Venomoid Debate V1.0

[natas]

WARNING: The following thread hits a very touchy subject. In order for the discussion to be dealt with, pictures of "VOIDED" snakes maybe embedded into the thread or Linked to. If you are overemotional this maybe the wrong thread for you. The images maybe disturbing, so be forewarned....

This is version 1 of the debate "Venomoid Debate". What this thread is not is a place to come and insult, mock, degrade or put down members for their views. Engage the debate in the spirit in which it is meant to be debated.

In this thread we will talk about the following:

* Why "voiding" a venomous snake is wrong
* Why "voiding" is or is not O.K.
* Can a vet legally "void" a venomous snake?
* Gray areas of voiding
* Botched jobs and garage hack examples
* Venomoid used in education. Safer because no harm can be done, or bad example to the people?
* False security in venomoids
* Comparing venomoids to other procedures (declawing cats, defanging cats)

Special rules for this thread:
1) As always, please stay on topic. Off topic replies, will be removed.
2) Limit small replies like "that was awesome", or "Your wrong". Instead of replying like this, use rep or the "thank you" button.
3) Try your best to back your statement up with scientific fact, studies you have read or done.
4) DO NOT plagiarize. If you quote someones findings, please give credit by providing the name, or a direct link.
5) Before posting, please read the rules of this forum.
6) 10 day bans for personal attacks on persons or companies.

Your opinion on the matters above are important. This subject is a very touchy one, so please respect each other.

Enjoy, and have fun!

List of references to start out your discussion with:
Venomoid Paper - The Venom List
Venomoid snakes - The first successful operations in Australia.

[TammyJamaica]

I do not believe that humans should inflict their superior intelligence in this nature-altering way upon these reptiles, who have evolved (and/or been created!!!) with this particular nature, ability and method of survival for themselves.

We think that we know it all, and justify our deeds to suit our "needs", to the detriment of something that we do not yet, and may never, understand.

[TongueFlick]

I agree- venomous snakes are made that way, it is not our right to take their self-defence away from them.

[natas]

Devil's advocate time:

NOT MY OPINION, and not true. This is just to bring on more discussion
Hi, My name is Rick and I teach a Game Wardens. I have a permit to keep venomous snakes.

In our field of work we sometimes are required to relocate venomous snakes. In order to teach this to a person I believe first hand experience is best. When teaching this we use Voided animals to for insurance and safety reasons.

Now, in the case above what do you guys think? Right, Wrong, or other...

[TammyJamaica]

Voided snakes are not serving any scientific purpose like lab rats. The only purpose they serve is to make the people doing it and supporting it more self-satisfied/wealthy/popular.

If you want to teach people how to relocate a venomous snake, use a non-venomous one, a rubber one, or a piece of garden hose in the training exercise. Or better still, let there be no dummy at all - let the person learn at his/her own risk. Just have antivenom right handy.

[natas]

Originally Posted by TammyJamaica

Voided snakes are not serving any scientific purpose like lab rats. The only purpose they serve is to make the people doing it and supporting it more self-satisfied/wealthy/popular.
If you want to teach people how to relocate a venomous snake, use a non-venomous one, a rubber one, or a piece of garden hose in the training exercise. Or better still, let there be no dummy at all - let the person learn at his/her own risk. Just have antivenom right handy.

I see the point you made, and its what I believe personally. However, I see this as the excuse to VOID animals all the time. Heck read this: Venomoid snakes - The first successful operations in Australia.

[TammyJamaica]

I checked out the article and, to use a crude expression, it sucks. Look, if we want a venomous snake, or to be able to show off one, we must be prepared to deal with the risk. And as I said, I believe that there is NO acceptable excuse to do this to these animals.

To be fair, though, I also do not appreciate the cosmetic clipping of a dog's ears and tail for show purposes, albeit that ears and tail do not a fantastic, lethal survival weapon make, as in the case of the venom of the snake.

[natas]

I disagree with the article as well, just wanting to point out others opinions thats all. This debate is pretty much one sided, so I am just trying to stir the pot

anyway articles like that are what make some people think its ok

[morti]

(Disclaimer: the following statement is not necessarily the opinion of PrimaReptilia, Me personally, or anyone else for that matter. This statement is provided only in the interest of debate and discussion. Please do not misconstrue any of this for anything other than what it is: an attempt at rationally presenting the argument for venomoid snakes.)

