Euthanasia

[insignia100]

Originally Posted by Xanafein

I'm Sure i'm going to be pissing off ALOT of people when i say this, but Using Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Is extremely inhumane, it is the exact equivalent of sealing them in tupper-ware, it pushes the oxygen from the chamber and gives them nothing to breath

Breaking there necks if done right is the only really painless way i can think of short of spending a rather large amount of cash on a way to administer Carbon Monoxide (CO)

^that wasnt the part that i think will piss people off, this is

I personally have been bitten by so many feeders when feeding Prekilled, that I see no reason in treating them humanely as pets, to me its almost the same as offering a deathrow inmate a last meal ect, You are going to kill them and feed them to your pet anyways, why try and pretty it up by doing it in such an elaborate (and in the case of a CO2 chamber) More painful way?

Done making a complete @$$ out of myself, sorry, i had to get it out there, it irks me that people think a carbon dioxide chamber is like putting them to sleep, and that it is a humane way of doing things If you want something Cheap and painless, Fry their nervous system with an apropriatly applied spinal break, or highvoltage electricity

My friend did that, filled a tub with water, took some jumper cables and a car battery, I guarantee you they where dead the second the current hit, and electricity is one of the ways we execute death row inmates, far more humane also even it it has not killed all of there systems, the brain itself is totaly dead from the first jolt, so they cant feel a thing

All I have to say is that euthanasia via CO2 is an acceptable method of euthanasia as determined by the American Veterinary Medical Association (see AVMA Euthanasia Guidelines).

"Several investigators have suggested that inhalation of high concentrations of CO2 may be distressing to animals,(63-66) because the gas dissolves in moisture on the nasal mucosa. The resulting product, carbonic acid, may stimulate nociceptors in the nasal mucosa. Some humans exposed to concentrations of around 50% CO2 report that inhaling the gas is unpleasant and that higher concentrations are noxious.(67,68) A brief study of swine examined the aversive nature of CO2 exposure(69) and found that 90% CO2 was aversive to pigs while 30% was not. For rats, exposure to increasing concentrations of CO2 (33% achieved after 1 minute) in their home cage produced no evident stress as measured by behavior and ACTH, glucose, and corticosterone concentrations in serum.(70)"

I guarantee you that you would see elevated ACTH, glucose, and corticosterone in rodents that died via constriction.

Note that electrocution is NOT a humane method of euthanasia. It causes death by cardiac fibrillation, NOT "frying the brain."

"However, animals do not lose consciousness for 10 to 30 seconds or more after onset of cardiac fibrillation. It is imperative that animals be unconscious before being electrocuted. This can be accomplished by any acceptable means, including electrical stunning.(25) Although an effective, 1* step stunning and electrocution method has been described for use in sheep and hogs, euthanasia by electrocution in most species remains a 2-step procedure.(25, 63,140) ... Although the method is conditionally acceptable if the aforementioned requirements are met, its disadvantages far outweigh its advantages in most applications. Techniques that apply electric current from head to tail, head to foot, or head to moistened metal plates on which the animal is standing are unacceptable."

Now tell me, if these so-called "humane" methods of euthanasia were really humane, do you really think they would be grounds for a veterinarian to lose his license if he used them?

About the only true thing you said is that cervical dislocation is humane. Nothing else you mention has any scientific grounds for support.

[insignia100]

Originally Posted by Skumbo

In the long run, really anything you do is, at worst, going to be about the same pain as being bit in the face then constricted to death.

So, just to clarify, you say that being put into a CO2 chamber to suffocate is just as painful as suffocating from constriction? Seems like the constriction bit would add a significant amount of additional pain and distress to me.

[KORBIN5895]

Does the American Veterinary Medical Association allow a vet to remove dew claws, dock tails and crop ears? If so the can take their hypocrisy and shove it.

[insignia100]

"The AVMA opposes ear cropping and tail docking of dogs when done solely for cosmetic purposes. The AVMA encourages the elimination of ear cropping and tail docking from breed standards."

