Vet's shortcomings

["Tracey" <tracey@tbt.co.za>]

Marv wrote:

 

>>I often say the chances of a vet finding any definitive source for lameness that has no visible physical trauma are pretty slim.  Course, I also say that vets are to equine dentistry what the lightning bug is to lightning.<<

 

See, even we can agree on something!  And you forgot to mention that, generally, if you've got a foot problem, get a farrier, not a vet.  Fortunately, my vet IS aware of his shortcomings in this regard, and quite happy to work with the dentist / farrier.

 

I'm still not sold on chiros, but I think that's just inherent caution on my part, and determined by my environment rather than the profession as a whole.  Out here, you get all sorts of people claiming to be "chiros" with little or no qualifications, and no way of checking on their ability.  At least with a vet, there is a licencing authority which can strike him off the roll if he behaves recklessly.  Not so with chiros, although I think it may be different in the States.  For some reason, I am more willing to trust someone with my horse if I feel he has something to lose if he f....s up.  Of course, letting them know I'm a public liability attorney also helps <grin>

 

 

Tracey