Medical Detection Dogs: The Future Of COVID 19 Testing?

They’ve successfully sniffed out different forms of cancers and sniffed out those affected by malaria for years, but are medical detection dogs the future of COVID 19 testing and detection?

By: Ringp Bones

Three months ago, specifically trained medical detection dogs have shown promising results in being able to detect COVID 19 in suspected patients even before the patients tested positive with existing COVID 19 test procedures, thus establishing their potential for use in new non-invasive, early warning measure to detect coronavirus in the future. After promising results by the world leading researchers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and collaboration with the charity Medical Detection Dogs and Durham University, dogs that can sniff out COVID 19 will soon be working as an early detection system in a public space near you.

Given that dogs have been successfully sniffing out certain cancers and even malaria infected individuals for a number of years now, COVID 19 detection could represent the new frontier for these medical detection dogs. More than 10 years of research gathered by Medical Detection Dogs has shown that the dogs, which could screen up to 250 people per hour, can be trained to detect the odor of specific diseases at the equivalent dilution of one teaspoon of sugar in 2-Olympic sized swimming pools of water.

Trials in Helsinki, Finland’s airports are already planned to use medical detection dogs to “sniff-out” newly arrived plane passengers for COVID 19. And given the promising results by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine trials of these dogs, the medical detection dogs can also perform mass screenings of COVID 19 at a faster time compared to existing mass testing methods with even better accuracy. This could make the disconcerting cotton swab through the nose testing for COVID 19 a thing of the past.

Can We Give Our Pets COVID 19?

Given the zoonotic nature of the coronavirus, can we inadvertently give our pets the COVID 19 despite of observing stay-at-home guidelines?

By: Ringo Bones

Zoonotic diseases – also known as zoonoses – are diseases caused by bacteria and viruses that spread between animals and people. Unfortunately, the COVID 19 virus has mutated into something that became a global pandemic back in March 2020 – and sadder still, it seems that pet owners can give their pets COVID 19 despite strict adherence to stay at home guidelines, not to mention it can virtually be impossible to social distance from your cherished pet during a pandemic lockdown.

The possibility of people making their cherished pets sick with COVID 19 arose when a tiger at the Bronx Zoo tested positive for COVID 19 and likely got the disease from the zoo’s animal handlers. Testing your pets if they got the COVID 19 virus has been a contentious issue since the WHO declared the disease a global pandemic due to the shortage of test and – currently – the tests are prioritized to essential and at risk personnel – i.e. front-line doctors and supporting healthcare workers. There has even been an outcry when that tiger from the Bronx Zoo got a COVID 19 test became headline news given that some doctors and nurses still await to be tested due to possible exposure due to lack of adequate personal protective equipment like masks and face shields.

When a pug from Chapel Hill, North Carolina became patient-zero of COVID 19 in dogs in the United States after that tiger in the Bronx Zoo tested positive for COVID 19 has raised concerns given that it is virtually impossible to social distance from your pets during a lockdown. Not to mention that some towns and cities have ordered veterinary clinics to close during the ongoing COVID 19 lockdown because they are not considered as “essential businesses”.

Spotify For Your Pets, Anyone?

Aimed by the Swedish audio streaming site for their subscribers who felt guilty leaving their pets alone at home, does a Spotify playlist and podcast list for your pets actually offer positive benefits for your pets?

By: Ringo Bones

The Swedish audio streaming site has pitched the scheme specifically for those who felt guilty leaving their pet(s) alone at home Spotify is now making curated playlists specifically tailored for your pets to enjoy. Often referred to as “Spotify For Pets”, it’s been around for over two weeks now and many subscribers swear by it given that the app’s algorithm generates a music playlist that is more or less “liked” by their pets.  But for pet owners with a semblance of knowledge on how the science behind their pet’s auditory system works compared to theirs, are the “Spotify Pet Playlists and tailored podcasts are really backed by science that they offer positive benefits to your pets, never mind if they can even hear them at all given the physiological differences between the human auditory system and your pet’s?

