你的兽医是真的“兽医”吗？

飞狐

http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/ ... cus/6946476&sec=lifefocus


WENDY Leow and her family were overjoyed when they were given a ShihTzu puppy in February. They were advised to take Precious for hisprimary vaccination when he turned three months old. The friend whogave them the pup mentioned that Precious had a skin problem and thatit could be a food-related allergy.
In early March, Precious was taken to a veterinary clinic in Petaling Jaya, Selangor, where he was diagnosed with scabies.
“Wewere horrified. Scabies is mange and is caused by microscopic mitesthat can spread to other dogs and even people,” says Leow, a publicrelations consultant.   Half-blind: Precious’ vision in one eye was almost gone after being treated by a bogus vet.

Thepup was given an injection and a course of pills to consume. By thethird day, Precious’ right eye had become inflamed, so they took himback to the same clinic. The same “vet” said Shih Tzus were prone toeye problems and advised them to trim the fur around the face and heprescribed eye-drops. He insisted it was the fur that caused the eyeproblem and asked them to continue with the scabies medication.
“Unfortunatelythe inflammation got worse, and our poor puppy was in pain, judgingfrom his puffy red eye. A colleague recommended a good vet inBrickfields (KL). This vet informed us that Precious’ eye had becomeulcerated and there was a danger of losing the eye. Surgery had to beperformed immediately,” says Leow.
Surgery was carried out thenext day. The head vet and his team gave the family a clear idea ofwhat was being done. For 40 days, Precious’ right eye had to bestitched shut to give it a chance to recover.
Although Precious recovered, his vision in the right eye is compromised due to scarring.
Leowand her family asked the new vet for a second opinion on the scabiesdiagnosis. Using a skin swab (a requirement when checking for mange andwhich was not done earlier), the vet found that Precious only had asimple yeast infection.   Sufferingin silence: After the alleged botched-up spaying done by a ‘vet’ inPetaling Jaya, Elsie’s Pekingese was left unattended in the clinic.

Allthey had to do was to substitute his meat-based dog food with afish-based diet. Leow also did her own research and found that ateaspoonful of yogurt with each meal could have helped to clearPrecious’ skin problem within 10 days.  
Who’s in charge?
StarTwodecided to check up on the earlier “vet”. The clinic in question hadtwo vets with the same name. It was the younger “vet” who had treatedPrecious.
A check with other vets revealed that the “vet” inquestion was not a qualified one. He was just an assistant employed atthe clinic. He was not on the list of registered vets under theMalaysian Veterinary Council (which is empowered to regulate theprofession). His modus operandi involved giving out the name card ofthe older qualified vet who shared the same first name.
Theowner of the clinic and chief vet had been told by other vets to stopthe assistant from treating animals but this went unheeded, despitemany complaints of malpractice against the latter.
Another petowner, Elsie (name changed upon request), claims that the same clinic(its main one in KL) did a botched job of spaying her one-year-oldPekingnese in March last year. She claims the vet punctured the dog’sintestines and stray fur left in the wound resulted in infection.
Aftersurgery, Elsie claims that her dog was left on its own in an unhygienicarea in the locked clinic. Only when she called the “vet” did he lether in to see her dog.   Double stress: Going to the vet is no joyride for pets and their owners.

