Don't trust these vets. Get a second opinionDon't trust these vets, As nice as they are, they are too young and too inexperienced. Find an older vet with more experience, at least get a second opinion from another vet April 18th. My dog was panting more than usual, no temperature but the vet prescribed Panadol. The vet did an ultrasound scan but could not see an issue. He could not see anything abnormal in the ultrasound. April 24. X-rays were taken, we were shown to a monitor to view the X-rays. With a swipe of her hand across the screen the vet said "There's a large mass there, most likely a tumour". May 31. We asked the vet if an operation was possible, she said "No, there will be too many organs involved. July 4. I asked to see the x-rays again. She went through the x-rays again to explain what she diagnosed. I was told the same as the first time, a large mass, a tumour, no mention that it could anything else but a tumour as was first diagnosed. July 11. Weeks went by and her breathing became more laboured, so we attended the clinic again to get another x-ray to see if the tumour had grown. A nurse filled out forms incorrectly requesting the dog be euthanized, we were shocked and said that we had booked in for a follow up x-ray to see if the tumour had grown. She said there wasn't time on that day and booked for the x-ray to be done one week later. Unfortunately over that weekend our dogs laboured breathing increased and we made the difficult decision to put her down, believing she had a large tumour depressing her lungs. She was euthanized on the following Tuesday. July 18. An autopsy was carried out that found NO LARGE MASS!!??- Only suspect cell growth and a swollen lymph node, it also reported LOTS OF FLUID AROUND HER LUNGS. We trusted the vet when she said our dog had a large growing mass, most likely cancer between her lungs and her rib cage which was pressing on her lungs. We didn't know any better, we'd put our trust in the vet, what a huge mistake that was. After our dogs euthanasia, I met with and said to the vet "Since the autopsy, where you reported that no large cancer mass was found, but instead lots of fluid around the lungs" we have investigated her condition thoroughly, and we've learnt that the fluid should have been seen on x-rays and ultrasounds and should have been drained immediately. I said 'My dog went through a miserable two months between your diagnosis of "a large mass, most likely cancer", and her eventual euthanasia, when as we now know her suffering was caused by Pleural Effusion, a condition that you should have diagnosed as the cause of her laboured breathing' I said 'I've been told that you should have seen on the x-ray and the ultrasound scan that it was fluid not a massive tumour. You should have suspected that it could be fluid. You could then have extracted the fluid, allowing us time to continue our own cancer treatment' The vet said, with a shoulder shrug, and a simpering smile "I SUPPOSE SO". In my mind that's a very serious malpractice mistake, a mistake that we have to live with through trusting a vet who did not thoroughly investigate our dogs ailment, and that we didn't seek another vets opinion. Yes, our dog did have the beginnings of cancer which caused the fluid build up. But it wasn't a huge mass as was described by the vet when viewing the x-rays, but instead fluid. When the vet said that there was a huge mass, most likely a cancer, we started to treat our dog with natural medicines, medicines that we would use to treat ourselves should we ever experience cancer. Had fluid been diagnosed by the vet, it could have been extracted, relieving the dogs laboured breathing and suffering, while we continued our cancer treatment over the advised six months. Even though she was suffering with the laboured breathing, she was bright, playful and always wanting to go for her scheduled afternoon walk. On the morning of putting her down, she trotted into the vets clinic as happy as any other time, looking forward to treats. We were shocked at the desensitised demure of the vet when euthanizing our dog. When picking up our dogs ashes, I saw quite a lot of other animal ashes in bags awaiting pickup. It seems that euthanasia is an easier option for these vets when they don't know of a cure, because of their lack of experience. Believing that the tumour must by now be huge and causing the laboured breathing, we had our beautiful dog euthanized well before was necessary. We put our trust in inexperienced vets instead of a second opinion from a more experienced older vet, this is something we will have to live with forever. The following video was taken an hour before putting her to sleep. She was happy and looked good, she didn't need to die so soon, if only the vet had known to drain the fluid. https://www.productreview.com.au/reviews/19c4164d-4402-566d-bf16-a2d5e67a7fcd The following statement is from the site Pet MD (It is important to note that for all causes of pleural effusion, if the fluid causes any breathing issues (increased respiratory rate/effort), the fluid must be drained to give relief and to see improvement.). https://www.petmd.com/dog/conditions/respiratory/pleural-effusion-dogs Read Less

I booked my Labrador in for an ultrasound to confirm pregnancy. When I booked it in I told them explicitly it was for this purpose. They do the ultrasound and then charge $66 for a consultation for the vet to tell me that their machine is over 30 years old and not up to the task. They also charged me to diagnose an ear infection which I did not authorise and had already been treating appropriately. Then they suggested I book in for an ultrasound with a consultant vet that costs $450 (twice as much as a regular ultrasound). This is not the first time I've been charged inappropriately for a consultation. The last time we were charged $66 for a vet to ask us why we wanted progesterone testing. This was despite me telling them on the phone that we are ANKC (Australian Kennel Club) registered breeders and wanted the test results to time breeding. We we did get progesterone testing we had to take the blood samples to the pathology ourselves (3 times!) because they couldn't get a courier in time despite this being included in the cost of the testing. Disappointing and would not recommend to anyone. Read Less

I brought my cat to the Kingston Channel Highway Animal Hospital because she had an infected scratch on her nose. The vet there talked about getting a $500+ biopsy and gave her a steroid shot and prescribed pills and a 3 times daily cleaning & ointment regime (which meant she needed to wear the elizabethan collar three times a day). After two visits to this practice costing a total of $250, I took her to the wholistic vet in Sandy Bay. He used a simple, cheap, non-invasive diagnostic tool (a Wood's Lamp) to find out that the infection was fungal. From there the treatment became simple, effective, cheaper and far less stressful than that prescibed by Channel HAH. Which makes me think that CHAH vets either don't know about simple, non-invasive, inexpensive diagnostic methods, or just don't choose to use them. Read Less