Talk:Veterinary medicine

Older discussion

The comparison to pediatric medicine was in fact quite apt: the patient can't speak, and the doctor must get any information about symptoms from the adult responsible for the patients. Pediatric human doses and animal doses are also similar, as they are based on body weight, which is not generally the case in adult medicine. --- Someone else 22:25 22 May 2003 (UTC)

Hi Guanaco, Please do not remove large chunks of information from an article without discussing why. If you think that a list of schools of veterinary medicine is inappropriate, please discuss this here first. Or you could have started a new article Schools Of Veterinary Medicine --- Cheers, Jurriaan 08:52, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

New templates

I created and installed new templates to Veterinary Practitioners and Veterinary Specialties. Thier are two articles in the Veterinary Specialties section that have yet to be created. Have fun with them if you want to create them. --Admiral Roo 03:08, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Veterinary Informatics

Given that veterinary informatics has it's own article, would anyone mind if we removed this section from this article? Veterinary Informatics is much more about practice management than it is about medicine. Edwardian 3 July 2005 04:22 (UTC)

• I have removed the above section which contained the following: "Veterinary informatics is the application of information technology to healthcare. Most vet clinics now utilize software for practice management systems to control scheduling and billing of clients, tracking of inventory and automation of lab results. Additionally, many clinics are working towards becoming computerized for electronic patient records." A link to veterinary informatics is contained within the article. Edwardian 05:21, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Applicants: veterinary school vs. medical school

The article currently states: "Admission into veterinary medical school is competitive. According to the US Department of Labor, 1 in 3 applicants was accepted into a veterinary program in 2002. (Compare this with human medical school statistics of 1 in 2 applicants accepted, keep in mind however that human medical school acceptances have an average GPA of 3.7 and the acceptance rate per medical school is lower than that of vet schools)." The portion in bold was recently added without reference or citation.

1. The DOL reference regarding veterinary applicants can be found here: [1].
2. Regarding veterinary schools: The lastest report from the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges indicates 2,576 matriculants (mean GPA 3.53)[2][3] - no information on number of total applicants. Another website reported 6,695 applicants (mean GPA 3.42), 2,301 matriculants (mean GPA 3.62)[4] - these are probably 1999 figures. The same website indicated that each applicant files 3.65 applications and veterinary schools receive 10.62 applications per position.
3. Regarding medical schools: The latest report from the Association of American Medical Colleges indicates 35,735 applicants (mean GPA 3.47), 17,662 accepted, 16,648 matriculants (mean GPA 3.62)[5][6].

I found no data to support the recently added assertions that "human medical school acceptances have an average GPA of 3.7" or that "the acceptance rate per medical school is lower than that of vet schools". It does appear that those applying to and entering medical school do have a slightly higher GPA, but that admissions into veterinary school are more competitive (as the article stated in its previous incarnation). Edwardian 06:39, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Could someone please make the discussion about comparing medical vs. veterinary school admissions more concise? I have lived in two states, Michigan, and California. In both there were many medical schools and only one veterinary school. Doesn't this fact alone mean that vet schools admissions are more difficult? Is this the result of boards of medicine limiting the numbers?

• No, it doesn't. There are fewer clown schools than there are veterinary schools, but I don't think clown school is more competitive than vet school. Competitiveness is a vague term, anyway. Certainly there is a lower acceptance rate to vet school than med school, and this fact is relevant. However, it might also be relevant to consider the qualifications of the applicants. If a higher number of less qualified individuals apply for vet school, does that make it more or less competitive? I'm not sure this question is important, but let's be concrete about whatever data we include.

I once remarked to my dentist that I was considering relocating to California as had one of my colleagues had done, submitting her nursing school transcripts, and board scores, (nationally administered, and when I was licensed passing score was 350--except California and New York where it was 450), and being licensed under most state nursing boards' reciprocity policy. My dentist remarked that he could not move to California, since the board of dentistry in that state decided that there were too many dentists there already.--W8IMP 15:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Income?

