Did diabetes treatment do this to him?

"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...
On Apr 10, 2:40 am, "Phil P." wrote:

I've treated many diabetic cats- at least a few dozen over the years- and
I
can say, based on actual experience, Glipizide does not work, over the
long
run, in the vast majority of diabetic cats. The failure rate in cats is
~75-80%. The most serious- and potentially life-threatening side effect of
Glipizide in cats is loss of appetite and nausea. Loss of appetite in a
diabetic cat that's receiving Glipizide can result in *profound*
hypoglycemia. The higher the dose the greater the chance- and severity of
adverse effects. The dose your cat has been prescribed is *twice* the
normal initial dose. I strongly suggest you seek a second opinion from a
vet
who is current in treating diabetic cats.



My wife read all the postings in this thread and then
spoke to an acquaintance who's a vet tech. Pretty
much confirmed what was recommended here. The PetSmart
vet she was going to had been leading her astray.
So she'll take the cat to a vet who will endorse the
insulin + no-carb diet, probably. Life will become more
complicated, not to mention more constrained for our
dear companion animal. Sigh...on the other hand, if we'd
all grown up on farms, we'd have a different perspective --
more balanced, perhaps -- on the relative value of
human and animal lives...

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org

This is *great* news. I'm so glad to hear that your wife is going to see
another vet. Incidentally, I would never use the PetSmart vets for
anything, so I think this will be much better all around. Please suggest
that your wife make the change ASAP. This is one of those times when delay
in effective treatment can have very serious consequences.

Thank you!! And please thank your wife.!!

MaryL


MaryL

On Apr 11, 9:15*am, "cindys" wrote:
I just love a happy ending! May you and your wife and your cat have many
long, happy, healthy years together. Please keep us updated on how your cat
is doing.


Sorry, no happy ending. The new vet found a liver problem
as well. The word came back that the animal would have to
be fed a truckload of pills as well as endure the insulin
shots. We had the cat euthanized and buried him in our
back yard. So this was the outcome of plan A, which
gutted my wife's bank account. Plan B, which I had favored,
would have been to not treat the condition at all. At the
time it appeared, the cat simply drank a lot of water and
peed a lot, but was otherwise normal. I would have waited
until he seemed to be in pain or became obviously sickly
and weak, at which time I would have had him euthanized.
Hence my question earlier in the thread, never answered,
as to what actually would have happened if the condition
were not treated.

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:21:53 -0700 (PDT), Charles Packer
wrote:

On Apr 11, 9:15*am, "cindys" wrote:
I just love a happy ending! May you and your wife and your cat have many
long, happy, healthy years together. Please keep us updated on how your cat
is doing.


Sorry, no happy ending. The new vet found a liver problem
as well. The word came back that the animal would have to
be fed a truckload of pills as well as endure the insulin
shots. We had the cat euthanized and buried him in our
back yard. So this was the outcome of plan A, which
gutted my wife's bank account. Plan B, which I had favored,
would have been to not treat the condition at all. At the
time it appeared, the cat simply drank a lot of water and
peed a lot, but was otherwise normal. I would have waited
until he seemed to be in pain or became obviously sickly
and weak, at which time I would have had him euthanized.
Hence my question earlier in the thread, never answered,
as to what actually would have happened if the condition
were not treated.


Oh, sorry to hear that. Sometimes it costs a lot of money to find out
that there is nothing we can do, but because I love my cats I spend
the money; they are part of the family after all. Deciding whether to
treat and quality of life is a very difficult decision for most of us.
Not for you though.

Healthcare costs money, whether it's for people or for animals.
Keeping a cat in distress until it falls over isn't an option for me.
I'm glad "the animal" had your wife to look after it because you
apparently don't count.

I guess no one answered your earlier question because, well, without
spending some money to find out what is wrong, no one can answer the
question.

Charles Packer wrote in
:

On Apr 11, 9:15*am, "cindys" wrote:
I just love a happy ending! May you and your wife and your cat have
many long, happy, healthy years together. Please keep us updated on
how your ca
t
is doing.


