Although we've certainly come across
prosthetics with names
similar to that of a fun-loving canine, we don't believe we've ever seen a pup actually become the receipiant of one. Nevertheless, the Surrey-based Belgian Shepherd (named Storm) had to undergo a leg amputation due to an agreesive tumor, but rather than allowing it to live out its life minus a limb, Noel Fitzpatrick decided to operate further. Now, Storm has reportedly become the "world's first pet to be fitted with a prosthetic paw," and moreover, the device has actually been installed in a manner that will allow skin to "grow into the metal." Best of all, the veterianarian hopes that "it will act as a model for human amputees," and if this approach gains traction, it could provide hope for humans in the future "without feet or hands."
[Via
Shiny Shiny]
posted Jul 20th 2007 10:15PM
When I saw that I though the upper pic was a human and that the dog's skin was placed in the prosthetic...lol, well, thank not it was not.
This has been on UK news for the past 3 days! Please, for a change, pick up on something quickly! And as for the prosthetic paw, i think its great! :D P.S. Is there no sort of username-checking thing on engadget? Ive seen some comments posted by 'Simon' (not me!).
just noticed this one: 'due to an agreesive tumor', you might want to change that.
also noticed 'veterianarian' and 'receipiant'. *rolls eyes*
and then I descended into a pit of self-loathing after re-reading these and realizing what a pain in the ass I'd become.
But then I felt much better knowing that some opiniated asshole bothered to reply to what was after all not even related to the subject of the post. And 'Simon again'? That's lame. Get a freakin imagination.
Why don't you just learn to shut up?
Why dont you mind your own business? Oh yeah, because you want to be 'that guy', the one who 'saved the post from the evil spellcheck monster Simon'. You couldnt leave this page without leaving a comment trying to act big. And i dont see why i should get all this shit just for pointing out some errors in the post that shouldnt have been included in the first place. It seems it is you and 'simon again' with the problem, not me.
if you find spelling mistakes, good for you but you dont need to post them because like me and everyone else, just wants to read the article. It's not like oh dear god, the author forgot to put an "s" in!!
If this article was already in another site then skip past it and keep your OMG comments to your self
Back to topic: i think might a little bit to much for a dog but whatever.
Oh look, its another one... Why waste your time replying to me? Other than the fact it gets your comment higher on the page theres no benefit to anyone. And as far as finding spelling mistakes goes, its a good idea to let someone know so that it can be changed so it is correct, no?
There must be hundreds of commenters, how can we tell if you're an oldbie or a newbie? In either case, go back to gaia online until you can learn to chat with the big boys.
the 'big boys'? hahahahahahahahahaha well i must say i think your attitude is...oh wait i think i hear an ice-cream van YAY... *runs off*
Eli Vance!
Hahaha!
I visited the comment section of this article just to see if anyone mentioned the similarity between this and Eli's prosthetic leg.
I must me psychic...
I know I'll get ripped for this, but I have to say it. It's a dog!! I love animals and I want a dog very bad (have to wait for now), but dogs are not people. This is just overkill.
As the saying goes: Dogs are people too, y'know! :P
As the vet said, it provides an excellent testbed for human recipients. Better to test it on a dog first (not that I love the idea of animal testing). Providing this treatment to a dog isn't denying it to a human, and may speed up the process of getting human patients this kind of technology. Everyones a winner!
Very good point Mikey, hadn't thought of it that way.
So, would you rather kill your dog than try to help it, if you have the means?
i think the real question is:
shouldn't the dog have the choice if it wants prosthesis or not?
Shaggy: Hey Scoob, you want to get a prosthesis after we chop off your tumor infected foot?
Scooby: Ry ron't row raggy. Mrrrr, ro-ray.
Sounds like a plan to me :-)
Uhm, I saw a dog on E-Vet Interns that had two prosthetic limbs. So I don't think this is the "world's first pet to be fitted with a prosthetic paw."
YUP! Saw that too...think we have them beat..damn brits! LOL
I don't think they're claiming to be the first to fit prosthetics to a dog (we've all seen those pics of dogs with wheels for feet from AGES ago).
It's all to do with the technique. The honeycomb mesh allows new skin to grow over the prosthesis.
So it's engadgets (mis)quote...again. ;)
a dog is a damn dog. back in the day we would just pop a damn cap in the dogs head an that would be the end of it go out get a new dog. those were the days.
this is why people cant handle there pets they think of there pets as people.
Yah and back in the day if we didn't agree with you we'd plunge our rapier up to its hilt in your gut. Good thing it isn't back in the day and we've become a tad, just a tad mind you, more civilized.
Whatever you say, Mr. Vick.
Niec speeling.
Well, it sounds like the vet has a new idea for how to do (human) prosthetics and rather than experimenting on animals by chopping off a perfectly good foot, he's using it on a dog that lost a paw. That sounds like a great way to do animal testing to me!
However, I'm not sure that a prosthetic paw so that a dog will have 4 legs rather than 3 is all that useful. Most dogs take losing a leg or paw in stride and have no problem running around on 3 legs. It takes more adjustment for them to get used to wearing boots, so I imagine that a prosthetic paw would be a bigger adjustment for a dog than having 3 legs.
Wow. A dog with automail.
Arakawa got there first, din'she?
Very groovy nonetheless.
wtf?
I know the owner of Storm - she'd much rather see him live a little longer than die painfully of cancer. Storm was also featured in the Sunday Express a week ago. Bill.
I know someone whose dog is unable to walk, so they put the dog in a baby carriage and go on walks so the dog can get outside, see things, and be seen.
Some people really love their pets, and that is fine with me.
I think that it is wonderful that such developments are being made in the field of prosthethics; a proper way to fuse skin to metal is a giant leap.
However, I find it selfish for an owner to spend the kind of money that it would cost to have this prosthetic for a dog. I wish that the site would post how much it cost for the dog's owners or insurance company, if it covers pets. Probably around five thousand dollars, or more, considering some of the brand new technology involved with the device.
Think about how many vaccines or other types of health care could be supplied to REAL HUMAN BEINGS for the price of replacing the dog's foot. I'm entirely for what happened in this case because the knowledge learned from it will benefit the unfortunate PEOPLE who have suffered an amputation, yet an actual market for spending this kind of money (that could be much more practically spent) on PETS is rather disturbing. (sorry, run-on sentence.)
"Storm's owners, Francesca and Derek Taylor, had the foot amputated rather than having him put down."
That's a little more reasonable to me, IMHO.
I guess, if someone actually has the kind of money to spend on getting a state-of-the-art prosthetic limb for their dog, I'd hope that they would make a donation of an equal amount towards research for human diseases.
TL;DR
Damn cool technology, lets see it put towards the interests of people.
It sure is easy to spend other people's money, isn't it?
Indeed.
Point taken.