If we are comparing human vs. animal physicians, shouldn't there be some compaof the cost of their educations (including the amount of government subsidies at the colleges) and relative incomes?--W8IMP 15:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

UK Schools

Why does the list of UK vet schools warrant placement on this page while all the others are relegated to Schools of veterinary medicine? 24.210.140.97 11:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I've moved it to veterinary school. As for why, simply because that's where the person who decided to add the info decided to put it. See Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia. --Quiddity 18:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Veterinary medicine overhaul

I've overhauled Template:Veterinary medicine (formerly {{Veterinary Practitioners}}) to include all the related "See also" links, from various veterinary articles. Please feel free to correct/improve anything in it (ordering, subheaders, additions, etc), and add it to appropriate articles. Thanks. --Quiddity 18:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Why having 3 pages? Veterinary medicine, Veterinarian, and Veterinary surgeon??

Shouldn't we combine these 3, and retain the best of it??--Northerncedar (talk) 01:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes and no. The veterinarian and veterinary surgeon articles need to be combined. The Vet medicine article needs to cover all aspectz, with veterinarian-specific info merged into the vet article. I'm doing that right now. :) Skittleys (talk) 10:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

U.S Centric

This is the most U.S biased article I've read to date with statements such as "A shortage of veterinarians who treat farm animals is stressing the nation's food inspection system." It doesn't even specify which nation!!!! I plan on editing this article as soon as possible to make it less biased and to be more inclusive of aspects of the veterinary profession in other nations, (as soon as I finish studying for my vet exams), and I strongly encourage anyone else out there to do so. We can't have self obsessed yanks ruining wikipedia, if you look to the left hand corner there's a picture of the whole world not just America!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.244.161 (talk) 04:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

This article reads like a "how to become a veterinarian" ad. Surely the focus here should be on the practice of veterinary medicine itself and not how to get into school to be one? couldnt that fit under Veterinary school? 98.220.2.38 (talk) 17:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Tone

"The field of veterinary medicine is a highly competitive, yet underemployed, field of medicine. Today's veterinarians are doctors who are highly educated to protect the health of both animals and humans. The skills of highly qualified veterinarians are in constant demand, and job opportunities within this field are endless. To be considered a qualified veterinarian, there are many preparations to complete, the road is long and treacherous, and the competition is intense. Additionally, the career continues to change, from income trends to gender distribution, and these changes impact the field as a whole."

Excuse me? The road is long and treacherous? I'm no Billy Shakespeare but this introduction is terribly written. It looks like something you'd see on a badly folded pamphlet in an unlicensed career counsellor's office. It's eye-rollingly POV and isn't even about veterinary medicine, it just attempts to make the profession look good (which it doesn't) in an inappropriate style. Can someone add a template or fix this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxPayne901 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree with MaxPayne, it looks like some dopey 14-year-old trying to write an essay on how to become a veterinarian. The whole "Today's Veterinarian" section is horrible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.237.249.166 (talk) 22:35, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Merge with DVM

This page should be merged with doctor of veterinary medicine page. Is anyone opposed to this? DVMt (talk) 16:16, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Strong oppose - this article sets out all the types of veterinary medicine, regardless of practitioner. It is not just vets that provide veterinary medicine! OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:18, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Revert

My previous changes were reverted under the premise that it was US centric which I disagree. Could there be a discussion here please to clarify as to what the problem were in my revision? DVMt (talk) 03:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

It wasn't a full revert -though I think the term / qualification 'DVM' is not in wide use internationally and is where the the US centric claim came from. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 03:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Could we use all professional designations then that come across the globe where the profession is licensed and regulated? For example, what is the designation of UK vets. etc..? Thanks for clearing that up, I wasn't sure when Owain was referring to with his US-centric comment. DVMt (talk) 05:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As Clovis points out, I only reverted the parts that were US and veternarian centric. As the article explains, terminology varies worldwide, and most vets aren't doctors (that is principally a US affectation). Listing them all out is wordy and ultimately pointless. This sort of information belongs in a country specific article like veterinary medicine in the United Kingdom. In the UK, they are veterinary surgeons, but in either case, for veterinary medicine, vets aren't the only providers. In countries like the UK, veterinary nurses have autonomous scope of practice, including performing operations without supervision. I hope that makes sense. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Further - for those reasons I have reverted again. It is incorrect to state that post-graduate study is required - you are making broad assumptions about 200+ other countries based on the one in which you live. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't know what you are doing, but you better discuss it here first. Obviously any article on Veterinary Medicine will have a US-emphasis. The US is where 90% of all advances in the field are made, where all the major facilities are. Small towns in the US have better resourced animal care facilities than large cities elsewhere. To be sure, the article needs fixing, and needs to be supplemented by information about other parts of the world, but removing content and pictures that provide some information about the field to novice reader, is not the way to do it. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:31, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

