Sure people deserve a choice of what level of medicine they are going to get. But, if faced with a shocky puppy that has been attacked by another dog, NO ONE that understands current treatment would give a STEROID SHOT. That is so far behind what is considered to be standard of care, it is pathetic. Placing an IV catheter, giving fluids, REAL pain medication, and OXYGEN are not that expensive. Letting it die on a heating pad (heating pads cause thermal burns BTW) is unacceptable. Euthanasia would have been a better thing for this puppy. Can you put yourself in this puppy’s place? I shudder to think what it was going through. The owner is always offered the A plan because that is what we have to offer. They need to know the best way to help their pet. But allowing someone to choose a plan that makes an animal suffer needlessly: I would suggest euthanasia before that. Even just giving the poor dog a ton of morphine or hydromorphone to help with the pain while it died on its own would have been preferable.

I have worked in a variety of places over the last 18 years or so I have been in the industry. I am not a snob. Excuses that this is just an old, therefore acceptable way of doing things is wrong. It used to be acceptable for the government to require separate facilities for black and white people. Does that mean that going back to the is ok? Should we go back to ether anesthesia just because people used to do that? There are plenty of older practitioners that keep up. Plenty of them are not in big fancy hospitals either. Failure to keep up with current treatments is dangerous.

Until people that do this are either hit with losing their license or losing money, it will not change because the reason “I have always done things like this” keeps them in their medical rut.

Rebekah says, “This guy is a disgrace to veterinary community. Lack of sterile technique, no monitoring while animals are under anesthesia, very “old school” approach. The show should be taken off the air, this is not what veterinary medicine is about – there is a reason why the animals die!” My first thought was, “so none of her patients die?” However, in some ways, I would agree with her . . . for most (especially younger) veterinarians, what Dr. Pol represents is not what many veterinarians today are about. Most younger veterinarians I know are not able to diagnose without a plethora of tests. They can’t determine a break without a full radiological workup. They can’t palpate much of anything and have to use machines and equipment to make a diagnosis. In addition, most of them will not personally answer the phone in the middle of the night when there is an emergency.

While I am thankful for all of these advances in medicine, there has been a detrimental effect on medicine. Doctors trained since the “advancement” of these technologies can’t function, diagnose or treat without them. A doctor that criticizes Doc Pol for diagnosing a break and setting it without xrays, does so because they don’t think it’s possible to diagnose or treat without equipment, because that is what they have been taught . . . which means that is all they know how to do. It’s precisely because of “old school” training, that Doc Pol (and MANY other veterinarians) are able to makes such diagnoses. I would rather have a doctor with the skill, and expertise, that enable them to diagnose without technologies when necessary, than one that needs “modern” equipment before they will move forward with treatment.

Angel, “as a member of the veterinary profession”, had concerns about a few things also . . . some that were specifically listed included a calf being splinted with “wood slivers for a bushel basket” and the dog whose tail was stitched on paper towels, among other things. The problem, as Angel described it, with the calf being splinted with wood slivers seemed to be all about perception. In fact, and I quote, “looks terrible for a professional to do something that the owner could have done themselves in the back yard.” So, basically Angel stated that the reason for concern was that if it looks like someone can do it themselves, it looks terrible for the professional. I didn’t see a question or comment on whether the treatment WORKED, just that it reflected badly on the profession, because it was “something that the owner could have done themselves in the back yard.” We can’t make it look like an owner could do it themselves, after all, if the owner could do it themselves, they wouldn’t need the veterinarian would they?

The second concern listed was regarding the dog with the tail that was amputated by the screen door. The main concern, again I quote Angel, “most concerning is that the owner was holding the dog. He would be so liable if the dog had bitten her! Check with the AVMA-PLIT. Veterinarians are constantly warned to not allow owners to restrain their animals for procedures, we post signs in our hospitals telling clients that we don’t allow it and now they can watch Dr. Pol doing exactly opposite.” Quite right, AVMA-PLIT does constantly warn against owners restraining their animals. However, AVMA-PLIT is a liability insurance company. Their main concern is to avoid liability, their concern is not necessarily best care. As everyone knows, the practice of medicine, in both human and veterinary, has become more about preventing liability than truly about the best care of the patient. As a pet owner, a mother, and someone who has worked in veterinary medicine, who is best able to calm a frightened animal? If the concern was truly about “best care” the owner would be the best person to restrain an animal. Unfortunately, there have been instances in veterinary medicine where an owner was bitten by their own animal, sued the veterinarian and won. IMHO, it’s comparable to the idiot who won millions for spilling coffee on themselves and won a suit against the restaurant because the coffee was hot. Angel even admits liability is the problem, not level of care, again, to quote Angel, “He would be so liable if the dog had bitten her!” Admittedly, there are circumstances where owner restraint would not work, but an across the board stand against it is not about standard of care, but level of liability; which, unfortunately, is something doctors have to be concerned with. It’s unfortunate, because it tends to interfere with good medicine, not enhance it.

Angel commented on a few other things: that a surgery was performed without proper prep of the surgery site; that a pup should have been treated differently – in their opinion; and concern that a surgery was performed without gas anesthesia. Again, I didn’t watch the shows, but I don’t believe that Doc would ever perform surgery in a manner that was unsafe for any animal. The concern mentioned was not that the dog wasn’t anesthetized, but that GAS anesthesia wasn’t used. There are other kinds of anesthesia. Contrary to Angel’s statement, it is not “unheard of” to perform a procedure without gas anesthesia. It is, however, the preferred method taught at “modern” veterinary schools . . . which does not mean other methods don’t work. After criticizing Dr. Pol for, what Angel refers to as substandard care, the next criticism is that, “that is not a surgery that requires 2 doctors,” so somehow having another pair of trained hands in a surgery is now bad.

