Pamper Pet Care Blog/Best Pet Vitamins

The science of associating something with an activity is known as classical conditioning. The best example is the experiment conducted by Pavlov. Whenever he served food to his dog, he used to ring a bell.

In the beginning, the dog used to salivate by looking at the food. Later he began associating the bell with the food and at a point of time, he used to salivate at the sound of the bell. This doesn’t mean that the actual noise of the ringing bell made him salivate. The dog associated the ringing of the bell with the food and that food or even the thought of it made him salivate.

Classical conditioning cannot actually make the dog to sit or jump at the command, but it does change the way the pet feels about a particular situation in which it is right now.

Classical conditioning gives explanation about the behavior relating to a particular place, object or event. It explains how the emotional response is developed.

The responses can be developed in the animal either wontedly or by chance. Also the trainer must remember that the change in the behavior is irreversible most of the times.

One of the most common behaviors dealt with in conditioned emotional response is fear. The fear can be instinctive, learned or unknown. For example, if a cat gets scared upon seeing a dog, this is instinctive fear.

If the cat backs off upon seeing a raised hand, this is learned fear. This can happen in the case of an abused cat. If there is fear because of lack of exposure to a particular situation before, this is known as fear of unknown.

The conditioned emotional responses, which are dislike-able, can be reduced with the help of classical conditioning. Classical conditioning further has two concepts namely desensitization and counter-conditioning. Desensitization is reducing the sensitivity of the animal towards a particular unavoidable situation.

The bad situation is created again and again until the animal becomes insensitive or doesn’t feel about it any more. For example, if the animal is given crate training, it is locked inside the crate again and again, till he gets used to staying locked inside the cage.

In counter-conditioning the animal is exposed to a lower degree of extremity. The intensity is less and as well a positive thing is presented to the animal. By doing this pet begins to like the nasty situation. The pet is made to respond in such a way, which contradicts the current or previous reaction.

For example, a pet doesn’t like to be locked up in the crate all the time. But this undesirable situation can be made to look pleasant if the pet is fed with a treat from time to time as long as it stays calmly inside the cage.

Negative counter conditioning is another technique, but it is used very rarely. For example, if the cat likes to bite the hand of the owner very frequently, the person can rub something distasteful on the hand.

When the animal bites the hand, it will taste the distasteful substance and then associate the bad taste with the hand and will not bite again, if done repeatedly.

Classical conditioning is used to alter the way of reaction of the animal in a particular situation. With classical conditioning it can be made to like an unpleasant situation and even dislike a pleasant condition.

Posted via web from thepetguy’s posterous

Owners outraged over botched surgeries, medication errors, misdiagnoses
———————————————————————–

By JoNel Aleccia
Health writer
msnbc.com

Jared Genser was a day away from euthanizing his family dog,
Finnegan, when the Washington, D.C. lawyer discovered that the
lab’s diagnosis of a painful and deadly bone cancer was wrong.

Jenn Diederich of Riverton, Utah, sent her dog, Ted, for surgery
to repair a torn ligament in a right rear leg, only to find that
the veterinarian had operated on the left leg instead.

And Stefani Olsen of Silver Spring, Md., returned from a weekend
business trip to discover that the clinic where she’d boarded her
elderly diabetic cat, Toonces, had overdosed him with 10 times the
amount of insulin he needed, leaving the animal blind, wracked with
seizures and suffering from severe brain damage that lasted until
his death.

“It goes beyond heartbreak,” said Olsen, a 45-year-old health
information technician who’d had the 15-year-old cat since he
was a kitten.

If any of these mistakes had occurred in human patients, they’d be
classified as medical errors worthy of investigation, public
reporting and professional discipline, including dismissal.

Wrong-site surgery and medication overdoses, for instance, are among
the so-called “never events” regarded as inexcusable in a human
health care setting.

But because the errors occurred in animals, owners and advocates
say they were ignored, minimized or outright denied by a system
that devalues the bond between pets and their owners and fails to
hold veterinarians sufficiently accountable when they make mistakes.

————————–
‘Woefully inadequate’
————————–

“When someone’s companion animal is injured by a veterinarian,
their choices are between slim and none,” said Joyce Tischler,
founder and general counselor for the Animal Legal Defense Fund,
a Cotati, Calif., group that fields several calls a month about
pet medical errors.