Well, there was a study published by Australian researchers a few years ago that dog breeds used for sheepherding prefer to listen to acoustic guitar based campfire music and even seem to feel relaxed while listening to such repertoire. But what about the more exotic pets mentioned in Spotify’s pet playlists, like iguanas and probably snakes whose auditory system are more sensitive in the low frequency or bass region compared to humans? Would such pets prefer electronic dance music with a surfeit of bass – maybe Meghan Trainor’s All About the Bass perhaps?

Larry The Cat Versus President Trump?

Even though he served as the “Chief Mouser” of Number 10 Downing Street since 2011, did Larry the Cat managed to successfully put a damper to Trump plans where London protesters failed?

By: Ringo Bones

Ever since serving as Number 10 Downing Street’s “Chief Mouser” after being recruited from Battersea Dogs & Cats Home for his exceptional mouse hunting skills since 2011, Larry the Cat has kept the official residence of the Prime Minister of Great Britain free from furniture and document destroying mice for almost a decade now. And yet, back in June 4, 2019 - the intrepid feline has managed to do what thousands of London based protesters has set out to do – to put a damper on the U.S. President Donald J. Trump’s packed itinerary during his official U.K. state visit.  

By hiding under the underside of “The Beast” – the president’s official armored limousine, it seems like Larry the Cat is not shy at expressing his disdain against President Trump. Maybe Larry the Cat is no fan of white supremacists who do not give a rat’s ass on the less fortunate. Given that President Trump is too fat to reach down under The Beast to shoo the cat away by himself, it looks like Trump finally met a pussy that he can’t grab by himself.

The Passing Of “Grumpy Cat”: A Sad Day For Cat Lovers?

Described as having the face that has launched a thousand memes, does the passing of “Grumpy Cat” spell a sad day for cat lovers everywhere?

By: Ringo Bones   

                                                                    

During the early days of social media, cats had become the world’s most liked animal and back in September 2012, the internet’s “greatest cat” became a viral success. Sadly, after seven years of living in the internet limelight, her death was announced on Twitter back in Friday, May 17, 2019. Tabatha Bundesen, Grumpy Cat’s owner said “We are unimaginably heartbroken to announce the loss of our beloved Grumpy Cat.” “Despite care from top professionals, as well as from her very loving family, Grumpy encountered complications from a recent urinary tract infection that unfortunately became too tough for her to overcome.” She passed away peacefully on the morning of Tuesday, May 14, 2019 at the home in the arms of her mother Tabatha.

Grumpy Cat, whose real name is Tardar Sauce, was born with feline dwarfism which, her owners said, probably accounted for her distinctive facial features and small size. During Grumpy Cat’s heyday, even the then US President Barack Obama was not immune to the charms of Grumpy Cat.

3D Organ On A Chip: The Future Of Cruelty Free Drug Testing?

Primarily developed to increase the accuracy of drug research in the lab, could a 3D Organ On A Chip also point to the future of cruelty-free drug testing by reducing the use of lab animals?

By: Ringo Bones

The newfangled device, which incorporates cells inside a 3D transistor made from a soft sponge-like material inspired by how cells in nature are structured, now allows scientists the ability to study cells and tissues in new ways. By enabling cells to grow in three dimensions, the device more accurately mimics the way that cells grow in the body. The researchers, led by the University of Cambridge say their device could be modified to generate multiple types of organs – a liver on a chip or a heart on a chip, for example – ultimately leading to a body on a chip which would simulate how various treatments affect the body as a whole. Their results are reported in the journal Science Advances.

Traditionally, biological studies were – and still are – done in petri dishes, where specific types of cells are grown on a flat surface. While many of the medical advances made since the 1950s, including the polio vaccine, have originated in petri dishes, these two-dimensional environments do not accurately represent the native three-dimensional environments of human cells and can, in fact, leas to misleading information and failures of drugs in clinical trials. “Two-dimensional cell models have served the scientific community well, but we now need to move to three-dimensional cell models in order to develop the next generation of therapies,” says Dr. Roisin Owens from 

Cambridge’s Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology and the study’s senior author.