Sorry, no happy ending. The new vet found a liver problem
as well. The word came back that the animal would have to
be fed a truckload of pills as well as endure the insulin
shots. We had the cat euthanized and buried him in our
back yard. So this was the outcome of plan A, which
gutted my wife's bank account. Plan B, which I had favored,
would have been to not treat the condition at all. At the
time it appeared, the cat simply drank a lot of water and
peed a lot, but was otherwise normal. I would have waited
until he seemed to be in pain or became obviously sickly
and weak, at which time I would have had him euthanized.
Hence my question earlier in the thread, never answered,
as to what actually would have happened if the condition
were not treated.

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org




So the entire point of your post was to be able to show your wife that
you were right and she was wrong? Well, you win!

"cindys" wrote in message
...

"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 9:15 am, "cindys" wrote:
I just love a happy ending! May you and your wife and your cat have many
long, happy, healthy years together. Please keep us updated on how your
cat
is doing.


Sorry, no happy ending. The new vet found a liver problem
as well. The word came back that the animal would have to
be fed a truckload of pills as well as endure the insulin
shots. We had the cat euthanized and buried him in our
back yard.

I am so sorry to hear that.

So this was the outcome of plan A, which
gutted my wife's bank account. Plan B, which I had favored,
would have been to not treat the condition at all.

The condition you were talking about was *diabetes* NOT a liver problem.
It is extremely unfortunate that your cat had more than one thing going
on, but that doesn't mean that the advice we gave you about the *diabetes*
was incorrect.

At the
time it appeared, the cat simply drank a lot of water and
peed a lot, but was otherwise normal.

Drinking a lot of water and peeing a lot can be a symptom of many things,
many of which are treatable. Thyroid disease is another easily treatable
condition which can manifest this way. Thyroid disease is easy and cheap
to treat. You presented us with a *diagnosis* from a veterinarian. If you
had presented only the symptoms, we would have advised you to have the cat
tested to find out what was the diagnosis.

I would have waited
until he seemed to be in pain or became obviously sickly
and weak, at which time I would have had him euthanized.

With untreated diabetes, the cat was already sickly and suffering. Cats
hide their pain very well. If the cat had had only diabetes, he would have
been feeling much better by now from the insulin shots, and your wife
would have been so happy. And if the cat had had thyroid disease, he would
have been feeling much better right now from (inexpensive) medication.
This was a very sad outcome, but our advice was still on-target for a cat
with diabetes.

Hence my question earlier in the thread, never answered,
as to what actually would have happened if the condition
were not treated.

We did answer you. We told you that a cat with untreated *diabetes* would
have a short and sickly life. To elaborate, the glucose would have clogged
up his organs and he could have lost his eyesight, had organ failure, and
nerve damage. Except the reality is that the cat also had a liver
problem, which the first vet (who was clearly incompetent) failed to
diagnose. So, your wife took the cat to a competent vet and got an
accurate diagnosis. We have all lost animals that we love, and grieving
takes a while. You told us your cat had *diabetes,* and we advised you
that the veterinarian was treating it incorrectly and to see another vet
about giving insulin shots. That advice still stands with a cat with
diabetes. There was never any discussion of liver disease in any of your
earlier posts. There was discussion of seeing another vet, which your wife
did, and the new vet made an accurate diagnosis. The fact of the matter is
that your cat had liver disease, and that would have been true whether you
had seen the second vet or not. That is a sad outcome, but we gave you
good advice.

The bottom line is that when the cat got sick, what you really wanted to
do was nothing. You wanted to let the cat die and not treat him. You're
angry with us because we advised you to go to a competent vet and have him
treated. And that cost money. And as an unfortunate twist of fate, he had
an incurable disease in addition to the diabetes, which no one knew about
until the new vet diagnosed it, and now you're angry that your wife spent
money on the Lantus insulin, and we all should have been mind-readers and
known that the cat had liver disease and/or we should have told you to
leave the cat untreated and let him die. The people on this group are
focused on helping cats to live, and no one here would ever advise someone
to leave an easily treatable medical condition like *diabetes* untreated.
So, now, you are berating us for not keeping out mouths shut rather than
telling you how to cure your cat's diabetes?

