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?