“Action against veterinarians is woefully inadequate,” she added.

Owners of injured animals say they’re stunned to discover state
veterinary boards that dismiss up to 80 percent of the complaints
filed against their members, and a legal system that regards pets
as mere property, with no way to recover damages for emotional loss.

Laws vary, but in most state courts animals are worth their market
value, plus perhaps any economic value they generate for their
owners, Tischler said. That could be a considerable amount of
money for a high-value show dog or a racehorse, for instance,
but for most household pets, it’s not.

“If you have a 10-year-old mixed-breed dog, the value of that dog
is generally considered to be under $100,” Tischler said. “It’s a
sad situation, it’s an unfair situation for people who care about
their animals and are quite shocked to find when their animal is
killed or injured they cannot sue.”

But industry advocates and vets themselves say that such rhetoric
overstates the problem. They contend that mistakes occur only in a
tiny fraction of the nearly 190 million for veterinary visits for
dogs, cats, birds and horses each year, and that there is adequate
monitoring and discipline when they do happen.

“I guess I don’t agree that there is a lot of malpractice out
there,” said Adrian Hochstadt, assistant director of state
legislative and regulatory affairs for the American Veterinary
Medical Association, which represents about 80,000 vets.

“If there are negligent doctors — and there are probably a few in
every system — if it’s a big problem, it would have been addressed
by legislation,” he added.

——————————
No tracking of vet errors
——————————

It’s difficult to know how often medical errors occur in pets. The
AVMA collects no statistics on veterinary malpractice suits,
Hochstadt said, and the group’s associated Professional Liability
Insurance Trust, or PLIT, which offers malpractice insurance for
vets, refused to release numbers or outcomes of such cases.

One small study of veterinary errors, a 2004 paper published in the
journal Veterinary Record, found that 78 percent of recent
veterinary graduates surveyed in Scotland and England admitted
making a mistake that could have endangered an animal. It’s not
clear whether those results can be extrapolated to the larger
profession, however.

In the absence of better data, most industry experts look to human
medicine, where medical errors kill as many as 98,000 people a year,
and likely more, according to a decade-old Institute of Medicine
report widely regarded as a baseline.

“There’s no reason to think that it’s so different than what occurs
in humans,” said Kathleen Bonvicini, chief executive of the
Institute for Healthcare Communication Inc., a New Haven, Conn.,
nonprofit that had to add sessions on veterinary errors several
years ago to address a growing demand.

The AVMA stands by the state discipline system, Hochstadt said. At
the same time, the group has staunchly opposed efforts to allow
courts to impose non-economic damages for animals, arguing that the
move would drive up costs, push vets out of the profession and
create many of the problems found in the medical malpractice realm
for humans.

“Our position is that the current legal structure is working well,”
Hochstadt said.

That sentiment outrages some pet owners, prompting them to take
their plight to the Internet. Greg Munson, 44, a Mesquite, Texas,
businessman created the Web site www.vetsfromhell.net  after the
2005 death of his beloved 8-year-old Shih Tzu, Stempy, from an
alleged veterinary error after surgery for a bladder stone.

Munson’s site, which features flaming letters and “story after
story of EVIL Vets from HELL,” was designed to gain attention — and
prompt action, Munson said.

“Vets in this country literally get away with murder,” Munson said.
“Even when a vet board does hold a vet accountable, it’s nothing
more than a slap on the wrist.”

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

P.S. So what is the REAL instance of Veterinary Errors?

Well we don’t know, except that by comparison, Doctors are the 3rd
leading cause of death in the U.S. – causing 250,000 deaths a year- 
and that is according to stats from JAMA.

Our dog and cat population is approx 1/3 of the human population-
by comparison that could mean 100,000 pets dying a year due to
Veterinary Error.

My point of all this is that it happens- and because there is NO
central reporting of it, we Don’t know the real numbers.

Don’t let your pet become one of these stats.

Become an EMPOWERED Pet Owner.

Learn more at Pamper Pet Care

Posted via web from Pamper Pet Care

Posted via email from Pamper Pet Care