lives

Totally agree. There are so many amazing animals in shelters that are missing out due to stupid rehoming rules (I'm sure it's all legal ass covering!). Kills me that you can just walk into a shelter in America, sign a form and walk off with a dog. While I do believe there should be checks in place, it's madness to make it so hard while there continues to be nothing stopping any idiot buying a puppy. There shouldn't be so many restrictions on who can rehome an older dog when breeders are out there unregulated and ten a penny.

I'm with you. It just takes time and patience and effort to get a dog transitioned and trained. We got my GSD as a puppy and he was an absolute nightmare, drove me to the point of tears several times when he was in his "teens", he wouldn't do a Goddamned thing he was told and would run off all the time, but we pushed through and he ended up being the best dog and my little shadow. But my God, that first year or so....he tested me hahaha!

When I was a kid we went to a rehoming centre to get another dog some months after our dog had tragically died. Went every Saturday and Wednesday for weeks to walk him while they "assessed us", and we'd bonded and our family loved him. Then in the 11th hour the rescue then turned around and said we couldn't have him because my mother was disabled and used a wheelchair to go out for a walk!!! Of course, they'd never get away with that nowadays, but this was in the late 90's. To lets kids bond with a dog and then deny them taking him home was so cruel. It was grief on top of grief.

Stupidest thing was, even though my mom is disabled, she used to be a police dog handler and had been raised in a multi dog home her whole life. So what happened? We went out and got a puppy (and then end up collecting a couple more dogs in the following years too) who lived his best life until he was 14 years old and age took him from us. He would roll alongside my mom on her scooter with no issues. The older dog we adopted from a family member a few years later was just the same! No issues with adapting to walking alongside a wheelchair and what not.

All our/my dogs so far have lived well into old age and have been completely and utterly adored and considered probably the most important member of our family! It's really sad how so many dogs and people miss out on making those special bonds because of some dumb rules that really benefit no one in the long run.

 

[Former_Antelopee]

This , my uncle retired early because he couldn’t cope with the stress of running a business of 30+ people and caring for animals, providing hr, chasing up none paying clients, being harassed by them - got a paving slab through a window at home, he couldn’t find vets willing to work nights and weekends even with a free car and accommodation and newer vets are even more demanding, wanting a vet nurse each to sew up animals , do smaller ops etc which costs more money.

Another thing that annoys me is when people get annoyed at vets not doing payment plans. They should blame people who they had previously given them to who then haven’t paid and then have to be chased up. Tbf most ops you do need a nurse or at least someone else to monitor the patient as once scrubbed up the vet wouldn’t be able to do it. It’s an emotionally hard job I don’t blame vets for not wanting to do out of hours and having to deal with that on top of the normal day

 

[Merpedy]

I worked for an animal charity hospital years ago, when the drug order came in I could see the price of everything and some of it was pretty inexpensive e.g saline drips but private vets used to charge people a fortune for very inexpensive items, I expect they still do.
I have a small savings account for my cat it has £700 in it at the moment but I am putting into it every pay day, every bit counts.

Nah mate this would never happen!!!

I feel like a lot of the vet nurses I’m seeing speak on this (and it’s not targeted at the poster here, I happen to have a few vet nurse friends) is that they’re taking it personally. Chances are these vet practices are run by business people and not vets themselves. People generally respect vets and vet nurses

 

[Snippysnips]

I've said as much earlier in the thread. We're supposed to be a nation of animal lovers and I would happily pay a couple of quid extra in tax each month if it went to a system where vets were better supported and veterinary medicine/treatment was cheaper and more accessible for pet owners.




Pet insurance is a joke, even if you think you're covered, you're not, and generally you're only covered until the pet turns 8/9 years old, which is shameful when dogs can live to 10-14 fairly easily and cats even older, especially if they're indoor. You often end up having to pay a certain percentage of the cost of treatment, even while still paying for a fully comp policy. It's another racket, which needs looking into, especially these companies that cherrypick from their terms and conditions or suddenly change them mid policy (as once you've claimed for an illness you're screwed for getting cover elsewhere) but it's a thousand percent better to have a policy in place to cover some of the costs than have nothing to fall back on.

Honestly I couldn't ever see people being happy about paying taxes into a system to better help vets an as much as I love animals I can see the point where people would be mad at that, not everyone loves animals, there's more than enough out there that just can't be bothered with them/have no time for them so therefore don't own them, could you imagine those people who have no interest in animals paying a tax for people who do have animals so the vets get helped out?

