• Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    7 months ago

    Chemotherapy for a dog? I think where I live it’s seen as more merciful to put the dog down rather than have them suffer through chemo.

    • Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 months ago

      My understanding is the goal of chemo for animals is to keep the drugs at a low enough level that any symptoms they have from them are less impactful than the symptoms they have from the cancer. I understand it’s also less effective, for this reason- but it wouldn’t be fair to make them sick because they don’t understand.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        7 months ago

        I feel like the chemo would only be to prolong their life for the benefit of the owners and not of the animal.

          • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I too only value people, animals, and things, for the monetary returns they bring in.

            No wait, that’s not true, because I’m not a fucking psychopath.

              • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                You sound like a slave stockpiling brownie points with your master instead of realizing the yoke around your neck.

                Enjoy that. I guess.

                • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  Nope. Just don’t waste my $$. For less, people can adopt a new pet. There are tons waiting in shelters.

                  I’ve seen plenty of dogs and cats that were long past their quality of life. Selfish prick owners.

                  • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    I’ve seen plenty of dogs and cats that were long past their quality of life.

                    OK, but that’s not what people are arguing with you about. I don’t think people would disagree with you if you were only talking about spending money on pets to extend their lives without making them happy/comfortable. But there are a lot of instances where you can increase your pets lifespan without losing any quality of life. Sometimes that’s expensive, and it can be a really hard choice to make (especially if you have trouble affording it), but it sounds like you’re arguing that people shouldn’t spend a lot of money on their pets no matter what. That’s absurd.

          • iamericandre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            The absurdity here is you feel the need to express an unwanted opinion about the way someone else spends their money.

          • Emerald@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s absurd how some people think animals should only be exploited for making money

          • Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            …it’s just a pet. Give them some love, food, housing and that’s all we need, as it’s always been since we tamed the first pet animal. No need for fancy stuff

            • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              True and there is a boatload of other animals stuck in shelters waiting for a nice home. No need to prolong things when it’s impossible to know how the pet is actually feeling about the extended treatments.

              • Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Yeah and if the current pet has to go to the next life, just adopt another and treat them well too. Life comes and goes.

    • scoobford@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Also…maybe its my country speaking, but chemo is fucking expensive. I love my pets tremendously, but it seems wasteful to dedicate all that time and money to an animal, even if they are a beloved pet.

      • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        “Expensive” is relative. If you’re making 300k a year, chemo for your pet might only cost 3% of your annual salary. Someone making 50k a year can easily spend 3% of their salary ($1,500) on their pet even without any medical emergencies.

        I agree it seems unethical, though. I hadn’t though of that before this thread, and now I’m sad…

    • scoobford@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Also…maybe its my country speaking, but chemo is fucking expensive. I love my pets tremendously, but it seems wasteful to dedicate all that time and money to an animal, even if they are a beloved pet.