For the moment, let’s assume that it is a perfect world and what we are discussing is the merits of venomoid surgery as preformed in a sterile environment with proper anesthesia and pain medication by a licensed and experienced vet. There are very few people willing to justify garage hacks like Ray Hoser and I certainly won’t. Let’s also assume that we are discussing a full removal of the gland rather than a Ductectomy. The regeneration of a gland removed while fully intact is nearly impossible. The regeneration of ducts has been reported (1) but not formally documented. (Side note: It was pointed out to me in another thread that Dr. Bryan Fry did point out in a personal experience that he has witnessed regeneration of venom glands, but I have yet to see formal documentation on this. I believe this to be a ductectomy)

The number one argument for the production of venomoid snakes is the safety of the keeper. Simply put, a snake that has had its venom glands removed is less likely to kill the keeper than one that has not. A good example of an environment where this would be highly beneficial is in zoos. A situation occurred a few years ago where an Ohio man was bitten by an exotic venomous snake. The closest source of antivenin for this species was the Louisville zoo. The authorities in Ohio took all of the antivenin available and the man still died. Had a keeper at the zoo been bitten before the stock could be replenished, he would have very little chance of survival. If the zoo had all of their snakes voided, however, it would have been less of a disaster.

One common argument that many people use in arguments against venomoid snakes is "the unloaded gun logic". I call it the unloaded gun logic because of the old saying that an unloaded gun is more dangerous than a loaded one due to the fact that if a person thinks it’s unloaded, they are more likely to take more chances with it ergo, more likely to get hurt. For this logic to be true when applied to venomoid snakes, it has to be assumed that regeneration is a real possibility, and therefore a keeper should use the same caution when dealing with this snake as they would with a hot specimen of the same type. It is assumed that people will Not be able to be trusted to keep the snake as though it were still hot. I disagree with this assessment. I personally keep white-lipped pythons. I know that if I get bitten by my white-lipped pythons, I am in no real danger of death, but I still go out of my way and do anything possible NOT to get bitten by them because THEY HAVE GREAT BIG TEETH! It still hurts a lot to get bitten by any snake with great big teeth. Let’s say it is a large viper that has been voided. Regardless of any danger from regeneration, I don’t want to be bitten by a snake with fangs as long and sharp they have. I suggest that a smart herper can and should treat venomoids as though they are hot, and I feel that the unloaded gun argument does not give enough credit to the individual.

I’ll not argue with the common point that people who want to keep hots personally and are not willing to take the risk shouln’t have voids. I feel as though an average herper who just wants a snake to say “Look at me, I have a Cobra” are the ones more likely to treat their venomoid cobra like a corn snake.

We are currently living in a time when there are more laws concerning reptiles being passed. In some states, like Kentucky for instance, there is no provision for licensing responsible keepers to keep these animals. Even if I wanted a Gaboon viper, I couldn’t have one. In the future, it may be an interesting proposition to speak with legislators and seek permission to keep venomoid snake with proper paperwork. While most states consider venomoid snakes to be the same as venomous, I feel that this is simply because they have no knowledge of the issue. Perhaps that could, in the future, be another justification for venomoid snakes.

In reality, and outside of my above disclaimer, I do not own venomoid snakes and don’t plan to. I won’t go out of my way to condemn those who do because their justification for is, to me, every bit as valid as most justification I have heard against. I am HIGHLY opposed to the garage hacks and I feel that they should all be prosecuted because the practice is already illegal it should be stopped.

(1) “Venomoids: An Overview”, Jeff Miller, 2001 Venomoids: An Overview

Footnote:

This is a well written article about the procedures themselves:
Venomoids: An Overview

This one is by O'Shea and basically says he doesn't like them but sees a place for them in Hollywood films instead of intact snakes:
Help put an end to this practice - A Case Against Venomoid Snakes

This is a study of Strike-induced chemosensory searching compares venomoids to intact snakes to determine if chemosensory searching is based on venom. You can read the abstract for free, but you have to buy the full text:
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

[JuliusSqueezer]

What? You want to loby for legislation for voided snakes in a nonven state? First of all, it's not a perfect world. Very few vets will touch this operation. Those that do are nuts. Even if it was ethical, it's an insurance nightmare for a vet to get involved especially just so JoeBlow Hillbilly can have a pet cobra to ride around in his camaro...which is what the majority of the Ky notso hot keepers would be. Most everyone else that keeps vens took the time and effort and learned how to properly. I can't think of any logical reason why any vet would sign off on a void for the pet trade. Did I mention that's nuts? Putting the staff at risk, yourself at risk...for what good reason? Does it account for some ignoramus breeding his voids and expecting voided offspring? What if later the operation does prove botched or regenerates? Malpractice for the vet either way...and possible manslaughter charges. No freaking way! So the best you can really hope for (if you want to call it that) is legislation to condone the illegal garage hacking.