I also think it depends on the insurance, when I was looking for one for my rabbit the vet actually printed off a list of questions I could phone them an ask to make sure absolutely everything was covered that could possible come up, they helped me out a ton an made sure that he was going to be covered for life with both any illness and or injury's, the only problem I ever had with my insurance was when he was getting castrated, the insurance thought it was a choice thing an at first refused me (which rightly so as choice for castration is not covered) but the vet spoke with them an insured them it was not choice but a medical matter an he needed it done otherwise he would get cancer, the insurance was fine after understanding an went ahead with paying them, I do understand that as he gets older it will go up as hes more prone to illness/injury but he is covered till the day he dies, as well as being covered for every illness/injury an also I have a boarding cost if am delayed coming home (i.e cancelled flight) an I also get money towards trying to find him if he goes missing (i.e flyers)

 

[Snippysnips]

Honestly I think robots is a not bad idea especially for the elderly, there's no needing to walk them, feed them, take them to vets, or make sure there's enough toys, bedding etc for them

You seem to think it would be easy to employ people to go see the animal as well if the elderly were given real animals but the truth is services that visit the elderly are all ready pushed to their limits an it's not so easy to be employed within that line of work, you cant just employ someone then have them check up on a animal, people need to go through background checks that cost money, some places do pay for it but not all, in order to take the dogs walks you also need insurance which can be pricy an why dog walking services are limited, you also need to think where is that animal going to go if the elderly person was in hospital for a lengthy time, what if the animal suddenly gets hurt but the owner has no way to get to a vets an the nearest vet cant get out, just like a home carer id imagine that a pet carer would also have so many homes per day to visit and would only be able to offer limited time per house per day

While it seems nice to give animals in shelters to the elderly, it's just not going to work, employing people isn't going to be easy an will also be costly an we may not end up with enough for it to be possible, you would need enough people willing to do this work which may not be the case, I love dogs but am not comfortable around other people's dogs so as much as I love animals I wouldn't be taken a job like that, you would also need back up plans for numerous lengthy hospital stays, the event the person dies, like how many times is a animal going to be put in an out of care? You also have to think what's fair for the animal especially because they bond with their owners, so I do see why robots in this instance is better

 

[Snippysnips]

It’s no wonder that a lot are rescuing from abroad considering it’s easier than rescuing from this country. I don’t really agree with it but I do see why people do it

Not just rescuing but buying as well, I'd love to have a little miniature dachshund but prices are between 2k an 4k, they never come up for rehoming in my around me due to popularity an most rehoming places won't allow you to take if you aren't near them, there was places in England offering re-home but being in scotland I was denied, there's no way I can justify thousands for a dog as much as I'd love one, out of curiosity I looked an I could actually get a pure breed Dachshund from America an have it brought over for just over 1k, obviously it's not something I would ever do, seeing a dog an it's parents if possible is the most important thing an with it being America you know nothing about where the dogs coming from, the health of the dog or the legitimately of the company, but the fact I can bring in a dog from another country an be cheaper than buying from my own is insane

 

[Snippysnips]

Could it be that the drugs are just simple a bit expensive because of who the supplier is that the vets need to use for legal reasons, an with all the regulations the supplier needs to go through they are marking it up a bit?

I don't buy online so I don't know how it all works, but I'd imagine vets would only be allowed to use certain suppliers compared to the public that have a bit more freedom to where they could go so therefore can be able to get whatever drugs cheaper if they were to shop around a bit

 

[SaltandPepperChicken]

Is it possible to find out how much the big corporations pay the shareholders? I watched a Joe Lycett documentary last night where he took on the water companies that were paying the shareholders vast amounts and not doing much needed repairs to sewage works and it made me think of this situation.

Vets and animals should not be for making already rich people even richer. I know there has to be some profit. Staff deserve a fair wage for the work they do, and then there are costs of premises, utilities, insurance etc but there needs to be a much greater amount of transparency. Obviously the government will do bugger all about it, but change needs to happen.

 

[Snippysnips]

Depends on how you define pain and suffering. Personally I’d argue that only a small portion of donations going to food banks, research into diseases, hospice management is linked with pain and suffering but we can agree to disagree.
The pharma industry as a whole profits from sickness, pain and suffering - it’s not going to change for humans any time soon let alone animals.

I agree, everyone is out to make profits, the amount of times I've seen items in grocery stores or shops that mention the proceeds go to charity an then you look an it's 1p from every £1 or it will be £5.99 for something with only 25p going to the charity, it's ridiculous how small they actually give to the charity themselves

There are charities giving their CEO's over 200k a year, why the hell does someone need that kind of yearly income if not for greed, an who suffers...the people do, supermarkets an charities are profiting off pain and suffering an making as much profit as everyone else does because it's a business an every business is only ever thinking about profiting, personally I think it's a damn disgrace my mate is paying around $100 in America for insulin for his diabetes when insulin is about $2 to $4 to make, so yes, everywhere profits off the sick an suffering

 

[Saddlesoap]

Convenient. How can you access the wholesaler's prices if you're not at work? Didn't think we had work from home RVN...

