Friday, July 25, 2014
If you are searching for a picture of a black cat with icy blue eyes you have one on this page. The big question is whether it is a genuine photograph or whether there has been some element of photo shopping, which I suspect.
This cat is listed on page about the Ojos Azules cat, which is a blue-eyed cat that has a coat which is not normally associated with blue eyes. Coats which are normally associated with blue eyes are white or partially white because the piebald gene both removes pigmentation from the hair strands and from the iris of the eye.
It is highly unusual to see a black cat with this colour of blue eyes. Do you think this is a fake? I do but who cares? It's still a good photograph and a very handsome cat which fits the bill.
I will keep this very short because I only want to say one thing about the cat who has thin fur above the eyes. Quite a few people search for this, looking for answers. It is not possible to provide a complete answer unless you are a veterinarian and the cat is in your presence. However, in my estimation, people who search for information about why their cat has thin hair above the eyes are referring to something that is normal and unrelated to health. The coat immediately above the eyes is, in my experience, more sparse in terms of hair strand density, than any other part of the body except the tips of the ears.
So if you are searching for information about what you perceive as a lack of sufficient hair above the eyes you're probably looking at something that is completely normal. That said you need to observe other behaviours and symptoms to confirm it. If, for example your cat is scratching or over-grooming above the eyes or around the face then you have to conclude that there is some sort of parasite infestation causing irritation and therefore scratching and hair loss around the eyes.
But without more; without any further signs or symptoms or indications and provided the cat is behaving normally and eating well while defecating and urinating normally, then I think you can conclude that a thin coat of hair above the eyes is perfectly normal.
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Mr White is all-white and deaf because of it. White cats can be deaf and they can blind too. The gene that creates all-white coat can affect the hearing and eyes. Mr White has odd-eye color too (but a faint difference judging by the photos). This is called: heterochromia iridum.
He is also a "Twisty Cat" or Squitten or there is another name: Kangaroo cat because he uses his hind legs, back and tail much more than normal due to deformed forelegs. He is described as a Kangaroo cat. The genetic defect is called "radial hypoplasia"
I may have misguidedly rolled all three types of cat into one because apparently a different genetic mutation produces the Kangaroo cat to the Squitten but the end result is much the same: forelegs which are much less robust and useful forcing the cat to adapt by using other parts of the body to compensate.
Mr White lives in Australia and is much loved by Sharon Abdallah. She is seeking some help to raise funds it seems to see if something can be done to improve Mr White's life going forward - see her new FB page. Not much activity as yet.
Mr White should live as long as any other cat. He just has a couple of disabilities that slows him down a bit. Jumping down is probably almost impossible.
Interestingly the chief vet of RSPCA Victoria reports that he has seen several cases annually, which gives us a clue as to how common radial hypoplasia is.
Monday, July 21, 2014
Monday, July 14, 2014
Am I the only one who has become resistant to looking at shocking photographs of animal abuse on Facebook? When I visit the site searching for cats it takes me to a column of animal photographs of various kinds, some of which are cute and some are funny, but interspersed between the cute and funny is the horror of extremely cruel images of animal abuse from far-off countries.
As I said, I am becoming or have become resistant to them which means I don't like to look at them. I don't think it does any good actually to constantly show them because there's not a lot we can do about it other than donate money to animal rescue centres in the places where the cruelty takes place and spread the word about the good work they do.
Set against that, looking at these pictures, which I now avoid, a person becomes inured to the cruelty or the images remain in one's head which makes life worse. That is something to avoid.
I wonder whether Facebook should do something about this. These big websites seem to allow anything. It's carte blanche, do as you please. All they are concerned about is getting more and more people to visit and say something.
Do you think it's a good thing to show nasty pictures of cruel animal abuse in order to highlight it or do you think there are some downsides to this which should be addressed?
This photo is oriented upside down on Facebook! Perhaps it is better upside down. Perhaps it was deliberately twisted upside down (180%) to make it look better.
Here it is upside down:
I have also cleaned it up a bit. The color balance was off slightly.
There are two schools of thought about the efficacy of colloidal silver in the treatment of a variety of feline diseases but essentially focusing on viral and bacterial infections.
What is interesting is this. Every webpage that recommends the use of colloidal silver as a health treatment for cats (including FIV) contains information from people which is anecdotal. It is from people who have used colloidal silver either on themselves or a pet and sometimes a cat, or the information comes from a supplier of the product. Amongst suppliers, the product's wondrous properties tend to be overhyped as an alternative to "expensive" veterinary care.