Cambridge University’s 3D Organ On A Chip could also spell good news on the reduction of the use of lab animals which could eventually lead to cruelty-free drug testing. Remember how Canadian scientists Fredrick G. Banting and his team discovered insulin back in 1921? They extensively used dogs in their lab to find out how insulin works and how it could be used to treat Type-1 diabetes in humans and unfortunately, it resulted in the deaths of many dogs.

A Museum That’s Going to The Dogs?

Is the American Kennel Club’s Museum of the Dog a museum that’s actually “going to the dogs”?

By: Ringo Bones

The American Kennel Club officially opened its Museum of the Dog back in February 8, 2019. Located in Midtown Manhattan, the newly designed space will house art from famous dog artists such as Sir Edwin Landseer, Maud Earl, Arthur Wardle and many more. It also has a two story glass vitrine that encases rare porcelains and bronzes, in addition to a library where users can learn about their favorite breeds. The museum’s first exhibition will be entitled “For The Love Of All Things Dog” and contains select works from the AKC’s own collection and that of the museum.

There is also a “Meet the Breeds®” touchscreen table that allows visitors to explore breeds features, traits, history and representations in the collection although this only involves the 193 officially recognized breeds by the American Kennel Club. There are also several other digital experiences that bring audiences into the history of the Museum and its mission. The Museum also has an app where users can interact with the exhibits with “Arty” a virtual dog / tour guide throughout the museum. This creates a new user experience for kids and kids at heart.

The American Kennel Club’s Museum of the Dog was founded in 1982 and was originally housed in The New York Life Building located at 51 Madison Avenue as part of the AKC Headquarters. In 1987, the Museum was moved to West St. Louis County, MO. The AKC was instrumental in founding the Museum and believes in its mission to protect and to share the amazing works of art donated by participants in the dog sport over the last 35 years. The new Museum is now housed at the Kalikow Building at 101 Park Avenue.

Low Carbon Footprint Dog Food: Wave of the Future?

Given that the human race’s meat consumption forms a significant chunk of humanity’s carbon footprint would a low-carbon footprint dog food made from flies offer a viable solution?

By: Ringo Bones

As far back as 2007, scientists have calculated that if Americans reduced their meat consumption by just 10-percent, the resulting net reduction in carbon footprint was estimated to be as much as taking 20-million cars off America’s roads. Given the result, would eating food that results in a lesser carbon footprint to produce – i.e. eating insects – be better for the environment?

Believe it or not, a startup company in the UK has started selling dog food made from insects back in January 10, 2019 in what is expected to be another step towards reducing humanity’s carbon footprint. Yora – named after an Amazon tribe – is based in Brighton on the southern coast of England. The startup company has started sales of a dry kibble, as in ground meal shaped into pellets that most of us are familiar with – for pet food created from the larvae of the black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) combined with UK-grown oats, potatoes and herbs. The flies’ larvae are reared by a protein nutrient company Protix in Eindhoven in the Netherlands. The kibble is available at £14.99 per pack. The company says it hopes to launch a “wet” version of their dog food later in the year.

Even though they’ve been around for almost forever, as of late, insect-based food, for both humans and animals, has been catching on in the UK. In November 2018, Salisbury’s – the second largest chain of supermarkets in the country – became the first major UK grocer to sell barbecued crickets as snacks. Environmental experts have for long recommended insects as an alternative and sustainable food source that could help end global hunger and reduce the damaging effects of meat production. And according to The Holy Bible’s Book of Leviticus, locusts are Kosher so religious restrictions of consuming insects are not quite taboo. Insects also contain proteins, fats, minerals and amino acids. Forty percent of the protein content by weight in Yora’s kibble, for instance, comes from black soldier fly larvae. At least 1,000 insect species are eaten globally, most of them in developing nations.