Again, I think you need to suggest finding a new wholesaler because the entire concept of wholesale is getting it cheaper than Average Joe can buy for. So something isn't adding up here at all.

Oh, and we'll wait while you get back to us with what the client pays on top of these wholesale prices....

Wow you're really mad

I can access the wholesaler prices because I have the password for their website saved in my Google drive. I cannot access my practice management system from home.

I'm actually at work now (not convenient, no conspiracy, just my shift), I'm eating my tea after being flat out since I arrived with 2 critical patients who have just gone into theatre and I'll be looking after them in recovery. I will get back to you about the prices, but probably won't be tonight.

You seem very certain of a lot of things despite not working in the sector. I did say 'my practice' passes on the savings, I cannot speak for others. But how can you possibly know that no savings have been passed onto you. You absolutely cannot.

Clavaseptin, for one. You want me to provide invoices? Would that stop you pissing on my shoes and claiming it's raining?

All I was interested it was which drug it was, since you were adamant that 25p becomes £7. As I've said, I'm just genuinely interested. I'll take a look at this one as well. For some reason I thought you were talking about human drugs.

Clavaseptin, for one. You want me to provide invoices? Would that stop you pissing on my shoes and claiming it's raining?



At this rate it's around a 25% increase on what the public pay, so I think you need a new wholesaler. They're clearly taking the piss out of your practice. The very definition of 'wholesale' is that you get products cheaper than the general public. Makes absolutely zero sense that you'd be paying more.

Again, I think you need to suggest finding a new wholesaler because the entire concept of wholesale is getting it cheaper than Average Joe can buy for. So something isn't adding up here at all.

Everyone needs to make profit. Vets have to buy from a wholesaler, who also needs to make profit.

Drug company > wholesaler > vet > client
Drug company > online pharmacy > client

Maybe we should just give out medications for the same price we buy them for. Sounds like an ideal business prospect

 

[Merpedy]

I am well aware that costs are rising an that things can get difficult out the blue, what I mean is that if money is a struggle at the beginning then really you shouldn't be agreeing to take on the responsibility of a pet, at the end of a day whether we like it or not animals are still classed as a luxury an unfortunately there is too many out there that take them on without knowing just how expensive they can become, an am not talking about being in a position where once it was fine an then it's become a struggle, am talking about the spontaneous buyers that are in no fit position to afford a pet never mind be able to cover vet fees, I have known people to get rabbits then not bother to ever get them vaccinated because of costs which isn't fair to the rabbit, or people that get a dog then dont bother to keep up with health checks or vaccines, there are charities out there to help but most of them struggle because they are paying out for people who were never going to be able to pay in the first place for a pet an the people who once afforded the pet an now have fallen out the blue on hard times are being left because the charities cant help due to limited finances

That’s exactly why I identified responsible owners specifically. People who got pets because they can afford them and due to unforeseen circumstances are no longer able to

The rising costs of vets and medications specifically aren’t helping with that. I understand they are running a business and costs are going to rise. However, something is clearly going wrong with the amount being charged for medicines

 

[Former_Antelopee]

Oh I can't be bothered with this tonight, we're trying to re-home a dog, I don't feel the need to explain myself to you anymore..,..

I didn’t say anything about you I said if a dog cannot be helped, I didn’t say don’t try as I said in that post you just replied to as well.
It’s good it can be helped but it they can’t always. So it’s good the dog your getting is getting help and hopefully it’ll be getting better or at least manageable but not all will. I was speaking in general not to your specific situation

 

[Saddlesoap]

I wrote out a pretty lengthy reply, but I've realised I don't have the energy to debate this.
Wishing your pets good health.

 

[ranchdistressing]

Don’t get a pet then pets are a privilege and it’s up to the person who gets them to be able to afford them.

You do realize that no one in life is immune from a downfall, right? And that many people who were able to afford pets when they got them suddenly end up struggling to afford them, or being completely unable to? Hence the crisis in animal shelters across the country.

More so, how many people have kids without considering the fact that child could be born sick, or get sick at some point in their lives? Would you turn around when the NHS is gone and say "yeah, well, shouldn't have had a kid if you can't afford to make them better?"