Zoos keep animals far more likely to kill someone than any of the snakes. The risk of killing the snakes (vioiding has a very high mortality rate) isn't worth it. If they void the snakes should they fill the elephants full of helium so they can't trample people? Wire the bears, lions, tigers mouths shut? What about the monkeys? Cut their arms off? A chimp can rip you in half with no effort whatsoever. So can a bear. Rhino horns...those definately gotta go. Honestly, snakes...even the venomous ones are just too easy to keep properly than to go through all of that. Even a venomous keeper is more likely to choke to death on a hotdog than to die from a snake bite.

Back to the pet trade since whatever excuses people tend to come up with...this is really what it's about. If there weren't 6500 + nonvenomous snake species to choose from that are already were safe to handle...then I'd say there may be a place for it. If venomous snakes weren't welcome in the wild and were nusance animals ...domestic cats for example are not welcome anywhere in the wild. So I see no problem with declawing/altering them since it gives them more homes and means less cats have to die. Venomous snakes have no such housing issue.

[deadliestformula]

Okay, to put myself out on a limb all alone with my views here, I will say that I feel that there are circumstances that would be justifiable to use voided snakes provided that the operation was preformed under anesthetic, by a liscenced veterinarian, in sterile conditions. And with these precautions in place, I would be for allowing the surgery.

1. In the above mentioned situation with the Game Warden, it would be okay.
2. In situations where learning is the key, such as a veterinary school as a step before actual venomous snakes, or in a zoo keeping situation, where it is imperative to learn the ways to handle the animal for medical reasons or otherwise for the health of the animal.
3. If scientists had some specific reason to study the animal that would require frequent handling, yet would not require the snake to have its glands.
4. As a safety precaution for someone who had a legitamate reason to own the animal. (not just because joe blow wants a gaboon in his garage to impress his buddies)

I also believe that if the surgery was perfected so that it was not detrimental to the snake in any way and could be done sanitarily by a liscenced professional, THEN and ONLY THEN venomoids could be offered as a pet. However, that could only occur if there was a certainty that no regrowth of the venom glands or ducts or whatever, and the animal would need to be 'tagged' or otherwise marked in a way that was not harmful but readily visable to a person who may come in contact with it that it was 'safer' to come in contact with. In the event that this could occur, the snake would also have to be 'neutered' or whatever you call it to prevent any breeding as the progeny would not be venomless.

Because what I understand of venomous keepers is this (JS or BW or FLVenom correct me if I am wrong) but you guys feed your animals FT. So the venom isn't really necessary to kill the prey.

Is venom a digestive aide? Does it provide some purpose other than killing the prey? If not and the snake is eating FT, I see no reason not to void a pet. It would reduce the chance that a keeper was bitten and injured(which only hurts herp keepers as a group).

I have seen it pointed out that it would be similar to somehow implanting rods in a constrictors back or fusing the vertabrae to prevent a full coil that would kill a person. I feel that this is completely different because a procedure like that would effect an animals quailty of life, and impare movement. While venom only disables prey for consumption.

But from what I understand the procedure is most commonly preformed in garage hack shops in dirty places. That is not okay. But done responsibly, with proper medical care to prevent infection, and undue suffering of the animal in question, without possibility of regrowth, it would be a CHOICE for people.

And YES, we are the top of the food chain (for now). It is in our nature to conquer and control, mold and manipulate, that which we can.


I think its only fair to mention that I personally have no interest in venomous reptiles. And that may be why I am not as passionately against this as much as the rest of you are. I don't see how keeping a voided snake would be any less 'special' that keeping a venomous snake. If you like the species and want to keep them for a pet, it shouldn't matter if its voided (as long as its done properly) And if a person says its not the same, please explain to me why? If the answer is because its not as dangerous, then the person has no business owning the animal in the first place. Keeping the animals should be about appreciation of the breed, not the thrill of the danger and the rush of adrenaline of being around one that is not altered.

