- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Veterinarians…a Question About Nsaid Poisoning for Dogs .UPDATE : Rimadyl poisoning.
Posted on 11/27/24 at 12:44 pm to OTIS2
Posted on 11/27/24 at 12:44 pm to OTIS2
I had a dog go on apoquel, something wasnt right after giving it to him. i told the vet he looked like my friend that has seizures, they said he was fine, dont take him off the med.
So i listened, well 45 minutes after giving him another dose after the vet he starts having seizures. Then has 10 more in a row and fricked my dog up for good. Had to put him down.
Basically, frick vets sometimes.
So i listened, well 45 minutes after giving him another dose after the vet he starts having seizures. Then has 10 more in a row and fricked my dog up for good. Had to put him down.
Basically, frick vets sometimes.
0
Posted on 11/27/24 at 1:14 pm to OTIS2
"idiosyncratic reaction" by itself with a known drug seems to be a rare occurrence.
Even though it was the drug it seems like the vet shouldn’t have given it the first place based on what Caro81 had mentioned about tests done before treatment plus older age (it also mentioned mild elevated ALT).
The interpretation of ultrasound being “a bit lacking” may have played part in missing or understating the extent of existing liver and kidney conditions. I don’t know what other non-narcotic pain meds a vet can give besides the topical treatments mentioned below, but with age and just the known issues stated on the pre-admission tests it seems like the vet should have at least tried something else first (especially at a regular dosage which is used up to weight of 90 pounds).
Caro81 earlier:
Even though it was the drug it seems like the vet shouldn’t have given it the first place based on what Caro81 had mentioned about tests done before treatment plus older age (it also mentioned mild elevated ALT).
The interpretation of ultrasound being “a bit lacking” may have played part in missing or understating the extent of existing liver and kidney conditions. I don’t know what other non-narcotic pain meds a vet can give besides the topical treatments mentioned below, but with age and just the known issues stated on the pre-admission tests it seems like the vet should have at least tried something else first (especially at a regular dosage which is used up to weight of 90 pounds).
Caro81 earlier:
quote:
on the ultra sound i see that he had significant changes to his liver. the ultrasound interpretation is a bit lacking imho. There was also some mention of kidney chronic pathology.
With those two findings would i have started the dog on rimadyl? No. i would not have. i would have opted for topical treatments to manage the skin irritation.
This post was edited on 11/27/24 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 11/27/24 at 1:38 pm to dallastigers
Thanks. I do believe your analysis is correct. Lots of lessons learned here...vet students and young professionals were involved in Rye's care. Hopefully, this experience helps them in future care decisions.
I'll leave it at that.
I'll leave it at that.
Posted on 12/13/24 at 8:00 pm to Giantkiller
Me too.
Posted on 12/16/24 at 11:36 am to caro81
Bump for caro81. Thx
This post was edited on 12/16/24 at 11:36 am
Posted on 1/10/25 at 3:23 pm to OTIS2
Bump for caro81. Thx
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News