G
George
Guest
GIVING PILLS TO CATS AND DOGS MADE EASY
CATS:
1. Pick cat up and cradle it in the crook of your left arm as if holding
baby. Position right forefinger and thumb on either side of cat's mouth
and gently apply pressure to cheeks while holding pill in right hand. As
cat opens mouth pop pill into mouth. Allow cat to close mouth and swallow.
2. Retrieve pill from floor and cat from behind sofa. Cradle cat in left
arm and repeat process.
3. Retrieve cat from bedroom, and throw soggy pill away.
4. Take new pill from foil wrap, cradle cat in left arm -- holding rear
paws tightly with left hand. Force jaws open and push pill to
back of mouth with right forefinger. Hold mouth shut for a count of ten.
5. Retrieve pill from goldfish bowl and cat from top of wardrobe. Call
spouse from garden.
6. Kneel on floor with cat wedged firmly between knees, hold front and
rear paws. Ignore low growls emitted by cat. Get spouse to hold head
firmly with one hand while forcing wooden ruler into mouth. Drop pill
down ruler and rub cat's throat vigorously for 30-40 seconds.
7. Retrieve cat from curtain rail, get another pill from foil wrap. Make
note to buy new ruler and repair curtains. Carefully sweep shattered
figurines and vases from hearth and set to one side for gluing later.
8. Wrap cat in large towel and get spouse to lie on cat with head just
visible from below armpit. Put pill in end of drinking straw, force open
with pencil and blow down drinking straw.
9. Check label to make sure pill not harmful to humans, drink 1 beer to
take taste away. Apply Band-Aid to spouse's forearm and remove blood from
carpet with cold water and soap. Throw pieces of towel in garbage.
10. Retrieve cat from neighbor's shed. Get another pill. Open another
beer. Place cat in cupboard and close door onto neck to leave head
showing. Force mouth open with dessert spoon. Flick pill down throat
with elastic band.
11. Fetch screwdriver from garage and put cupboard door back on hinges.
Drink beer. Fetch bottle of scotch. Pour shot, drink. Apply cold compress
to cheek and check records for date of last tetanus shot. Apply whiskey
compress to cheek to disinfect. Toss back another shot. Throw T-shirt away
and fetch new one from bedroom.
12. Ring fire brigade to retrieve the cat from tree across the
road. Apologize to neighbor who crashed into fence while swerving to
avoid cat. Take last pill from foil wrap.
13. Tie the cat's front paws to rear paws with garden
twine and bind tightly to leg of dining room table, find heavy duty pruning
gloves from shed. Push pill into mouth followed by large piece of fillet
steak. Be rough about it. Hold head vertically and pour 2 pints of water
down throat to wash pill down. Pray vigorously while performing all steps.
14. Consume remainder of Scotch. Get spouse to drive you to the emergency
room, sit quietly while doctor stitches fingers and forearm and removes
pill remnants from right eye. Call furniture shop on way home to order
new table.
15. Arrange for ASPCA to collect mutant cat from hell and ring local pet
shop to see if they have any hamsters left.
DOGS:
1. Wrap pill in bacon.
"z" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Greg ([email protected]) wrote:
> Subject: Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about
> safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
>
> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >> >>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we
> spent less on >health
> >> >>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it?
> Terrible for >insurance
> >> >>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
> > >>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for
health
> > >>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>
> Americans are now spending over $5,000 per capita on healthcare, more
> than double what is spent in Canada, or any other country, and that's
> with like 40% of the people not belonging to any health plan. What
> makes you think we would 'spend *AT LEAST* that much in additional
> taxes'?
>
> > >>>> Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada
and Japan,
> > >>>> spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
everybody?
> > >>>Answer a question with a question. How does your state run health
care
> > >>>system cost less than the current private one?
>
> Because there are no expenses for HMO marketing, competing redundant
> HMO bureaucracies (if you think the government bureaucracy is bad
> you're not familiar with HMOs), huge executive salaries, dividends and
> profits for shareholders, money to cover investment losses (a big
> factor in the current sudden rise in insurance costs, or didn't you
> know that that's what insurance companies and HMOs do with your
> money?); because providers don't have to spend significant chunks of
> their highly expensive time filling out various and sundry varieties
> of reimbursement forms; because there are no random deliberate or
> accidental routine nonpayments of bills that should be paid, requiring
> a repeat of the reimbursement process; because a huge health plan has
> the market muscle to wrestle low charges from providers, who then
> charge correspondingly more for smaller plans and charge the maximum
> for individuals paying out of pocket. (Or did you have no idea the
> discount your health plan, if you have one, gets from the amount you
> see on your hospital bill?)
> Of course, that explains why Medicare gets the lowest rates in the US,
> and is one of the most successful plans in terms of patient
> satisfaction, as well as being the only health plan in the US whose
> members get care that's at or near the top rank of the industrialized
> nations. Ironic, because of course it is, of course, state-run
> healthcare.
>
> > >> Because all the examples we have of state-run health care say it
would.
> > >> Economy of scale, negotiation for lower prices, preventative care
instead of
> > >> waiting until the person becomes sick -- all these and other factors.
> > >
> > >So your answer is we would save money through the reduced quality of
care.
> > >I suggest you gain some experience with how government price controls
> > >have a negative impact on care, at least with regards to how it works
> > >in the USA.
> > >
> > >
> > Again, I refer you to all the data which shows people in Canada and
western
> > Europe are healthier and live longer.
>
> >And naturally this has absolutely nothing to do with lifestyle, food
> choices,
> >relative scarcity of obesity, and regular excercise as part of the
> daily
> >routine. Nope, it must only because of state run health care.
>
> Well, yeah, good to see it's dawning on you.
> The famous JAMA 7/26/2000 paper points out that the US doesn't have
> such bad habits as to put it at the bottom of the barrel for health
> care outcomes; we're the 5th best and 3rd best for smoking for females
> and males, 5th best for alcohol consumption, fifth best in consumption
> of animal fats and third best for cholesterol level, for instance. And
> deaths from unnatural causes, like getting shot or car accidents, are
> not included. So, if we rank at the bottom of healthcare measures of
> quality without ranking at the bottom for lifestyle causes, it's hard
> to escape the implication that we are just not getting the best or
> most appropriate care, regardless of price.
> But enough about me and what I know; what evidence do you have that
> you are getting the best care in the industrialized world, or even
> average care for the industrialized world, other than your deep-seated
> belief that anything else would be just too unthinkable to even
> consider?