[bcfos1]

Originally Posted by morti

For the moment, let’s assume that it is a perfect world and what we are discussing is the merits of venomoid surgery as preformed in a sterile environment with proper anesthesia and pain medication by a licensed and experienced vet. There are very few people willing to justify garage hacks like Ray Hoser and I certainly won’t. Let’s also assume that we are discussing a full removal of the gland rather than a Ductectomy. The regeneration of a gland removed while fully intact is nearly impossible. The regeneration of ducts has been reported (1) but not formally documented. (Side note: It was pointed out to me in another thread that Dr. Bryan Fry did point out in a personal experience that he has witnessed regeneration of venom glands, but I have yet to see formal documentation on this. I believe this to be a ductectomy)

First off find a vet willing to do said surgery just for the sake of doing it. Unless a venom gland is infected and putting the snake's health at risk most all vets will tell you to take a hike.
As for a ductectomy not being documented has being regenerated. Sadly it has, as a well soiled roll of paper towels from a keeper in Florida who had a "rescue" venomoid Ophiophagus hannah can attest to. Long story and I will try to bring that person (Ray Hunter) who witnessed this here to detail the specifics of what took place. And if Fry has seen it but failed to document it I can understand. It takes a group study to make a proper determination and one specific snake a group does not make.

Originally Posted by morti

The number one argument for the production of venomoid snakes is the safety of the keeper. Simply put, a snake that has had its venom glands removed is less likely to kill the keeper than one that has not. A good example of an environment where this would be highly beneficial is in zoos. A situation occurred a few years ago where an Ohio man was bitten by an exotic venomous snake. The closest source of antivenin for this species was the Louisville zoo. The authorities in Ohio took all of the antivenin available and the man still died. Had a keeper at the zoo been bitten before the stock could be replenished, he would have very little chance of survival. If the zoo had all of their snakes voided, however, it would have been less of a disaster.

No 9 times out of 10 it would have been more of a disaster for the zoo due to the simple fact this surgery has a nasty side effect of creating undo stress on the snake. That stress leads to it going off feed, which leads to more stressful force feeding. End result is usually death. Do zoo's have their lions and tigers declawed and their teeth pulled just to make them safer for the keeper? No.. Same basic situation none the less.

Originally Posted by morti

One common argument that many people use in arguments against venomoid snakes is "the unloaded gun logic". I call it the unloaded gun logic because of the old saying that an unloaded gun is more dangerous than a loaded one due to the fact that if a person thinks it’s unloaded, they are more likely to take more chances with it ergo, more likely to get hurt. For this logic to be true when applied to venomoid snakes, it has to be assumed that regeneration is a real possibility, and therefore a keeper should use the same caution when dealing with this snake as they would with a hot specimen of the same type. It is assumed that people will Not be able to be trusted to keep the snake as though it were still hot. I disagree with this assessment. I personally keep white-lipped pythons. I know that if I get bitten by my white-lipped pythons, I am in no real danger of death, but I still go out of my way and do anything possible NOT to get bitten by them because THEY HAVE GREAT BIG TEETH! It still hurts a lot to get bitten by any snake with great big teeth. Let’s say it is a large viper that has been voided. Regardless of any danger from regeneration, I don’t want to be bitten by a snake with fangs as long and sharp they have. I suggest that a smart herper can and should treat venomoids as though they are hot, and I feel that the unloaded gun argument does not give enough credit to the individual.

Then give credit to the "not so smart" herper who just "has to have a venomoid because it is the coolest snake ever".. This type of person will take risks as they think none are possible due to the fact it is after all a venomoid. People like this have no need having a venomoid yet alone a full on 100% venomous reptile. The only difference with a venomoid is you don't read about them in the papers or see their bite become the top story on the local news. If it were a hot they were taking risks with we would hear all about it and legislation would be made which would effect those of us who keep within the confines of the law.

Originally Posted by morti

I’ll not argue with the common point that people who want to keep hots personally and are not willing to take the risk shouln’t have voids. I feel as though an average herper who just wants a snake to say “Look at me, I have a Cobra” are the ones more likely to treat their venomoid cobra like a corn snake.