If you are looking for someone to blame, look to the incompetent
veterinarian who missed the liver disease diagnosis (didn't s/he run blood
work and see that the liver enzymes were all messed up? Doesn't take a
rocket scientist). And for the record, many of us would have spent the
money on all the pills for the liver disease, even if it meant eating
beans for dinner for a month. If that wasn't your choice, it wasn't, but
stop berating us as if your cat's liver disease is all our fault.

Condolences to you and your wife on the loss of your kitty.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org


This is an excellent post with good explanations of these medical
conditions. People on this group *did* answer the question (several times)
because the question related only to diabetes. We were never told about
liver disease. The OP is just looking for a way to tell his wife, "They
wouldn't help."

One of my cats had liver disease. It was diagnosed with her routine blood
tests. With aggressive treatment, she lived for another three years. When
it finally became clear that we could no longer sustain a quality of life
and that we would be prolonging her life only to cause pain, I made the very
difficult decision to have her euthanized.

I do offer my sympathies to the OP's wife. It sounds like she truly loved
this cat.

MaryL

On Apr 14, 9:58*am, "cindys" wrote:
rocket scientist). And for the record, many of us would have spent the money
on all the pills for the liver disease, even if it meant eating beans for


Clearly.

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org

"cindys" wrote in message
...

"Matthew" wrote in message
...

"cindys"


Cindy why waste your time
--------
Hoping against hope that he'll do some introspection and rethink the way
he
treats his wife. But I know it's probably a lost cause.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

There's definitely a connection between domestic abuse and animal abuse:

*85 % of homes where women are abused, a pet is also abused.

*60% of women who are the victims of domestic violence have had a pet killed
by violence.

*40% of battered women delay going to a shelter for abused women because
they're afraid of what will happen to their pet if they leave.

Assholes like him are why I'm reluctant to adopt cats to women who are
married or have boyfriends but come into our adoption centers alone. I want
to meet both parties. I get into a lot arguments over it- but my reasons
definitely are not sexist.

Phil

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:00:44 -0400, "cindys"
wrote:


"Phil P." wrote in message
news:nEfNj.13886$DD2.2798@trndny04...

"cindys" wrote in message
...

"Matthew" wrote in message
...

"cindys"


Cindy why waste your time
--------
Hoping against hope that he'll do some introspection and rethink the way
he
treats his wife. But I know it's probably a lost cause.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

There's definitely a connection between domestic abuse and animal abuse:

*85 % of homes where women are abused, a pet is also abused.

*60% of women who are the victims of domestic violence have had a pet
killed
by violence.

*40% of battered women delay going to a shelter for abused women because
they're afraid of what will happen to their pet if they leave.

Assholes like him are why I'm reluctant to adopt cats to women who are
married or have boyfriends but come into our adoption centers alone. I
want
to meet both parties. I get into a lot arguments over it- but my reasons
definitely are not sexist.
-------
My jaw dropped when I saw these statistics, but I don't find them
surprising. My heart is bleeding, as I envision a woman who loved her cat
desperately and would have treated his/her various illnesses if only she had
the money, and a husband who refused to give her the money and forced her to
have her beloved pet euthanized. My tears are for the woman more so than for
the cat. The cat doesn't know the difference at this point, but the woman
will be grieving for months.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

Hopefully without living with the asshole.

On Apr 8, 7:18 am, Charles Packer wrote:
On Apr 7, 7:35 am, "Spot" wrote:

Its very critical that the cat get the correct dosage. Too much or too
little can kill the cat you need to work with your vet on this.

What would have happened if that cat hadn't been treated at
all? Except for a lot of drinking water and peeing, his behavior
otherwise was normal. If his condition were fatal, at least
we would have a memory of him as normal up to the end.
But he's my wife's cat, and she decides what gets done.

--
Charles Packerhttp://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org

You should never ignore a cat's possible condition just because its
not "fatal" or they are acting normally.

On Apr 18, 9:57*am, wrote:
You should never ignore a cat's possible condition just because its
not "fatal" or they are acting normally.

Think about your choice of words here. If I had been
_ignoring_ the cat's condition, it never would have
occurred to me to post a query to this newsgroup,
right?

Sloppiness like that has derailed many a discussion
in newsgroups. To get this one back on a useful track,
I'd like to know: Have there been any peer-reviewed
studies of the success rate of the diabetes treatment
advocated in this thread?

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org