When Alexandra Senter’s beloved rescue pug, Montgomery, was diagnosed with a devastating cancer, she did everything in her power to give him a fighting chance.
In February 2024, after returning from several months abroad, Senter and her husband were shocked to hear that their pet had collapsed. Rushed to the veterinary clinic, Monty required an emergency blood transfusion, followed by surgery to remove his spleen due to severe internal bleeding.
Despite the success of the surgery, the diagnosis was grim—Monty had hemangiosarcoma, a rare and aggressive cancer that attacks the blood vessels in dogs. Vets gave him a life expectancy of just two weeks. But rather than accept the prognosis, Senter sought out a veterinary oncology centre, where Monty began chemotherapy in an effort to extend his life.
In her search for advice, Senter joined an online support group for pet owners dealing with similar diagnoses. It was here that she faced a difficult and unexpected challenge: a growing faction of members who questioned her decision to pursue chemotherapy in favor of “holistic” treatments, which they argued were more natural and less toxic.
This divide highlighted a broader issue—one that extends beyond veterinary care and into the larger cultural debates surrounding medical science. Just as the anti-vaccination movement during the pandemic undermined trust in evidence-based medicine, the wellness movement in pet care often dismisses scientifically backed treatments as “unnatural” or “cruel,” despite their proven effectiveness.
For Senter, the controversy around Monty’s treatment underscored the increasing skepticism toward medical professionals. The debate mirrored societal trends seen in recent years, where alternative therapies—often unproven and costly—are being promoted as viable substitutes for science-backed medicine.
However, Senter argues that chemotherapy, despite its reputation, does not necessarily come with the severe side effects many associate with cancer treatment. According to experts, fewer than 25% of dogs undergoing chemotherapy experience significant negative effects. Monty, nearly nine months after his initial diagnosis, is still thriving. He has not lost his appetite, does not show signs of lethargy, and has kept his playful demeanor, proving the treatment’s effectiveness for him.
Despite the positive outcome, the cost of Monty’s treatment has been significant. With pre-existing conditions making him ineligible for pet insurance, Senter and her husband were forced to pay out-of-pocket for his care. While holistic treatments may be marketed as more “natural” alternatives, they can often be just as expensive as conventional treatments, sometimes costing pet owners hundreds of dollars for products that lack rigorous scientific validation.
Senter acknowledges the tough financial burden placed on families, particularly in the current economic climate. However, she believes that pet owners deserve access to reliable, evidence-based information when making critical decisions about their animals’ health. As with human healthcare, the key to responsible pet care lies in balancing informed choices with compassion.
Ultimately, Senter says, her decision to pursue chemotherapy for Monty was about “buying time” and ensuring that her pet lived every day as comfortably and joyfully as possible. Her message is clear: pet owners must be able to make informed decisions, free from ideological bias and driven by compassion, not unfounded online opinions.
The journey of Monty’s treatment serves as a reminder of the importance of expert advice and the need for scientifically validated care, not only in human healthcare but in the care of our pets as well.
Related topics:
Border Collie Star Ash Barky Welcomes Pups to Queensland Farm
Two Dogs, Two Worlds: A Week with a Pugalier
The Fruit Dogs Can Only Eat With Caution: Cherries