Or worse buy from a dealer who had a "little mishap" a couple of years back and shipped a voided Ophiophagus hannah to a keeper who requested a venomous one. makes you wonder if someone else didn't recieve a venomous Ophiophagus hannah when they thought they were getting a venomoid. And when confronted with this information the dealer did nothing more than reply "Oh well"..

Originally Posted by morti

We are currently living in a time when there are more laws concerning reptiles being passed. In some states, like Kentucky for instance, there is no provision for licensing responsible keepers to keep these animals. Even if I wanted a Gaboon viper, I couldn’t have one. In the future, it may be an interesting proposition to speak with legislators and seek permission to keep venomoid snake with proper paperwork. While most states consider venomoid snakes to be the same as venomous, I feel that this is simply because they have no knowledge of the issue. Perhaps that could, in the future, be another justification for venomoid snakes.

No it isn't because they have no knowledge of the venomoid process. they know a venomoid bred to yet another venomoid makes some rather pretty venomous offspring. Being a venomoid is not a genetic trait and cannot be bred out to show said trait. It has to be done by a human. So the whole legislation issue wouldn't fly or hold water anywhere.

[JuliusSqueezer]

The cytotoxins in snake venom aid in digestion. How well they do without this aid is debatable and grossly unstudied. Does it affect their quality of life? In many cases it kills them. The mortality rate is high. Some voiders claim it's very low. Of course they do. It's their livelyhood. But the fact is, it's very high. One of the seedier voiders, Bruce from Carolina Reptile exchange left a bunch of freshly butchered dead mambas in the trashcan at one of the shows after they died at the show. He also is the same guy that mailed someone a gaboon viper that was supposed to be in tact to a collector that did not want a void. The snake died a couple of days after arrival, out of suspicion and curiosity, he checked inside the mouth and found sutures! When he contacted Bruce they figured out that Bruce had mixed up the packages and the in tact still very hot gaboon was sent to a customer that thought he was buying a void...and had been walking around for 3 days with a hot adult gaboon around his neck showing it off. Pretty dumb even with a void but this IS the typical customer for this market.

[CraigC]

You know, all this talk about having it done by a licensed vet is well and good. Forget the arguments on both sides for any other reason, pro or con. Imagine the cost of the surgery done with proper methods, then figure who in the hobby market would pay those prices added on to the price of the snake.

Now for the real kicker, which should make the pet trade situation moot. Get a list of exotic reptile vets in this country and send them a letter asking if they would be willing to do this surgery so that the voided animals can be distributed in the pet trade. Now go ask those likely to sell these voids, if they are willing to have one of the vets on the very short list you got from the letters, do the surgery and pay for it, given the chance that the snake might not survive.

Pro or con, I don't think anyone debating voids, disagrees that the surgery should be done properly. I have no idea what a vet would charge to do the proceedure, but I doubt that it would be less than $500.00. Economics probably dictate that the pet trade void seller isn't willing to pay that kind of money.

Craig

[JuliusSqueezer]

There is no market for it for anyone who is genuinely interested in the species.

Education? What is to learn from them? Schools won't let you in with hots? Then you don't bring voids either since the idea is to treat them as hot at all times right? The game warden guy practicing with a void is no more gut wrenching than training with a coachwhip or a cornsnake. If he knows it's a void, he won't have the adrenaline factor to deal with and any training is out the window when confronted with a real hot anyway. There is NO substitution for proper training. There are NO shortcuts. It's funny kind of. You NEVER hear of properly trained hot keepers waking up one day and saying...hmm I want a void. It just doesn't happen. The only people that want them are people that want to have an impressive animal but don't have the patience or dedication to actually learn how to keep them. If the risk is so great...the world is not short of hot keepers. The world does not need you to keep cobras. The cobras don't need you. You don't need them.

The only cases I have ever heard of where someone who is to the best of my knowledge at least experienced at keeping venomous and later opted for voids is NERD. I have no idea how proper since I've never heard or seen the facility but I suspect their swing to the rotten side of ven keeping was so they could do "cool" stuff like this...



and let kids do this...



and this...



Too many people are too quick to ok voids for "education" without first asking what exactly the message is you are educating the public with. Personally if I want to learn something about venomous snakes or have my kids learn about them, I not only want but I demand to be taught by someone who knows what they are doing. Voids scream of shortcutting someone's education, training, experience level, RESPECT...or they want to show boat. Clearly not someone I want educating me or mine.

