Report a problem
Judy's Book takes violations of our Terms of Use very seriously. We encourage
you to read through our
Terms of Use
before filling report with us.
After careful review, we may remove content or replace a content warning page before
viewing content deemed offensive, harmful, or dangerous.
Additionally, we are aware that there may be content on Judy's Book that is personal
in nature or feels invasive. Please note that Judy's Book is a provider of content
creation tools, not a mediator of content. We allow our users express their opinions,
but we don't make any claims about the content of these pages. We strongly believe
in freedom of expression, even if a review contains unappealing or distasteful
content or present negative viewpoints. We realize that this may be frustrating,
and we regret any inconvenience this may cause you. In cases where contact information
for the author is listed on the page, we recommend that you work directly with this
person to have the content in question removed or changed.
Here are some examples of content we will not remove unless provided with a court
order:
Personal attacks or alleged defamation
Political or social commentary
Distasteful imagery or language
If we've read the Terms of Use and believe that this review below violates our Terms
of Use, please complete the following short form.
|
Businiess name:
Northeast Veterinary Hospital
|
|
Review by:
Sober Ballard H.
|
|
Review content:
Our cat was given an injection of Convenia at Northeast Veterinary Hospital in Seattle which caused many and varied symptoms (treatments which cost over $600+ and many smaller costing visits on top of the initial $200+ bill) that ended up being a bonanza for this practice. I did not want this injection but was overridden. The problem with long acting drugs is that they stay in the body a long time, but even I didn't suspect that this drug stays in the system for 65 days - long after efficacy. Stupid me, I thought 14 days might be bad if there was a problem. If you are interested here is a link of study data -
http://treshanley.com/NewCC/Dangers/page77/page77.html
What really hurts is I believe now that most of the treatment was designed to hide his reaction to this drug - not treat him - when they talked me into euthanasia for fluid build up (a side effect of this drug) they led me to believe he had cancer or heart failure and he wouldn't survive draining the fluid which would be cruel and painful and I should just let him go. At this point I was in for well over $1000 and they probably thought they couldn't get too much more out of me. I caved and maybe it was because they insisted that it would be cruel and he was suffering. He fought to live and I wonder if that was really what he wanted - I believe he was trying to tell me something and for the amount they charged me anyway I should have taken the risk with the draining even if they didn't want to do it. This drug was still in his system and given more time he might have recovered - maybe not 100% but who makes it through all the way at 100%?
|
Reasons for reporting (512 characters left):
|
|
Reasons are required.
|
|
or
Cancel
|