re: D.E. Brea, Ca's comments about the MD officials,
 
I didn't make the original comment about the `MD Nazi', and although I agree
that that may be a strong word, I'm afraid I also agree with the sentiment.
These officials can't possibly claim ignorance.  They were given all the
facts by reliable people and sources, including scientific articles.  I don't
know if these officials are M.D.'s or D.V.M.'s, but I do know that the former
seem to be taught in med school that animals are the enemy when it comes to
disease -- how many doctors have told pregnant women to get rid of their cats
rather than simply suggesting good hygiene practices?  It is my feeling that
the doctors in this case who ordered and carried out the destruction of this
poor ferret were going not by the facts, but by that misguided stubbornness
that seems to consume most all officials who are against ferrets.  Yes, a
child was bitten.  The issue here is not whether or not the ferret could
possibly have given her rabies -- I agree that the chance however remote
definitely warrants some sort of quarantine or *something*.  The issue is
that this ferret was destroyed *long after* he would have died had he bitten
the girl in a rabid fit, and the girl was never treated for rabies -- if the
officials had *really* believed she might have gotten rabies, she'd have
started shots right away -- she herself would have died or at least been very
sick from rabies by the time that poor ferret's fate was finally decided.  It
was all done wrong, and the ferret was indeed destroyed completely
needlessly.  And I believe the officials involved knew it, but were scared by
the lawsuit threats from the girl's family.  A fine excuse to take a life
needlessly.  Nazi?  I'm no one to say.  But what they did, in my mind, is
completely indefensable.  They weren't looking out for a bitten child.  They
were looking out for themselves.
 
Laura
 
Laura L'Heureux Kupkee
U. of Illinois Vet Med Class of `96
[log in to unmask]
[Posted in FML issue 1097]