On the other side of the coin there is one organisation which is against the use of colloidal silver. The organisation is the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It took me a little while to find this information and the relevant webpage whereas by contrast there are many pages of information from users or sellers which, in general, recommended the product.
The FDA state on their webpage from 11th February 1997 (which is now an archived page and may of course be out of date) that they have received reports that products containing colloidal silver were being promoted for use in the treatment of various conditions affecting companion animals. The product was also found on dairy farms.
The FDA state unequivocally that:
FDA is not aware of any substantial scientific evidence that supports the safe and effective use of colloidal silver ingredients or salts for any animal disease condition.
As for the use of colloidal silver in food producing animals the FDA states that this constitutes a potentially serious public health concern. With respect to companion animals they say that the use of colloidal silver to treat serious illness could potentially endanger the health of the animal in delaying prompt veterinary treatment.
In short, this product is not approved by the FDA for use in any animal species. At the time they were continuing to investigate the promotion and use of this product in animals.
As can be seen, the official assessment of colloidal silver is a complete rejection which is in stark contrast to either rather vague information from users or heavily promoted information from suppliers and manufacturers.
It has crossed my mind trying it myself to treat Charlie's chronic sinusitis because my veterinarian, regrettably, has not got a handle on the problem, which puts the onus on me to do something about it but of course I will not take any steps that are in anyway risky.
I think most people would agree with me if I said that colloidal silver should not be used unless there is some overriding reason based upon science or hard evidence which recommends it to the cat owner.
Do you have any personal supporting evidence?
Sunday, July 13, 2014
DR. ALLAN SIMON, is Co-Director of Paw Project-New York and a member of the AVMA. He says this:
"It will be obvious to all that the AVMA is on the wrong side of this declaw debate. This may harm the AVMA`s standing nationwide, which in turn may harm its members.... When the majority of cat owners realize that they have been mislead by their favorite veterinarian, they may change vets or look at veterinarians in a negative light. What will the AVMA do when 60 Minutes, Oprah, etc do a piece on the pain and other issues that cats may have for the rest of their lives after being declawed? What happens when the evidence is presented and the AVMA is asked to respond? Not a pretty picture!! What happens when veterinarians are attacked again by the news media, this time picturing them, and with good cause, as being cruel to cats...? I think that most people will not want to hear the AVMA`s canned response. Come on AVMA! Step up before the damage is done."
Is this a hint of dissent within the ranks of the AVMA?
The AVMA already looks foolish and unscrupulous in supporting declawing. They support it by failing to decry and denounce it. The AVMA leaves the door open to their vet members to declaw and the vets like it and demand it even though it is in clear conflict with their oath and principles. The door should be slammed shut if integrity is to be returned to the veterinary profession in America. It is time to ban declawing in America.
Here is a goldfish handbag photographed at the Brit Awards:
Comment from one FB visitor:
Cruel maybe next time someone could put her in a plastic bag and carry her around,see how she likes it!!!
What has this got to do with cats? It is about attitude. If celebrities do this to animals it devalues animals and encourages people who admire celebrities to treat animals as accessories and inanimate objects.
That mentality can then be carried forward to how we relate to the domestic cat, which translates to a lack of respect and lowering standards of cat caretaking.
Goldfish handbags are bad. It has been manufactured by a person who has no scruples with regard to animal welfare. The person carrying it has the same lack of scruples and concern. They are more concerned about standing out and being noticed.
As for goldfish, we are just learning that fish feel and remember more than we realised. One day fishing will be seen as cruel.
In a study carried out by the Swedish insurance company Folksam, it was found that 58% of the 2,000 people taking part in the study had a preference for dogs.
The figure is boosted by the fact that people in an older category, namely aged 56 to 79, preferred dogs even more. 63% of people in this category preferred dogs.
In the 14 to 35 age category 50% of people preferred dogs so it becomes a 50/50 split in this younger age category.
The president of the Swedish kennel club says that dog people tend to prefer being outdoors which indicates to me that the Swedish spend more time outdoors then North Americans but that is a rather rash thing to say and may well not be true.
It is difficult to explain the Swedes' preference for dogs. I think the key factor is that more Swedish women preferred dogs which as mention goes against the grain so any assessment as to why the Swedish preferred dogs would have to look at that aspect of the survey I believe. In a crude sense it indicates that Swedish women are more masculine than America women.