The manufacturers of Yora’s kibble hope that their product is a small step in reducing the global carbon footprint. Our pets currently consume around 20-percent of the meat and fish worldwide and pet food is estimated to be responsible for a quarter of the environmental impacts of meat production. Given that most dogs and cats I’ve owned so far have eaten almost anything – i.e. from geckoes and praying mantises frequenting our designated pet walkways in our local parks – Yora’s fly larvae kibble would probably tastes as natural to the dogs and cats currently in my care.

Can Dogs Make You Live Longer?

Several studies suggest that dog owners, on average, live longer than those who don’t own one. Is it high time to get your own dog?

By Ringo Bones 

Now, more than ever, there is even more of a reason to get a dog: it might help you live longer. A Swedish study published in the Journal of Scientific Reports in November 2017 found that dog ownership is associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, amongst other benefits. In the United States, a study between dog owners and the veterinarians who treat their pooches have also shown that people who own dogs benefit from increased physical activity given that dogs need their daily walk around the block as well as support and companionship. The stress-reducing effect of petting a dog and related pets – also play a factor for a healthier overall cardiovascular health among dog owners. For people living alone, dogs can decrease your risk of sudden death by 33-percent and your risk of cardiovascular-related death by 36-percent compared to people living alone that don’t have a pet. 

The benefits don’t only extend to those who live alone, although they have the greatest incentive to adopt a furry family member. Multi-person homes see an 11-percent decrease in their chances of death with a dog at home and a 15-percent lower chance of death due to cardiovascular disease. Researchers found a benefit in owning dogs of all breeds - however, the owners of hunting breeds such as retrievers, terriers and scent hounds saw the most reduced chances from dying of cardiovascular related diseases. While researchers say there’s still more to investigate, benefits are thought to also come in part from increased immunity thanks to dogs bringing dirt into the home from outdoors. Chances are, it seems that longevity and dog ownership might go hand-in-hand?

Music For Dogs, Anyone?

Given that Music for Cats was a runaway success, will Laurie Anderson’s Music For Dogs be the next big thing in the species appropriate music scene? 

By: Ringo Bones 

 

She is not just the “mere” widow of the late, great Lou Reed; Laurie Anderson is also renowned for her inventive use of technology – from her 1981 hit O Superman to her appointment as NASA’s first artist-in-residence. Laurie Anderson is indeed one of America’s most daring creative pioneers her eclectic multidisciplinary career has spanned the worlds of art, theatre and experimental music and has seen her create works as a writer, director, visual artist and vocalist. But will her Music for Dogs for this year’s Brighton Festival be the next big thing when it comes to the still unoccupied scene of species appropriate music? 

“Wouldn’t it be great if you’re playing a concert and you look out and everyone’s a dog,” Laurie Anderson mused while waiting backstage with cellist Yo-Yo Ma. True to form, Anderson made her outlandish dream come true: first at the Sydney Opera House and again in New York’s Times Square earlier this year, making headlines around the world. The 20-minute long piece has been specifically designed for the canine ear, including frequencies audible only to dogs, as well as other sounds for humans to enjoy. It looks like David Teie’s Music For cats is not the only happening thing in the species appropriate music scene. 

Speaking of how dogs react to music, Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization - or CSIRO - published research results back in 2012 on the result of a study conducted in cooperation with various veterinarians across Australia on the subject of how dogs react to music. Upbeat music / up-tempo music tend to make dogs more restless and animated while quieter slow tempo music – especially those with violins and cellos by Bach and Mozart – tend to make dogs more relaxed and rested and Laurie Anderson’s 20 minute piece falls into this category. One of the unexpected results of the CSIRO research, dogs have shown a preference to campfire music with guitar and harmonica because they not only howl along with the music but also smile if they get tired with singing along with the piece.   

Music for Cats, Anyone?