Michelle agreed with Angel saying, “As a veterinary technician for 25 years, I am saddened to see the level of care their patients receive. They may be great people, but veterinary medicine has strived to evolve beyond what is portrayed in his show. I watched him enucleate an eye on a dog without being intubated at the very least, but how about proper anesthesia and pain control. Please find a veterinarian whose standard of care represents our profession honorably.” At least she acknowledges that they are great people. She is right, veterinary medicine has “strived to evolve”. Unfortunately, it is evolving, in many ways, into something that is unreachable to most people. It is evolving into something that doesn’t allow clients to have input into their care. If the only treatment option people have is “the best” as defined by medical boards, most people won’t be able to afford medicine for their animals. This is a problem in human medicine too – doctors now “fire” clients, because clients/patients have the gall to question them or they choose not to follow the doctor’s recommendations, sometimes due to cost, but just as often because the patient doesn’t agree with the recommendations . . . . something they should have the right to do!

Wren’s comments that Dr. Pol somehow must not take pride in his work because he doesn’t do it the way Wren thinks should be done . . . . all I can say is how utterly arrogant. Which Wren reinforces with the statement that veterinarians are “amazing professionals.” Veterinarians are people, with all the same positive and negative attributes that all people have – they are no more or less amazing than anyone else. Unfortunately, like doctors in human medicine, most seem to have lost that level of humility and think they are on some plane higher than everyone else. Dr. Pol hasn’t – It is one of the most amazing things about him. He understands that while he has an amazing amount of knowledge and skill, and that he provides an indispensible service, he is just a person. He understands that it is not his role to dictate, but to educate. He will explain everything he is doing so the client can understand. He doesn’t feel the need to use medical terminology to make himself appear more intelligent than the person he’s talking to. Because of that, I would bet that his compliance rate is higher than most any doctor practicing “modern medicine” but who aren’t able or willing to speak to someone in language they can understand. Dr. Pol takes pride in his work as a professional, he just doesn’t see his “professional” role as being something that requires arrogance or putting up appearances. He IS a pleasant, charming man, but it is not why he has so many clients – although, I’m sure that helps – but treatment and outcomes are why people come back, and yes, price is a factor. However, if price was the only factor, and clients were not happy with the outcome, they wouldn’t come back. They certainly wouldn’t drive from the distances that some of them do. Pol Veterinary Services is in the country, but it is located very near a major university and a large community. Pet owners have more than a few options for veterinary care. They don’t come to Dr. Pol, or his staff, because they have no options . . . they come because Pol Vet is the BEST option in their opinion.

Shell, I love some of your comments. Some of the major problems in medicine that we have today are because of the “advancement of medicine.” Modern medicine has brought us MANY benefits, but it has also created problems. Shell is right that “super bugs” are the result of modern medicine. Modern medicine tends to use a bomb when a bullet would do – so to speak.

The medical community, historically and now, are the last ones to acknowledge when they are wrong. When Dr. Semmelweis introduced the idea of washing hands between patients to reduce infections, he was laughed out of practice. He spent 14 years fighting to promote the idea of washing hands, but died in disgrace because “established medical opinion” of the time didn’t like what he had to say. Twenty years later, in 1967, Dr. Lister “invented” the idea. It took 20 years for the medical establishment to acknowledge they were wrong. The same kind of problem exists today, and the comments I read are a clear demonstration. The medical establishment thinking they are all knowing and get to determine how every doctor practices. Doctors carry this to their patients by thinking they get to decide and demand that private citizens submit to their authority when it comes to treatment. Doctors’ and Veterinarians’ jobs are not to dictate, they are to advise and educate. The patient, or patient’s owner or parent, gets to decide how to proceed. Shell is right, younger people, in every profession, tend to think that the “old” ways are obsolete and ridiculous somehow. Where is the respect for the hands on knowledge gained over decades of experience?

Comments like “pets are furry kids” that Anna made, are something that makes me furious. Pets are not furry kids, they are animals. I love animals and have spent all of my life with them, caring for them in one way or another, rescuing them, etc., but I understand that they are animals. Unless you are referring to a baby goat, “kids” are PEOPLE! Anna, if you came across a veterinarian like Dr. Pol, you would be lucky. If you didn’t realize it, it would be your own loss. There were other negative comments made, but I don’t have the time to address each and every one of them. I’ve probably spent too much time already, but Dr. Pol is someone who deserves the time. TJ – he is certainly no quack, and I realize I don’t know you, but I’d bet he could diagnose you under the table. If he was brought before the Board, and, for any reason, lost his license, it would only be a demonstration of the arrogance of the majority of people in the veterinary medical profession.

Dr. Pol has 19,000 patients – clients from across multiple counties, throughout the state, drive long distances, passing MANY other veterinary practices to see HIM. How many veterinarians do you know that have that kind of loyal clientele!?! For those who might bring up cost – Dr. Pol does strive to make veterinary medicine affordable – but any savings is lost for those people who spend the money on gas, and plan an entire day by the time they drive to see him. Most people go to the local veterinarian, whoever it is, and when that veterinarian moves on, they see whoever takes their place. There is little loyalty that develops because there is little that is outstanding about any of those veterinarians. Not that they are bad, just that they are normal, nothing exceptional about them. Ask any veterinary management consultant and they will tell you that if a veterinarian moves his office, he better make sure another veterinarian doesn’t open a practice in the old location/building or he will lose most of his clientele to that veterinarian. I doubt that would be a concern to Dr. Pol because his clients have demonstrated their devotion to him. Dr. Pol is one of the most honorable men I know. He is exceptional, he is a credit to his profession, his family, his community, to America, and yes Anna, to his Dutch heritage.