Vets fees are definitely a massive issue in the UK. I gave examples of Brazil above, but it's the same in Spain. What costs me £140 a year in boosters for a single dog, my aunt in Spain gets for £50 for two. One of her dogs had bladder cancer, was a whole ordeal for 12 months and it cost her less than £1k in treatment. My best friend's dog of the same breed had the same condition with a better prognosis and only 6 months later, it cost her £8k. Vets charging obscene amounts seems ever more to be a British problem than standard practice for the profession. Much like most things happening in this country right now, we're being mugged off left and right for profiteering.

- just saw someone said that but it’s true so I’ll also say it. They are a business, how much do energy companies charge and how much profit do they get, a lot more profit than vets. And people need heat etc.

Yeah, and I don't agree with that either. But again, there are ways around reducing the amount of energy you use (putting on a coat/layers etc). When prices go up in shops, there are cheaper alternatives too, but vets have everyone over a barrel because there is literally no alternative to the care they can provide.

but at the end of the day vet care is like
Private human healthcare, a business and if getting a pet that should be thought about first. And I’ve seen people say vet care is a lot cheaper than human private healthcare.

It's not remotely comparable. Private human healthcare is a choice, for most an all out luxury. We can choose to go private at any point and still go back to the NHS. Private health care (fortunately) isn't our only option in the way it is with veterinary care.

You don't find many people calling their private healthcare provider at 3am on a Wednesday because someone is vomiting violently and having a seizure, because emergency private healthcare does not exist. We can call 999 for help and be put back right for free. We don't have to go running to the nearest emergency vets and come away with a debt of thousands.

Also where are stricter rules regarding breeding. Because at the end of the day bad breeding will lead to a lot of money being spent on vet bills.
Look at frenchies for example, breathing issues, spinal issues, eye issues, brain issues, elbow breaks, skin issues and some which can be sold for thousands and usually the worse specimens being sold for more I think e.g. the big rope ones. People spend thousands on a puppy yet when it breaks its leg and the owners doesn’t have the money to fix it it’s the vets fault.

This I agree with. Breeders are completely unscrupulous and often simply in it for the money. I loathe people who will have a litter of puppies/kittens and defend it by saying they're "not a breeder"....if you've facilitated an animal pregnancy - you're a breeder. End of!

I was absolutely disgusted to see Channel 4 doing that show following backyard breeders a few months back. Especially in a cost of living crisis where there's nothing stopping anyone from thinking they'll make a few quid from getting their pet knocked up.

Frenchies should be banned if you ask me. At least until the health issues have been bred out. But there's a big difference between paying an initial outlay of £1k and then facing a sudden vet bill of £5k and/or repeated treatments every month of £100+.

I personally think there should be a law that says anyone owning a pet should be forced to purchase at least some form of pet insurance, but that in itself would lead to further profiteering from the insurance companies who are already taking the piss by excluding conditions and denying claims.

vets are completely privatised. There’s no government pot that feeds into it and they have a lot of overheads.

I've said as much earlier in the thread. We're supposed to be a nation of animal lovers and I would happily pay a couple of quid extra in tax each month if it went to a system where vets were better supported and veterinary medicine/treatment was cheaper and more accessible for pet owners.

I work for a private company, not doing anything remotely complicated in comparison but charge 500-1k a day for my time and it’s because people are paying for the expertise, so I don’t have a problem doing the same when it comes to caring for my cats.

Well good for you, earning that much a day you've clearly got no problems in finding the money necessary to pay for treatment. Same can't be said for about 70% of the pet owning population though.

Pharmaceutical companies have a lot to do with it too- vet wholesalers are generally charged more than for human pharmacies. And also insurance companies- they are a massive issue, there’s little to no benefit of keeping my cat insured because of the sheer amount of things they will not cover.

As I said in earlier in the thread, I'm not convinced it is veterinary pharma as you can purchase a tablet that a vet will charge you £7 for 25p online. I'd like to know who actually is responsible for the mark up on the medication they prescribe.

Pet insurance is a joke, even if you think you're covered, you're not, and generally you're only covered until the pet turns 8/9 years old, which is shameful when dogs can live to 10-14 fairly easily and cats even older, especially if they're indoor. You often end up having to pay a certain percentage of the cost of treatment, even while still paying for a fully comp policy. It's another racket, which needs looking into, especially these companies that cherrypick from their terms and conditions or suddenly change them mid policy (as once you've claimed for an illness you're screwed for getting cover elsewhere) but it's a thousand percent better to have a policy in place to cover some of the costs than have nothing to fall back on.

Because as they say, we're all only one banana skin away from disaster or disability, and the same goes for animals unfortunately.