u/nightmareonrainierav

Hey folks. Just got back from taking my cat to the ICU and an afternoon of soul-searching alone in the park.

I got back from a trip out of town the other day, and she stayed with my mother. She wasn't eating much, and that had me worried and resolved to get her back to the vet ASAP. We snuggled on the couch all day yesterday. And then I woke up to her seizing this morning.

My last post here was in the end of June, when I asked about starting on amlodipine. After a series of very frustrating and conflicting vet visits on longer-term prognosis (one vet saying things were massively improved after a UTI, another saying things were looking bad, but also not), I went ahead with it knowing I'd be switching practices at some time. Meanwhile, the current vet was near impossible to schedule anything with.

She was doing great all summer. She was due for a biannual while I was gone, but put that off until I got back—in fact, I was dialing their number when she started seizing. (And of course, found out they recently ended weekend hours).

I just feel immensely guilty I didn't keep a better eye on this the last few months. I feel guilty I didn't get on the ball switching vets sooner. I feel guilty that, when I got news she wasn't eating much last week, not urging my mother to take her in.

On the other hand, it frustrates me to no end that our vet gave me absolutely long-term game plan or even indications to watch out for: I've never had a cat before, let alone one for 15 years, and I have no idea where the line of normal aging and medically concerning behaviors is. Especially considering she's been the picture of health until this year.

The doctor today was very...frank. It isn't looking good. Dehydration, electrolytes crashed, kidney values off the charts. Options were a 48-hour hold pushing fluids and nutrients, at a cost that made my heart skip, or call it a day.

Honestly, I wasn't ready to make that decision, and I was honest about that—the money isn't the concern, but I couldn't live with myself unless I knew I exhausted all options, but of course not ones that would prolong suffering just or my indecisions sake.

I asked what could have caused this and what I could have done. Not eating much was the first sign, the doc said, but sometimes kidney cats just crash. Or it could just be a bad UTI throwing things out of whack.

That was the glimmer of hope I needed. She had one back in January, and once we got through that, her kidney values were better than the prior month's baseline.

I asked if cost were no object, what she would do for their own pet—100% absolutely worth a shot, if it's not going to bankrupt you. Fortunately not the case for me. It hurts knowing how many aren't fortunate for that decision. On the other hand, my partner having worked in the vet field, I've heard too many stories of people throwing a lot of money at an unsalvageable prognosis.

I'm not putting too much faith in it. I know the chances are slim, and if she pulls through, it's not buying a lot of time. My partner's cat went through the same, and it got her a year with him. That defied a lot of odds. I know I'm delaying the inevitable here, but hell, even just a week where I can make sure she's comfortable and passes peacefully is worth all the money in the world to me.

I kinda made my peace with all this in the last 10 hours. It'll hurt if she doesn't make it through the night, but I know I tried.

I'm just thankful I've had her make it through the year fine. It's been a really rough one, with both my parents battling cancer. I'm glad my mother got to take care of her one last time. I'm glad she waited for me to come back so we could snuggle one more day.

And thanks to everyone being here. I know a lot of you have gone through this.

edit: the cat tax

https://preview.redd.it/owwvforu8cth1.jpg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aa892ff0d38c213087e09b22e6e7aab3495b0837

(archived/non-paywall link)

And I'm fatigued, man. Burned myself out writing my legislators last year (and all I got to show for it was getting automatically signed up for a bunch of gun-control newsletters).

I know this sub's been riding high on a bunch of favorable court cases and the prospect of Viramontes next year, and I'm happy for y'all fam, but I've been waiting for an article like this taking the temp of what's in store at the state level here in Washington.

As expected, doesn't look great.

For context and those that don't know, the tragic shooting mentioned was a shootout at a major food festival here in Seattle that left 3 dead (including one shooter), and 4 injured; what's trickled out is that it was likely a gang dispute among two groups of juveniles armed with switched Polymer80s. At least one suspect had an extensive firearm violations history, which has brought to light the state's 'five strikes' before charges law for juveniles.