Given the healthy Kickstarter support and satisfied early customers, will “Music for Cats” soon be topping the Billboard Singles and Download Charts? 

By: Ringo Bones 

Yes, folks, it is actually a thing and basing on the Kickstarter support during the past few years and satisfied early customer testimonials, it seems like the New York Times actually got it right when it called Cat Music as the number one idea of the year 2009. Music for Cats was born out of cellist David Teie’s scientific theory on the fundamental nature of music appreciation by mammals. He contended that every species has an intuitive biological response to sounds present in their early development. Felines establish their sense of music through the sounds heard after they’re born – i.e. birds chirping or their mother’s purr. With this premise, Teie composed Music for Cats, incorporating feline-centric sounds and their natural vocalizations with respect to a cat’s frequency range of hearing. An independent study conducted by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and published in Applied Animal Behavior verified that Music for Cats resonates conclusively with its target audience – namely cats – and writing that “cats showed a significant preference for and interest in species-appropriate music.” 

Cellist David Teie was born into a musical family, spanning three generations of professional musicians and a long line of musicians, composers and professional instrumentalists. Since 2014, Teie has been the conductor and music director of Washington D.C.’s premier chamber orchestra – the Eclipse Chamber Orchestra – and currently serves on the faculty at University of Maryland’s School of Music. His career has spanned performing as a soloist with the National Symphony Orchestra under Russian maestro Mstislav Rostropovich, acting principal cellist of the San Francisco Symphony where he performed as cellist on Metallica’s 1999 album S&M. His research has been published in the Royal Society Biology Letters and in Evolution of Emotional Communication. 

According to Teie, cats were our first choice because they’re widely kept as pets, allowing us to easily share music with them. While the most mellifluous of Debussy’s compositions seem to be largely ignored by cats – i.e. most human-centric music seems to be ignored by cats and raising the volume only drives them away. Testimonials by those who already manage to purchase the CD or download the music and tested Teie’s Music for Cats on their own cats say that it has a relaxing and calming effect on their cats, making them less hyperactive and more able to adapt in the indoor domestic environment. Will there soon be hi-fi audio gear specifically designed to please cats? 

Intrigue at the Birmingham Dog Show?

Though a full toxicology report is still pending, is the Birmingham Dog Show now a center of intrigue of this recent Irish setter poisoning case?

By: Ringo Bones

The prize-winning Irish setter known as Thendara Satisfaction – or Jagger for short – died after leaving the Birmingham Dog Show. His owners and a preliminary toxicology report points to the cause of death as the ingestion of poisoned beef. Given the terrible crime, will the Birmingham Dog Show, the Kennel Club and Crufts now be under uncomfortable scrutiny by both dog lovers and the press alike?

Co-owner Jeremy Bott said he did not think that the dog was targeted, but the culprit may have been acting on “a grudge against dogs or the Crufts show”. The Kennel Club said it is currently the only dog poisoning case that’s being investigated. “The Cruffts Committee and all championship show dog committees will have to look at security”.

Jagger came second in his class at the show at Birmingham’s NEC on Thursday, March 5, 2015. He died after returning to Belgium with Ms. Lauwers. Jagger ,to his family was priceless and he serves not only as a family pet but as pet therapy in the local elderly care homes. Jaggerwould sit there and give the residents some delight in him just by being around. The Kennel Club said it was awaiting toxicology report from Belgian police. It said it had not received any other reports of sickness in dogs at Crufts. 

Dog Blood Therapy, Anyone?

Given that some skilled veterinary clinics already offer blood transfusions for dogs in case of a major trauma or surgery, can donated dog blood also improve the health of another ailing dog of the same blood type?

By: Ringo Bones

A t present, donated dog blood is primarily used in transfusions of dogs undergoing emergency major surgery in cases of extreme trauma that involve cars. Though transfusions can be a lifesaving procedure for your beloved pet, can a dog blood transfusion from a compatible but much healthier donor improve the health of your ailing pooch?