Animal Welfare AVMA policy - Ear Cropping and Tail Docking of Dogs

The only reason any veterinarian I have worked for does them for cosmetic reasons is to prevent having to repair a botched back yard breeder's ear crop. As far as dew claw removal, I have no idea why you are opposed to that...

Besides, I hardly think anyone would agree that inhumane euthanasia and tail docking/ear cropping are even close to being in the same ethical category.

[KORBIN5895]

Mutilating an animal to tickle someone's fancy is just as bad as drowning a rat as far as I am concerned. Also any vet that says they do it to save the poor animal from a backyard butcher........ well I have opinions on that too.

[insignia100]

Well, you might have opinions on that, but I have personally seen mangled backyard breeder jobs. As far as dew claws, have you ever seen a dewclaw with no bony attachment ripped off and bleeding like a stuck pig? Because I have, and its a lot easier and cheaper to remove during a spay/neuter than to wait until it rips off.

Note: I am personally against tail docking, ear cropping, and most cat declaws.

[KORBIN5895]

Most cat declaws?

[insignia100]

If a person with a clotting disorder (with whom a severe cat scratch could be life threatening) is faced with either sending their cat to the shelter or having it declawed, I'd declaw it. That's also the ONLY time I would ever consider doing a rear declaw, and ONLY if the cat was strictly indoors.

The people who want their cat declawed so it doesn't mess up their nice leather sofa... well, they can shove it where the sun don't shine.

[KORBIN5895]

Originally Posted by insignia100

If a person with a clotting disorder (with whom a severe cat scratch could be life threatening) is faced with either sending their cat to the shelter or having it declawed, I'd declaw it. That's also the ONLY time I would ever consider doing a rear declaw, and ONLY if the cat was strictly indoors.

The people who want their cat declawed so it doesn't mess up their nice leather sofa... well, they can shove it where the sun don't shine.

I buy that. Good call.

[Caylan]

For those with furniture more important then a living cat.... Hope they get their claws into something while thier getting put on though... Caylan.S

[insignia100]

One thing I always have to keep in mind is that we do the best we can. Being able to euthanize our patients is, in all honesty, our greatest privilege. Look at human doctors, and how they are forced to let their patients suffer, even against their wishes, because euthanasia is not an option. Surely we all owe it to the animals we use to do the best by them and euthanize them as humanely as possible.

"With a true appreciation of life comes the responsibility of ensuring a humane death." -Pam Hullinger, DVM and Carolyn Stull, PhD

[RandyRhoads]

So if you are against ear cropping and such for cosmetic purposes I assume you are against circumcision in newborns? It is pretty similar. Genital mutilation without permission. Anyone else feel like the comparison is very similar and it's odd how society just accepts that one and doesn't give it two thoughts...?

[Strutter769]

Originally Posted by RandyRhoads

So if you are against ear cropping and such for cosmetic purposes I assume you are against circumcision in newborns? It is pretty similar. Genital mutilation without permission. Anyone else feel like the comparison is very similar and it's odd how society just accepts that one and doesn't give it two thoughts...?

Excellent points.

[Xanafein]

Originally Posted by insignia100

All I have to say is that euthanasia via CO2 is an acceptable method of euthanasia as determined by the American Veterinary Medical Association (see AVMA Euthanasia Guidelines).

"Several investigators have suggested that inhalation of high concentrations of CO2 may be distressing to animals,(63-66) because the gas dissolves in moisture on the nasal mucosa. The resulting product, carbonic acid, may stimulate nociceptors in the nasal mucosa. Some humans exposed to concentrations of around 50% CO2 report that inhaling the gas is unpleasant and that higher concentrations are noxious.(67,68) A brief study of swine examined the aversive nature of CO2 exposure(69) and found that 90% CO2 was aversive to pigs while 30% was not. For rats, exposure to increasing concentrations of CO2 (33% achieved after 1 minute) in their home cage produced no evident stress as measured by behavior and ACTH, glucose, and corticosterone concentrations in serum.(70)"

I guarantee you that you would see elevated ACTH, glucose, and corticosterone in rodents that died via constriction.