[bcfos1]

Brett is 100% correct on the myth of using a venomoid as a "training snake" to ready one's self for the real deal. If you know it isn't dangerous you become placid with it and start taking risks. Such risks would include but not be limited to not wearing eye protection when dealing with a venomoid spitter species (hey it's a void it can't spit anyways right). You get in that habbit and get a real spitter and the next thing you know you are in a world of hurt. Those little buggers are marksmen with their venom and aim directly at the eyes. Or you have a gaboon and get in the habbit of "tailing" your voided gaboon. Get a real one and find out how fast that seemingly slow thick bodied snake can strike. And factor in their strike range is pretty much 360 degree's. This would lead you to a one way ticket to the Darwin Awards.

From my own personal experience I just ponied up and bought a full on venomous instead of a void to train myself correctly. Granted that first venomous species I bought had what is considered a "mild" venom, but it was still an exotic and there is no known antivenom made for it. That kept me well aware of the snake's behavior and habbits which allowed me to "step it up" some the next purchase and so on and so forth. Yet I will to this day freely admit there are a couple of species of venomous I am not ready to take on. Yet some people will keep a voided rattler and think after dealing with that they are ready for some fast moving elapids like the dendro species. That right there is really using their brain I tell you...

[sarecho7280]

Originally Posted by bcfos1

Brett is 100% correct on the myth of using a venomoid as a "training snake" to ready one's self for the real deal. If you know it isn't dangerous you become placid with it and start taking risks. Such risks would include but not be limited to not wearing eye protection when dealing with a venomoid spitter species (hey it's a void it can't spit anyways right). You get in that habbit and get a real spitter and the next thing you know you are in a world of hurt. Those little buggers are marksmen with their venom and aim directly at the eyes. Or you have a gaboon and get in the habbit of "tailing" your voided gaboon. Get a real one and find out how fast that seemingly slow thick bodied snake can strike. And factor in their strike range is pretty much 360 degree's. This would lead you to a one way ticket to the Darwin Awards.
From my own personal experience I just ponied up and bought a full on venomous instead of a void to train myself correctly. Granted that first venomous species I bought had what is considered a "mild" venom, but it was still an exotic and there is no known antivenom made for it. That kept me well aware of the snake's behavior and habbits which allowed me to "step it up" some the next purchase and so on and so forth. Yet I will to this day freely admit there are a couple of species of venomous I am not ready to take on. Yet some people will keep a voided rattler and think after dealing with that they are ready for some fast moving elapids like the dendro species. That right there is really using their brain I tell you...

but most of earth is trained for potentially lethal things with non-lethal methods aren't they?

flight simulators, driving simulators, the military uses simulations as does NASA.

in football practice the QB will wear a "don't hit me" jersey, etc.

for it to be such a flawed principle, it sure is a heavily utilized principle.

[bcfos1]

Originally Posted by megascops-osio

but most of earth is trained for potentially lethal things with non-lethal methods aren't they?
flight simulators,.

To keep someone from crashing a 30 million dollar jet.

Originally Posted by megascops-osio

driving simulators,

For entertainment and to keep some teen from making their parents insurance skyrocket.

Originally Posted by megascops-osio

the military uses simulations as does NASA.

To keep billions of dollars worth of equipment from being "trashed".

Originally Posted by megascops-osio

in football practice the QB will wear a "don't hit me" jersey, etc.

To keep them healthy for the big game and avoid injury.

Originally Posted by megascops-osio

for it to be such a flawed principle, it sure is a heavily utilized principle.

Flawed when you think it will help you better deal with venomous. Not so flawed when you are trying to save millions if not billions in replacement equipment and keep a QB healthy in order to beat the spread.

[SoberGuy]

The point of simulators or safe scenarios is to ensure the health and safety of all involved. Removing glands and ducts to ensure safety is putting half the parties in jeopardy. Let's assume it's done by a vet in a sterile environment. There's still the risk of infection, problems with anasthesia (sp?), potential feeding issues, and many other risks. In none of the scenarios listed in the posts above is anything sacrificed for safety. In this one, an animal is altered. Plain and simple.

[bcfos1]

Everyone wants to play "Let's assume it's done by a vet in a sterile environment".. It isn't and 9 times out of 10 it won't be. Find a vet who will willing do this elective surgery then we can assume the above.