PS And of all the pictures in the article, the one you leave in is of a generic dude sitting in a generic office, dressed in short sleeves and jeans no less, doing something to a cat that the low-resolution doesn't allow anyone to comprehend. That is informative? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, i think your reversion was unhelpful, so i've undone it. Let's address this one point at a time. OK, veterinary medicine covers all disease, disorder and injury to animals, including prophylactic treatment. In that respect all the para-professionals are involved in veterinary medicine, including farriers (most of whom work on remedial shoeing, in the same way that orthotics specialists would in humans, and they are very much a medical speciality), at least as much as veterinary aromatherapy (a practice restricted to veterinary medicine professionals in the UK).

Why is is 'obvious' that there would be a US bias? You assertions over advances in the sciecne are unfounded, i suspect untrue, and certainly uncited. And in either case, if by some chance this was true, it doesn't belong in the global article, it would belong at Veterinary medicine in the United States, in the same style at Veterinary medicine in the United Kingdom. Incidentaly, i had intended to create this article by now, but have been busy IRL so not got round to it, but feel free to start it.

As for the picture, in the others, i couldn't actually see what was happening, and relied on the caption. It's not an endorsement of that picture, but it was the best available.

If you are determined to keep this incredibly biased information, it belongs at a different article. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 10:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, let's talk this out before getting reversion happy. This article should be about the basics of veterinary medicine globally, including who does it (which is more than just vets), what its purpose it, and some more general information. What it is not about, is how important vets are the US, how much vets in the US earn and how brilliant US veterinary medicine is, which is what the article previously consisted of, to the extent where it was unsalvagable as an article without this major rewrite, and irrelvant to the stated subject. A lot of this will be relevant at Veterinary medicine in the United States, but would not be relevant to a New Zealand school pupil looking for an introduction to veterinary medicine. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 10:39, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As someone who raised the topic of this page as an example (of important topics on which no one wants to work) on WT:FAC some three years ago, I'm well aware of the problems. (I guess I was pissed at seeing my pictures removed, pictures for which I made considerable effort, and which would likely give the reader a feel for what a modern vet facility is like.) As you obviously realize, the article still lacks a Veterinary Medicine section. No wonder people want to merge it with Veterinarian. Anyway, since I myself haven't done anything for more than three years, I should cut others some slack. I will try to add a gallery of just four images (to which section, is not clear right now) and will await your reaction. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:02, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't disagree that this needs expansion with more information on veterinary medicine as a subject, but the previous content was all about US vets. I'm not precious over pictures, but the one chosen seemed to be the most accessible one from commons. Its not that i particularly like it, it just seemed to contain the main items (a professional and an animal) in the right setting (some sort of practice) and was easy to look at. As per policy though, i would not include a gallery, but space the pictures around the article. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 15:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, with the citations, can we remove them from where they are, and move them to be inline citations, as this will make them move navigable. I appreciate this isn't a instant process, as the article needs to be written in order to be inline cited, but we should make that part of the process. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 15:57, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I've added a bunch of references (but no citations yet). I meant to have tidied up the references into subsections("General text-books and reference," "Speciality monographs," ...), but I've had a bit of a family emergency and have to take three to four weeks off. If you find them unsightly, you can remove them, I'll be able to find them in the history when I get back. Same goes for the three pictures I've added. See you here later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the references would eventually look something like those in the FA India#Notes. They would have three subsections: Notes (consisting of footnotes and remarks), Citations (using an Sfm or Harvnb style system), and References (consisting of the full details of the cited ones). I'm adding many more now to have them all in one convenient place as the article proceeds towards expansion. I've noted above below that I will, however, be taking a month off starting tomorrow. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:04, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Notes for consideration before and during expansion