Note that electrocution is NOT a humane method of euthanasia. It causes death by cardiac fibrillation, NOT "frying the brain."

"However, animals do not lose consciousness for 10 to 30 seconds or more after onset of cardiac fibrillation. It is imperative that animals be unconscious before being electrocuted. This can be accomplished by any acceptable means, including electrical stunning.(25) Although an effective, 1* step stunning and electrocution method has been described for use in sheep and hogs, euthanasia by electrocution in most species remains a 2-step procedure.(25, 63,140) ... Although the method is conditionally acceptable if the aforementioned requirements are met, its disadvantages far outweigh its advantages in most applications. Techniques that apply electric current from head to tail, head to foot, or head to moistened metal plates on which the animal is standing are unacceptable."

Now tell me, if these so-called "humane" methods of euthanasia were really humane, do you really think they would be grounds for a veterinarian to lose his license if he used them?

About the only true thing you said is that cervical dislocation is humane. Nothing else you mention has any scientific grounds for support.

I Did not say that the brain frying killed them, simply that with the kind of wattage we ran through them they where in a vegetative state although to be honest i dont care how they die, they are nourishment for my pet, break em gas em drown em shock em they are gonna be dead and eaten by the time the day is done, they are a rodent, bred for food in many cases Honestly they dont measure in the same class as dogs or cats or horses. Food is food, I hunt, when i hunt i try to get the lethal shot in, but it doesnt always happen, oh well, stab it gut it, haul the carcass back to the shed to make some burger and steaks

I simply do not understand the concern put into how humane a rodent killing process is i just dont and that is all i was really trying to say, also i dont care what those studies say, death by Co2 no matter how it is introduced is never pleasant, I ran out of air on a dive trip once, fortunately i was only 20 feet down so it did not take to long to surface, but let me tell you it was hell on earth wich true was oxygen deprivation more than co2, but the fact remains that i was breathing thininer and thinner air until it was gone, i would rather have a few instants of pain, than live through hell until its all gone

In any event, ill stick to severing the spine with either a well placed break, or a fillet knife for those picky eaters

[Skumbo]

Originally Posted by RandyRhoads

So if you are against ear cropping and such for cosmetic purposes I assume you are against circumcision in newborns? It is pretty similar. Genital mutilation without permission. Anyone else feel like the comparison is very similar and it's odd how society just accepts that one and doesn't give it two thoughts...?

I was going to bring this up but you did before I saw this, I'm against both, I'm actually rather upset (though to be honest, would have had it done when older anyway by choice, so not a huge deal..) that i was "forced" to be circumcized as a child, I find it inhumane and had a long talk with my parents about it, though there wasn't much they could do at that point.

For me, im an animal lover is a weird sense. Ill all for hunting for your own food, but i'd rather shoot and kill instantly if possible than chase down a pig with a bunch of dogs and knife it to death.

^ your dive trip experience is how Co2 will make you feel, if you look up the pathological effects of Co2 on how it kills you, basically you cant breath air anymore (because Co2 wont let your blood take air) and you feel like the air is thinning and thinning like you did, despite there being air for you to breath.

I wouldnt say that rodents are "below" anything, dogs cats etc.

I've eaten a dog, they're actually quite good. And I have a rodent for a pet. Animals are animals, thats all I see it as. Hell, if given a legal/safe/healthy way to eat a human.. why not? Doesn't mean im a sociopath and i hate humanity, it's all just meat and the "circle of life" so to speak. So, if I can, i'll get them as humanely killed as possible, but I respect and understand that I will end up as food as well (bacteria, worms, etc.) doesn't mean im "Below" worms.