Category:
Animals
Alex's post on animal owners seems to have divided WU readers into two camps: those who would pay any sum to heal their pet, and those who would duct-tape a gerbil at the first sign of infirmity.
I'm sure both types of readers would like to learn about
the experiences of Kim Cavallero.
Due to myriad health issues, Kim Cavallero has racked up more than $20,000 in veterinary bills for her cat, Annie, in the past year. Through the employee assistance program at her job, she discovered Feline Outreach. "During a time when people thought I was crazy for continuing to care for my pet through very serious and expensive medical care, Feline Outreach validated me -- especially emotionally,'' she said. "With their grant, they let me know that I was doing the right thing for my cat.''
Sociological research, detailed in a
1994 article in the journal
Qualitative Sociology, reveals that veterinarians classify annoying pet owners into five different types. I suspect I would fall into the animal-nut category.
Ignorant clients
"Some clients were so hopelessly ignorant of the basic requirements of animal caretaking that they were viewed with a sort of sad bemusement. Frequently, these owners were the focus of joking among the staff." Example: One client insisted that, because she had paid over $350 for her cat, it should be immune to fleas.
Inattentive and Demanding Clients
"Belligerent clients complained, disputed diagnoses, demanded special considerations, and generally did not behave in the compliant and appreciative manner deemed appropriate by the doctors."
Neglectful Clients
"Unlike the ideally compliant and realistic client, some owners were viewed negatively by the staff because their pets' physical condition indicated that they were neglectful of or indifferent to their animals' well-being, For the most part, the veterinarians maintained that this type of client was rare since the very fact that a person brought their animal for veterinary services demonstrated that he or she feels at least a minimal concern for the creature's health."
Over-Involved Clients (animal nuts)
"Over-involved clients were deemed troublesome because of the extra time and unnecessary attention that frequently had to be devoted to them. This client commonly provided the veterinarian with excessive and overly detailed information about his or her pet's condition and behavior, thus making it difficult for the doctor to determine what was actually going on with the animal... Not all 'animal-nuts' were defined as problems, however. Frequently, the vets recognized that people who are strongly attached to their animals were the prime consumers of their services."
Cost-Focused Clients
"Clients who were more worried about the cost of the service than they were about the welfare of the animal tended to be negatively evaluated, while those for whom money was a secondary issue were more positively defined as appropriately conscientious owners."
There's a lot of good information to be found over at the
Visual Guide to Bovine Reproduction. For instance,
Estrus detection: "The cow that stands to be mounted is the cow in heat. Cows are bisexual, hence may be mounted by a bull or another cow. Standing to be mounted is the gold standard of estrus detection."
And also:
Cow Eating Placenta: "It is not uncommon for a cow to eat her fetal membranes. This may cause digestive problems. It is an old-wives tale that the fetal membranes contain hormones that will benefit uterine involution. Some believe that it is the instinct of the cow "remove the evidence" to discourage predators."
What I find strange is the design of the site. For some reason, you don't really expect a guide to bovine reproduction to have fancy scrolling menus.
The
Sandy Paws Grooming Shop of Yucca Valley, CA has won many creative grooming awards. It's not hard to see why:
Chuck's post last week about the guy who
trained a rat to sit on top of a cat sitting on a dog, reminded me of the groundbreaking research of Dr. Loh Seng Tsai, conducted back in the late 1940s/early 1950s.
Dr. Tsai trained a cat and a rat to cooperate together in order to get food. From the
LA Times, July 15, 1951:
The latest research was done with the aid of special apparatus composed of three sections separated by electrically controlled screen gates. First section is the entrance or release box, where a cat and a rat assemble for a test. The second section is the reaction chamber where cooperation takes place.
To get into the third section, where a dish of food awaits, the cat and mouse must each step on a floor button simultaneously. When this is done by perfect cooperation the gate drops and both animals thus gain admittance to the food chamber.
Dr. Tsai reported that, "Soon all the pairs of cats and rats began to work together. Finally their cooperation was so perfect that they took only three seconds to reach their food from the entrance."
Dr. Tsai figured that these results disproved Darwin's concept of the Survival of the Fittest. He told the LA Times reporter: "In the face of the fact that even alley cats and rats live together, eat together, sleep together, play together and work together, Darwin's theory seems at most only a half-truth."
What's really amazing is that this guy was a professor of biology at first the University of Chicago, then Tulane, then UCLA, and yet he didn't seem to have a clear understanding of what Darwin meant by the Survival of the Fittest. Nor, as far as I can tell, did anyone ever call him out as a crackpot. In fact, there was talk of nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize.
In 1933 Dr. W.F. Dove, a biologist at the University of Maine, conducted an experiment to find out if he could create a "unicorn bull." He removed the two knots of tissue on the side of the bull's head that would normally have developed into horns and transplanted them to the center of the forehead. The experiment was a success. A single, massive horn grew there.
The unicorn horn made the bull the unchallenged leader of its herd. But Dr. Dove observed that the unicorn bull was actually an extremely docile creature. He wrote:
Although he is an animal with the hereditary potentiality for two horns, he recognizes the power of a single horn which he uses as a prow to pass under fences and barriers in his path, or as a forward thrusting bayonet in his attacks. And, to invert the beatitude, his ability to inherit the earth gives him the virtues of meekness. Consciousness of power makes him docile.
Link:
Unicorn Garden
Mankind replaced by squirrels? See it all in
this famous cartoon.