Dog blood is currently considered as the primary lifesaving medicine during emergency pet surgery, but some dog owners have noticed a marked improvement of their dogs overall vitality after receiving blood form a compatible but younger and healthier donor in a transfusion done during a major medical operation. Given that no synthetic dog blood or substitute had been developed yet, dog blood is – for a few years now – considered the most valuable medicine on the veterinarians operating table.

Is Debarking Animal Cruelty?

Often performed on dogs to reduce the sound level of their barking does the veterinary surgical practice of debarking be considered animal cruelty? 

By: Ringo Bones 

The case against the controversial veterinary surgical procedure called debarking recently happened when a Westminster Dog Show prize winning dog died 4 days after winning prizes at the prestigious dog show due to complications incurred during a recent debarking procedure. Debarking - though controversial - is often performed on show dogs to reduce the noise level of their barking usually involves a qualified veterinary surgeon strategically poking holes in the dog’s vocal cords. 

During the past few years, debarking had been a point of contention of animal rights activists – like PETA – not only because it exposes dogs to unnecessary risky surgery which could result in death and / or painful complications but also show-dogs, even in prestigious dog shows such as the Westminster Dog Show, are often bred for good looks with utter disregard to the animal’s long-term health and well-being. And it is not only dog shows that promote unnecessary debarking, some gated communities only allow households to keep debarked dogs on their premises. 

Should the cruel practice of debarking be outlawed? Well, some petitions and campaigns are already out on various social media sites like Facebook but only time will tell when there’s enough of an outcry against debarking that this rather barbaric and unnecessary surgical procedure on dogs should be ended once and for all. 

Cat Ownership In New Zealand: Not Economically Viable?

After a prominent New Zealand economist label them as “natural born killers” and therefore is a liability, is cat ownership no longer economically viable in the country of New Zealand?

By: Ringo Bones

Unless scientifically verifiable evidence to the contrary emerges, cats had been introduced by the first white European settlers in an otherwise cat-free land of what is now New Zealand about couple of centuries ago.  During their tenure, cats had lead to the extinction of 9 native bird species in New Zealand and have pushed other native fauna to the brink of extinction thus therefore are seen from an ecological perspective as an invasive species in New Zealand. But will a draconian measure of a prominent New Zealand economist of spaying and neutering cats and not replacing the ones left to allow them to gradually go extinct in New Zealand even be an “economically viable” option?

The rather draconian cat ban by Gareth Morgan, a prominent New Zealand economist who is now labeled as the “anti-kitty economist” by his detractors (mainly cat lovers and cat owners) proposes that by spaying and neutering stray cats and even cats with owners and allowing them to gradually die out is the most economically viable way to solve the native wildlife extinction problem in his country. Given that the New Zealand government had set aside large tracks of the country as a protected nature preserve and those outside the country have seen these via last series of movies by Peter Jackson – i.e. The Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit – is economist Gareth Morgan’s plan for a “cat extermination” the most economically viable way to solve New Zealand’s native species extinction problem? After all, tenured ecologists have since pointed out the three main threats to native wildlife all over the world are pollution, climate change due to excessive greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere causing global warming and an over encroaching human population into ecologically sensitive areas.

According to Bob Kerridge, president of the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals says economist Gareth Morgan’s proposal is too cruel for New Zealand’s feline pets – economic viability or not. Even though being a prominent economist is not yet an elected position in New Zealand, Gareth Morgan could well kiss his future in New Zealand politics goodbye because cat lovers and cat owners in New Zealand won’t be voting him into public office anytime soon.

Man’s Best Friend: Man’s First Garbage Collector?

Recent genetic forensic evidence had shown that mankind started to domesticate dogs not as hunting buddies – but as garbage collectors?