Elsietook her dog to another vet who found that the dog’s insides had turnedseptic. He gave her two options: operate on the dog to try and save it,or let nature take its course. Elsie opted for the former.Unfortunately, the dog could not be saved despite surgery.
Thereport issued by the second clinic confirmed that the dog’s intestineshad been punctured and subsequently became infected. Elsie confrontedthe “vet” at the first clinic but was threatened for complaining.
“I’mso sad about losing my dog. I hope someone can do something and stopmore animals from dying because of this horrible ‘vet’,” says Elsie whostarted a Facebook page in memory of her dog.
No action taken
Petcolumnist and author Ellen Whyte speaks of her own experiences indealing with a bogus vet. When Whyte was living in Malacca, she adopteda kitten from the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Shetook the kitten to the “vet” for a check-up and was told the kitten hadringworms. The “vet” prescribed some ointment containing sulphur.
“Iwas surprised because she didn’t really examine the kitten. I wasexpecting a topical anti-fungal cream, a tablet like itraconazole and aspecial shampoo. These are standard treatments,” says Whyte.
Soshe took the kitten to another vet for a second opinion. The vetpromptly prescribed the standard treatment. When Whyte informed thissecond vet of what the female vet had prescribed, she was told that thepractice was owned by a man.
It turned out she was the vet’swife. When Whyte confronted her, she maintained that she was “just asgood as a vet”. Her husband the vet was not perturbed by the complaint.
“Ithink defrauding the public and pretending to be a vet is a seriouscrime. I got the numbers for the vet authority in the state andreported them both. Nothing was done. When I left a year later, thesetwo were carrying on in exactly the same way,” says Whyte.  
More hijinks
InJanuary 2008, a local TV station highlighted a pet shop owner whodoubled up as a “vet” of sorts. The man had opened the pet shop with abig signboard advertising the premises as a veterinary clinic.
Heopenly acknowledged on TV that he had no veterinary qualifications. Hesaid he could treat minor injuries because he had experience, havingworked with a vet.
Veterinarian Dr Jon Satyamoorthy says he hascome across a Filipino “vet” who did vaccinations at his premises inJalan Pudu, Kuala Lumpur. After his “practice” became known, he movedto a shop in the vicinity of Sri Hartamas, KL. Then there are the bogusvets who operate out of pet shops and offer vaccinations and othertreatments. A check with several bona fide vets revealed that such apractice was quite common.
Malaysian Small Animal VeterinaryAssociation (MSAVA) president Dr Clement Anthony and past president DrPaul Chelliah both acknowledge the problem. Dr Chelliah, who is basedin Seremban, says he knows of four such bogus vets in his town.
“Theynot only vaccinate, they do spaying, surgery, castration, and so on.And they are cheap. Some of them are former DVS (Department ofVeterinary Services) staff who are not qualified, just assistantspreviously. Some of them operate from their houses or go house tohouse. I have confronted some of them but they laughed and challengedme to do something,” reveals Dr Chelliah.

飞狐

结论，很多“诊所”或宠物店的“兽医”其实都不是合格受承认的拿执照的毕业“兽医”，导致很多小狗小猫必须承受无辜的疼痛甚至死亡。请势必确认你们的兽医是“有牌”的。

虫皇

vet是个professional body，难道他们的professional board不能够做些什么吗？

goblinkaka

回复 1# 飞狐


    请用中文，不满可去英文论坛

varanus

英文报纸难道有华文？

飞狐

来自星洲日报的迟报导。。。
http://www.sinchew.com.my/node/177727?tid=1

獸醫局總監：未接投報‧無從對付非法獸醫

      阿都阿茲（左）呼吁，民眾一旦發現有非法獸醫或無牌營業的獸醫診所馬上向當局投報。旁為獸醫局生物安全及衛生組主任拿督莫哈末阿茲米。（圖：星洲日報）

（布城1日訊）獸醫局總監拿督阿都阿茲坦承，大馬確實存在非法或冒牌獸醫的問題，但獸醫服務局（DVS）及馬來西亞獸醫理事會（MVC）在今年內卻從未接到任何相關的投報，讓當局無從下手。

“我們雖然知道有非法獸醫存在，但卻缺乏有關的資料及證據，無法對他們採取對付行動，因此我們非常需要民眾提這方面的資料，讓我們能確實掌握非法獸醫的行徑。”

他說，該局及獸醫理事會也非常關注無牌和不合格人士，為動物進行診療、配藥，以及在沒有註冊的獸醫診療所、住家或農場為動物進行手術等事件的嚴重性。

阿都阿茲今日在新聞發佈會上說，雖然上述行為與正式或合格獸醫的服務性質相似，但卻是有可能會危害或殘忍對待動物的違法行為，而這也顧客非常不公平。

他指出，1974年獸醫法令闡明，只有畢業自受承認大學的合格獸醫，才獲准向大馬獸醫理事會註冊及行醫；國內所有獸醫診所也必須向大馬獸醫局註冊申請營業執照，並於每年11月尾更新有關執照。

展開突擊檢查運動

他透露，為確保國內所有獸醫診療所都是合法及合格操業，該局將從今日開始展開突擊檢查運動，到全國各地的獸醫診所進行包括診所衛生、執照有效期及藥品管理等方面的檢視，預計將在今年11月底可完成有關的檢查運動。

他說，要解決非法獸醫問題不能單靠政府的力量，更是需要民眾的合作，一旦發現非法獸醫就有責任向有關當局舉報；民眾可通過撥打該局設立的熱線03-88702236，舉報非法獸醫、投訴，又或是查詢有關合法獸醫診所的詳情。

阿都阿茲也說，該局也將會開設新網站提供全國各地的合法獸醫診所資料，方便民眾隨時上網查詢離家最近的診所位置及獸醫局最新消息等事項，而有關網站預計將在今年12月初可使用。
星洲日報‧2010.10.01