There's been a lot of ink spilled over how poorly the city and various officials handled it (most notably, zero communication of half a day save for a short tweet about a 'mass shooting') but also, equally expected, upcoming potential laws to prevent this.

A quick rundown of what looks to be in store:

• More 'gun free zones' with force of law, which may or may not have CPL exemptions. Last year a bill to add anywhere 'children may be present' died in committee.
• A confusing vehicle safe-storage law, that requires lockboxes for handguns but soft cases for long guns
• Removing theft/burglary as an exemption to our safe-storage law, meaning you are held criminally liable for firearms stolen from your own home
• More ammo taxes (we already have a 5¢/round one here in Seattle)
• 3D printing algorithm laws, which the sponsor says is 'technology that exists'
• Some lukewarm support for reversing lax juvenile sentencing laws
• support for restoring violence-intervention funding (which my neighborhood, and even the cops, has been big mad about cutting)

Notably absent is any discussion of what may happen should the AWB fall, but perhaps we're a bit early for that.

Lot of thoughts on this, and I won't turn this into another long ramble. I'll say it's frustrating that the tactic is, as usual, "make the already illegal thing illegal-er, but also don't prosecute things". Equally so that nobody gives much thought that expanding 'gun-free zones' means, well, more people are going to leave them in their car. Or just chance it anyway. Because prosecution is a crapshoot.

I get that everyone has a wildly different idea of what so-called 'common-sense' laws are, but the lack of logic and consistency is perpetually baffling.

For context: you may have heard since it made national news, there was a shootout at a major food festival that left a suspect and two bystanders dead and several others injured. It's suspected to be a gang-related altercation, though that wasn't reported for a day or two; now all the thinkpieces are coming out. The ST's comments sections are lot less MAGA-fied and vitriolic than our local Sinclair outlet, but the comments are doozies coming from both sides of this issue.

(and a little more context: the Bite of Seattle is one of the best-attended events in the city, on the city-owned former World's Fair grounds that is a de facto park.)

This shook me up a bit as I had been planning to go and decided against it last minute; obviously, a lot of folks are devastated, whether they lost a loved one or not.

As I read these and think about it, I'm seeing a lot of contradictions and irony in people's responses. For one, that this has gotten nonstop coverage, but the gang shooting in a crowded nightlife district two days earlier that left multiple bystanders hit was a blip. Or the bus I was waiting for after a World Cup game getting shot up, killing a passenger.

There's some irony that while people have been (rightfully) apprehensive over city-owned security cameras and security-theater overreach, the same crowd is outraged by the lack of city-owned cameras and security checkpoints at this site.

There's also the messy politics of youth violence intervention, which also has flown under the radar in the news. But that circles back to my first point; why is there more outrage when a shooting suspect is (as initially thought) 'random,' but not when it's teenagers killing each other? Why are we more outraged by a lack of 'gun free zones' than alarmed at how much gun crime is committed by juveniles?

Personally as someone who's worked at major events before I'm a little surprised there wasn't private security at this one. But I don't want to live in a world where every daily activity involves security screening. OTOH, as someone who has witnessed gun violence firsthand, do I want people to go about their daily lives in fear of that.

Got a lot of thoughts on this one. I've said it on this sub a lot, but at least around here, it seems to me the loudest antigun voices are those further on the left end of things, and it shows in those comments. It's frustrating to see people still saying we need to ban 'assault weapons' and 'high capacity magazines (which we did years ago, and while it's finally on the decline, violent crime has never been higher than it has post-ban). It's frustrating to see this discussion reduced to ideological arguments at both extremes. And it's frustrating to not feel like one can push back with rational arguments without being accused of being 'pro-murder,' or heartless, or the like. And honestly I do feel a little guilty thinking about how this will supercharge anti-gun measures in the next legislative session while people are mourning this event.