By: Ringo Bones

During the start of the 21^st Century, the National Geographic Society had shown evidence – via genetic science – on how humanity migrated out of that lush prehistoric savannah on the African continent for which we had evolved and migrated throughout every corner of the globe. And as of late, recent genetic studies of canis lupus familiaris – also known as the domestic dog – have shown that the domestication of man’s best friend is much more recent than previously thought.

Previously accepted conventional wisdom suggests that mankind first started domesticating the dog from captured wolf pups that are later trained to be hunting and foraging “assistants” about 30,000 years ago. But recent genetic forensic evidence obtained by the DNA analysis of the genetic material of dogs in a study recently conducted by Cambridge University suggests that the domestication of the dog occurred much more recently – about 11,000 years ago – about the same time when mankind discovered the rudiments of agriculture and started settling into large communities - a result that somewhat rewrites the domestication timeline of man’s best friend.

According to Dr. David Sargan of Cambridge University, the recent DNA-based findings suggest that wolf varieties that were better able to digest the starches found in wheat, barley and other grain crops first domesticated by mankind 11,000 or so years ago were the ones that gradually evolved into the present breeds of domestic dogs. For all intents and purposes, wolves first start to gradually evolve into dogs in the ancient garbage pits of the dawn of our agricultural society 11,000 years ago. The findings not only explain why dogs, until the present day, developed the taste for biscuits while their wolf cousins have never been partial to such treats. Does this mean that the real origin story of man’s best friend – the domestic dog - is rather mundane and somewhat a tad ignoble? 

Pet Social Networks For Our Increasingly Social Animals?

Given that pets now have their own social networks, are they now competing with us humans who are previously the only supposedly “social animal” on planet Earth?

By: Ringo Bones

The issue might seem trivial or esoterically academic to the general public – but it is now official, your pet can now apply for his or her own social network profile at mysocialpetnetwork.com. And besides, we humans had been hogging Facebook during the past few years. But are social networks for your beloved pet just too facetious and trivial for everyday practicality?

Some folks already have the “bragging rights” that their dog’s Facebook profile got 200 friends during the first week of joining and so does another who owns a 150 US dollar koi whose Facebook friends are already nearing the 1,000 friends mark. But unbeknown to their owners, a dedicated pet social networks can have uses that could one day save your dog’s and other pet’s life. As some human Facebook users already have testimonials on how they met someone with compatible blood and kidneys on the famed social network that had saved their life.

In more affluent parts of America and Europe, medical advances in veterinary medicine and veterinary healthcare already rivals that of humans and even though it may still cost 5,000 US dollars for your dog to get an artificial hip replacement for life-extension purposes – your dog’s vital medical information – like blood type and organ histo-compatibility – could prove a lifesaver if you have access to extra dog blood that’s compatible to your dog. And probably the most practical way to get such data is that if your pet dog had joined a kind of pet social network. And assuming your dog wins enough prize-money at dog shows to pay for upmarket veterinary surgery, then access to other dogs willing to donate compatible blood for surgical use can prove to be a lifesaver.

Does Your Pet Deserve A Vacation on the ISS?

Some pets may be over-pampered, but does your dog truly deserve a working vacation on the International Space Station? Space tourism can't be much weirder than this. Space dog, anyone?

Pet Custody Laws: Desperately Seeking Legal Precedents?

Given that an overwhelming majority of Americans consider pets as family members, should pets owned by legally married couples be subject to the same custody laws in cases of divorce?


By: Ringo Bones


Currently there’s a 50% chance that marriages in the United States will end in divorce – so it is no longer a question of “if” but a question of “when” where a more legally binding custody ruling becomes necessary in cases when a legally married couple will fight over custody of their commonly owned pets. But should a custody law for pets modeled after preexisting custody laws governing child custody be the most equitable solution for both couples?

Divorce is defined as the legal severing or suspension of marital relations under the conditions, and on the differing grounds, authorized by the various countries of the world. Divorce embraces either absolute divorce or the complete dissolution of marital relations and varying degrees of judicial separation as in limited divorce. But should a pet or pets be considered as “human children” in divorce court proceedings in order to form an equitable custody and alimony settlements? Since sharing of veterinary bills and visitation rights will probably be a primary issue, it does seem logical to grant the couples’ pet or pets a legal status similar to that of children in divorce settlements.

