Another Trip to the ER

On 21 Mar 2006 18:17:09 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:

But then I'm not allowed to discuss Kami's health issue in this
newsgroup, so I'll vent with normal, logical, and reasonable people
off-topic in some other one.

Oh, come on. What happened?

Charlie

"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
...
On 21 Mar 2006 18:17:09 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:

But then I'm not allowed to discuss Kami's health issue in this
newsgroup, so I'll vent with normal, logical, and reasonable people
off-topic in some other one.

Oh, come on. What happened?


*G*

cybercat wrote:
"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
...
On 21 Mar 2006 18:17:09 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:

But then I'm not allowed to discuss Kami's health issue in this
newsgroup, so I'll vent with normal, logical, and reasonable people
off-topic in some other one.

Oh, come on. What happened?


*G*

Sigh. They're both so predictable...

-L.

On 21 Mar 2006 23:23:56 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:

We'll keep on plugging. Viva la SpotBot.

I'm glad she's feeling better.

As for the eating thing... my neighbors had a cat that lived to be
about 23. The last year of its life, they had to cook special meals
for it, just to get it to eat. Lord they fussed over that cat.

Charlie

"-L." wrote in message
oups.com...

cybercat wrote:
"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
...
On 21 Mar 2006 18:17:09 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:

But then I'm not allowed to discuss Kami's health issue in this
newsgroup, so I'll vent with normal, logical, and reasonable people
off-topic in some other one.

Oh, come on. What happened?


*G*

Sigh. They're both so predictable...


Yeah. But at least Charlie is up front--"intellectually honest," as he says.

cybercat wrote:
"-L." wrote in message
oups.com...
cybercat wrote:
"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
...
On 21 Mar 2006 18:17:09 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:

But then I'm not allowed to discuss Kami's health issue in this
newsgroup, so I'll vent with normal, logical, and reasonable people
off-topic in some other one.
Oh, come on. What happened?

*G*
Sigh. They're both so predictable...


Yeah. But at least Charlie is up front--"intellectually honest," as he says.




On the newsgroups, Charlie is whatever he says he is... which doesn't
necessarily reflect reality.

cybercat wrote:

Yeah. But at least Charlie is up front--"intellectually honest," as he says.


Now, now, that's not fair to ole Cumbucket. One first has to have
intellect in order to be honest with it...

-L.

On 22 Mar 2006 16:28:20 GMT, Brandy Alexandre
wrote:


See? I think Dr. Greg was just interested in doing the expensive
thing and if that didn't work THEN something else. It just made me
suspicious and I'm glad I wrote Tina. I'm also glad that she's so
willing to get and respond to emails.

Yeah. Isn't it amazing how many professional people DON'T use email?
One would think they could save a lot of time.

It's funny. I'm not being fought on the pills. I'm wondering if
Kami's getting a clue.

I'll bet she is just getting used to it. Animals are pretty
adaptable, more than people give them credit for, I think.

Charlie

I've thought about that in the past regarding vets -- and I think it's a
time-saver for them NOT to have email. There are so many things that
have come up with our animals that I would have sent off an emailed
question to a vet. Since mine don't have email, I either try to find the
answer myself (usually on the web) or I call the receptionist. Many
times, she yells back to the vet or to a vet tech and just tells me over
the phone.

If the vet had to stop and type out answers to numerous emails, I think
that could take up a big portion of their day.

Having worked for one of the f-500 companies, there is so much time
wasted with emails. Many times it's a great thing to reach someone
instantly, but typing out answers to endless back and forth emails drove
me crazy (yep, that's what did it.) Lots of times after about the 3rd
round on one subject and facing another question of "what about this?",
I'd pick up the phone and call them.

Rhonda

Charlie Wilkes wrote:


Yeah. Isn't it amazing how many professional people DON'T use email?
One would think they could save a lot of time.

Rhonda wrote:
I've thought about that in the past regarding vets -- and I think it's a
time-saver for them NOT to have email. There are so many things that
have come up with our animals that I would have sent off an emailed
question to a vet. Since mine don't have email, I either try to find the
answer myself (usually on the web) or I call the receptionist. Many
times, she yells back to the vet or to a vet tech and just tells me over
the phone.

If the vet had to stop and type out answers to numerous emails, I think
that could take up a big portion of their day.

Having worked for one of the f-500 companies, there is so much time
wasted with emails. Many times it's a great thing to reach someone
instantly, but typing out answers to endless back and forth emails drove
me crazy (yep, that's what did it.) Lots of times after about the 3rd
round on one subject and facing another question of "what about this?",
I'd pick up the phone and call them.

Rhonda

Charlie Wilkes wrote:


Yeah. Isn't it amazing how many professional people DON'T use email?
One would think they could save a lot of time.


Email and the diagnosis and delivery of medical information don't
exactly go hand-in-hand.

Usually, the vet needs to see the animal and make a determination on the
basis of first hand observance rather than email information.

Agreed, email can be a huge time waster.