Got an SP01 that just shoots like a dream, and unlike the consensus of friends (but seemingly shared here), I much prefer the stock rubber grips to Al/brass. Grippy enough, but the shape is pretty damn near perfect.

However, because apparently I'm not hipster enough owning two CZs, I've been looking for wood grip panels. Nils are beautiful but a bit beyond my budget. After sorting through a lot of junk online, I found (local business!) Cool Hand has a few models tucked in among all their G10 options, and ordered them.

Oof. they're well made, but thin. Very, very thin. They look pretty but definitely a no.

To save myself ordering a million different sets, anyone know a manufacturer doing wood panels with those sweet, sweet curves?

New here and was reccomended this sub from a friend who lost their kidney cat last year. TIA.

tl;dr: elderly cat with mid-stage kidney disease, getting conflicting info from the vet wanting to start amlodipine; right time for treatment or should I get an alternate opinion?

I'll try not to let this turn into a rant of the state of the vet industry right now, but my longtime clinic has had a lot of personnel retire/move over the last year, and I've been stuck a few times with one doc with the bedside manner and communication skills of a rock.

My cat's a spry age 18, diagnosed with bordering Stage II/III CKD a year ago after a pre-oral-surgery blood panel. (she did well and now we call her the '3-hole-punch'). discussion at the time was she was a little underweight likely due to a broken tooth, and just to keep monitoring and be vigilant with water intake. Suggested some OTC low-phosphorus food in the meantime.

We've since done labwork a couple times, once as a followup last summer, and the rest following a mild UTI and URI earlier this year. Kidney values consistently going down, weight ticking up. One vet we saw said things certainly looked promising.

The last of those visits was rather urgent, and very stressful, involving dragging my coughing kitty on a rush-hour bus ride from hell in to the vet. Of course they wanted to do a BP check, and of course it...didn't look so good. Even the techs were a bit skeptical and suggested we try again at the next wellness visit.

I wasn't entirely surprised when I got home and the vet emailed sounding a little concerned, but I was a little shocked when she said she was worried about my cat's 'rapid decline and dramatic weight loss' when, to my eyes, the attached charts showed just the opposite (heck, she's 1lb heavier than last year). Said to 'consider' a laundry-list of prescriptions—food, BP, anti-nausea, appetite stimulant, sub-Q fluids, hydration therapy, and, strangely, arthritis medication. I couldn't get ahold of the doctor for a bit, and then got swamped with my parents' urgent health issues (ironically with one of them having the same experience!) and put it off for about a month.

And then we were back yesterday, unexpectedly before a scheduled visit, for what turned out to be a constipation false alarm. Got the same doctor, who seemed less than pleased I hadn't gone forward with all the medications from the last visit. I tried to bring up my lack of understanding re: the last communications, and her only real response was 'CKD doesn't go away, you're going to to have to put her on these eventually and it may as well be sooner rather than later.' I got sent home with what looks to be a year's supply of prescription food, and bafflingly, only two tablets of amlodipine.

So here's where I'm at: I'm not under any delusion CKD gets better. I'm totally fine with the prescription diet and Mirataz, dealing with an already picky cat. But the BP meds concern me just a little, between reading some of the side effects (weight loss, loss of appetite—she's picky and tiny, and any weight loss is a concern), trying to understand the reasoning versus the quantitative data, and apprehension over going on something that needs to be taken absolutely every day at the same time.

Is starting on this something I should be concerned about, and is it worth trying to seek out a second opinion (if I can actually find someone to, haha)? I don't think I'm doctor-shopping until I get an answer I like—I just haven't gotten any explanation with regards to my cat's specific diagnostic values, just reams of general CKD info pamphlets. I'm also concerned about starting in on something that I'll almost immediately need a refill of from a clinic that is really hard to get ahold of.

TIA and appreciate it if you made it this far!