It is not unusual in divorce proceedings for the petitioning spouse to ask for alimony and for the custody of the children of the marriage. A decree for alimony is for purposes of full faith and credit treated as a money judgment. For it to be entitled to full faith and credit there must therefore be a jurisdiction over the person.

Courts usually require residence or domicile as a jurisdictional factor on awarding child custody. Most state courts have held that the parent being sued over custody need not be served locally with process. There is, however, a relatively recent U.S. Supreme Court case in which a divided court came to a contrary conclusion. In any event, custody is only final as an adjudication of facts as of the time of the decree. Upon a showing of changed conditions which affect the welfare of the children, the court which made the original award may change its order. Since a court need give a foreign judgment or decree no more effect than it has where originally granted it may reward custody. Most courts are, however, of the opinion that they should only change the status of the children where to do so is patently in his or her best interest.

It is customary for alimony, or allowance for support for the wife and children of the marriage, to be awarded to the wife who succeeds in an action for either absolute or limited divorce. In some U.S. states, alimony is allowed in an action for annulment of marriage, despite the theoretical inconsistency involved, although in Texas, allowance for support of the wife, as distinguished from division of the spouse’s property is not granted upon absolute divorce and in Pennsylvania such allowance in case of absolute divorce is awarded only to an insane wife.

Temporary alimony, pending the outcome of a suit for divorce or separation, is ordinarily granted to the wife. Considerations governing the amount of the alimony awarded are the earnings and means of the husband, and to a lesser extent the earnings and means of the wife. Only rarely is the wife denied the custody of the children, so in the issue of pet custody, this legal precedent might be equitable to both parties. But when it comes to shoehorning preexisting legal precedents to apply to pet custody and / or alimony, some could see it as a waste of taxpayers’ money in establishing legal precedents for equitable settlement in pet custody litigation in a courtroom setting – never mind taking the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Establishing legally binding and equitable pet custody laws during divorce must start somewhere, right?

Is Desexing and Neutering Your Pets Inhumane?

Given that we universally value life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, is the veterinary procedure of desexing and neutering your cat, dog or other pets in order to stop reproducing inhumane?


By: Vanessa Uy


This idea probably dawned on a number of people when the world’s best-loved smut peddler Larry “Barely Legal” Flynt was featured on every major news network asking Uncle Sam for a 5 billion dollar “sex stimulus” bailout package during the start of 2009. But seriously, is the practice of desexing and neutering your quadropedal air-breathing pets – with the help of your friendly neighborhood veterinarian – so that they won’t be able to reproduce inhumane?

Even though the keyword here is “reproduction”, given that here in the somewhat liberal Christian West we consider the joy of experiencing sexual pleasure as a “God-given right”. Shouldn’t we extend that right to our fellow animals, given that for all intents and purposes our concept of “animal rights” is nothing more than an anthropomorphic-based one-to-one congruence to Human Rights?

Even though PETA – people for the ethical treatment of animals – though busy in reminding all of humanity the “evils” of excessive meat consumption and ostentatious wearing of mammalian fur as a fashion item, are “mysteriously” silent when it comes to the issue of depriving domesticated animals from experiencing the “joys of sex”. Sometimes I wonder if this particular argument conveniently devolves into that “if it has never been born, it won’t experience pain and suffering” kind of reasoning.

No matter whatever side you take on this particular issue, it is usually the prevailing local ordinance that takes legal precedence. If your locality has a mandatory well-enforced pet ownership quota law, pet owners usually have no choice but to comply with prevailing desexing and neutering laws as a means of keeping their pet population down. But lest we forget there is this global financial crisis that deserves immediate action, the issue whether pet desexing and neutering is inhumane will have to take a back seat-for now.