There are already Wikipedia articles on: Veterinary physician, Veterinary surgeon, Veterinary school, Veterinary technician, Veterinary pathology, Veterinary surgery, Veterinary anesthesia, Veterinary informatics, Veterinary homeopathy, Veterinary chiropractic, Veterinary specialities, Veterinary parasitology, Veterinary pharmacist, Veterinary dentistry, Veterinary ethics, Veterinary oncology, Veterinary obstetrics, Veterinary acupuncture, Holistic veterinary medicine. Some could be journals, but, still, there a number of pages that a flagship page (this one) will need to incorporate, or at least consider. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

{{Veterinary specialties}}

Good work. Could we not merge some of the content that has a subheading leading to the main article itself? Seems like a reasonable way of fleshing out the article and making it more robust and detailed. Suggestions? DVMt (talk) 06:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

That is exactly the right approach. As has currently been done with vets and paraveterinary workers, worthwhile articles should have a precis her with a link to the main article. Stubs should probably be merged and redirected. A couple of the ones mentioned, like veterinary surgeon, are DAB pages, so don't really count. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 06:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, just as I was getting interested I have to take time off. (Please see my note upstairs.) I will be back on Wikipedia in a month's time, though might not be able to get back to this article right away. All the best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

It was fun while it lasted. Thanks Fowler hopefully we don't mess things up too much while you on your wiki sabbatical! DVMt (talk) 04:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

PUBLICATIONS

The list of 8 PUBLICATIONS on this page, all of which have A Sisson as an author, is totally inappropriate. It appears to be an attempt at self-aggrandisement by one author. How that author could consider that a reference to a skin problem in one Corgi should be placed on a general page on veterinary medicine just amazes me. Out of courtesy, I am not removing the list myself immediately. However it should be removed - perhaps by A Sisson?

To be honest, i'm not sure this list of books adds anything to the article anyway, as they don't support in line references. I'm in favour of tossing 90% of them. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 08:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio problem

The entire history section had been blanked [7] since January 18 due to the addition of extensive copy paste from http://www.veterinaryhistorysociety.org.uk/press.htm. The temporary re-write page at Talk:Veterinary medicine/Temp is basically unusable, as it copied the entire article, not simply the offending section, and thus creates attribution problems. The re-written text is also still quite close paraphrasing from the above source and http://scienceray.com/biology/a-brief-history-of-veterinary-medicine/ (neither of which are ideal sources in the first place). It was also way too skewed to the British veterinary profession. I have consequently reverted to the clean version of the page, and then re-expanded the section in situ using better references. Other editors should now take it from here. Note that it was OK for me to remove the copyvio blanking template and re-write, as I'm a Copyright problems clerk. Voceditenore (talk) 10:06, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion you might want to be involved in

Please be advised there is a discussion here[Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)] which may affect this article.__DrChrissy (talk) 21:09, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Continual deletion of any pharmacology data not about humans

Happens all over Wikipedia. e.g. Epigallocatechin gallate page again today. Does this anti-knowledge "humans are the only relevant species to all of science" stance annoy anyone else too? Apparently if it's not data from several systematic reviews in high powered human clinical DBRCTs, then it never happened at all; even if you make the evidence source, standard and phase of research it occurred in abundantly clear. Even when notable enough to make the cover of a "core journal" cited by Wikipedia policy itself, as example of highest quality reliable source evidence. 120.17.209.117 (talk) 09:20, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Veterinary medicine has secondary sources such as reviews, clinical reviews, etc. (there's whole fields of veterinarians the publish these things). In this case, the removals seemed appropriate. Please read WP:MEDRS and WP:SCIRS if you haven't already. Otherwise, please remember that article talk pages are WP:NOTFORUM. You need to propose content specific to the page. Kingofaces43 (talk) 14:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Profession versus practice

Lots of Wikipedia articles have this challenge, but this article currently covers the profession but not the discipline. There is a different audience for people wanting this as a career path versus wanting to know about the field. These should be separate articles, and I think the main one should be about the field.

Addressing this is a long term challenge. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2020 (UTC)