Army dogs die in flea treatment mix up

Sorry the link does not work. The article said 18 army dogs were given pra tic flea treatment in their food instead of being used as a spot on treatment, three of the GSds died. It also talks of other poor treatment of army dogs. No idea if its true or not, just saw th article. Awful if its true.
 
The military are saying its contaminated food but if they put in the flea treatment it would contaminate it, Ive used this Prac-tic as we have a lot of deer here and my dogs often picked up ticks. It works very quickly so is very powerful stuff and would easily kill a dog if ingested.

It beggars belief how anyone could have mixed it up it says clearly on the box its a spot on solution and gives diagrams to show how and where to put it on.
 
Cant see any excuse for it, there is also mention of a dog dying because it was wearing a tight muzzle and could not pant. As much as I admire the armed forces how can this bbe justified?
 
itsmylife said:
I hope this does not get brushed under the carpet, How on earth could this happen?
Click to expand...

How TF could anyone, but anyone, make such an awful mistake.

Tho' perhaps (says my cynical head)...... it wasn't a "mistake" as such, they were "seeing what would happen", i.e. experimentation???? Who knows. But it wouldn't surprise me.
 
MiJodsR2BlinkinTite said:
How TF could anyone, but anyone, make such an awful mistake.

Tho' perhaps (says my cynical head)...... it wasn't a "mistake" as such, they were "seeing what would happen", i.e. experimentation???? Who knows. But it wouldn't surprise me.
Click to expand...

Thats a terrible assumption to make, these would have been highly trained dogs, trained for a specific purpose and that wouldnt have included experimentation.:mad:
 
Not quite the same, but as a student nurse I remember a lecture on drug admin, and being told the story of a 2nd year student who was asked to administer a syringe of ventopulmin to an asthmatic patient. Said patient was on a drip, and had a nebuliser by the side of the bed. Student added the drug to the drip, rather than nebulising the patient. Moral of the story, check, check again, check a third time, and if in doubt, check! It was a genuine mistake, the patient nearly died, but it shows how easy it could be. Not excusing this awful tragedy, just saying, mistakes are made, sometimes with horrendous consequences.
 
experimentation would surprise me- on the basis of how much it costs to train a dog to that level! (and what a random experiment too).. very sad though.
 
Dog handlers are not selected because they are 'doggy people' who 'love dogs' and 'know' lots about dogs, they are selected for their ability in terms of how easily they are able to be trained, how good they are taking orders, how good they are at acting on their own initiative, how they act under pressure etc etc etc and they have to be good soldiers as well as how they might work alongside their dogs. So they are not all as automatically clued up as some other dog owners or handlers. It sounds like a stupid mistake.

I am not excusing what happened, I am trying to give a bit of context.
 
CaveCanem said:
Dog handlers are not selected because they are 'doggy people' who 'love dogs' and 'know' lots about dogs, they are selected for their ability in terms of how easily they are able to be trained, how good they are taking orders, how good they are at acting on their own initiative, how they act under pressure etc etc etc and they have to be good soldiers as well as how they might work alongside their dogs. So they are not all as automatically clued up as some other dog owners or handlers. It sounds like a stupid mistake.



I am not excusing what happened, I am trying to give a bit of context.
Click to expand...

Anyone who saw the recent programme from Melton Mowbray will realise that what CC says is very true. I was surprised how little dog knowledge some of the new recruits had, (and also how badly trained some of the dogs were but thats irrelevant in this case). Very sad that this has happened, and I hope everyone involved will learn from it if it is just a tragic error
 
CaveCanem said:
Dog handlers are not selected because they are 'doggy people' who 'love dogs' and 'know' lots about dogs, they are selected for their ability in terms of how easily they are able to be trained, how good they are taking orders, how good they are at acting on their own initiative, how they act under pressure etc etc etc and they have to be good soldiers as well as how they might work alongside their dogs. So they are not all as automatically clued up as some other dog owners or handlers. It sounds like a stupid mistake.

I am not excusing what happened, I am trying to give a bit of context.
Click to expand...

In that case its time the training was improved, flea treatment is a routine part of dog care and if they cant get that right I dread to think what else happens to these dogs. As in most aspects of care with animals ignorance should be no excuse.
 
I don't dread to think what happens to them - they are expensive to breed (you only get that sort of drive from certain genetics) train and maintain and if there is a foul up anywhere, a soldier's life is at risk.
They have to want to work for their handler and there is an obligation on them to do their job and you don't get that from mistreating them (or indeed, killing them accidentally). If they foul up, for whatever reason, soldiers' lives are at risk, so objectively, forgetting they are dogs for a moment and bearing in mind they are an essential piece of kit, it doesn't make any sense not to treat them well.

Again, this is just me playing devil's advocate, trying to give a bit of context and does not excuse what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top