crazyfroglady said:
Atleast you can admit there's a possibility. And what information has came forward from ED. The only information I know of is the information that was posted by k412. For example the med examiner report and the Herpetologist. They both said the frog was sick. I'm going with the experts on this one not some guy who doesn't own a whites who thinks the frog was healthy. IMO the frog was sick. If you don't like it because my opinion doesn't match up with yours I don't know what to tell you.
My problem is not that our opinions do not match up. I am quite alright with that. The problem comes when you treat your opinion like it's a fact, and begin accusing someone of something without any real evidence.
I know what the herpetologist and necropsy both stated, but I have a problem with them for the following reasons:
1) They both state illness as the cause of death, but they don't state the same illness. IMO, that shouldn't add up to equal 100% positive that the frog was sick.
2) Any necropsy done on a frog should come with the disclaimer that it may not be completely accurate. When taken into consideration that the frog was initially examined by a first vet, then shipped to CA, then examined a second time a couple weeks later, the results should be even less so.
3) The herpetologists claims are based ONLY upon her personal reading of this necropsy. Her opinion has less direct information about this case than someone that read this entire thread.
4) The herpetologist's claim included the opinion that the hepatitis was highly contagious, but also neglects to mention what was causing the inflammation of the liver. It seems that either she assumed that the hepatitis mentioned was referring to signs of the virus, or she just forgot to mention what she believed caused the liver inflammation. The fact that acute hepatitis of the liver appeared to be a minor detail in the necropsy, and considering what poor condition the body was in when it was received (every organ was autolyzed, ulcerations and abrasions, the original vet discovered that she was a female, did she cut into the frog as well?) I find it a stretch that somebody could conclude that hepatitis was the cause of death and that the illness is very contagious.
This situation isn't as much of a problem because Ed is a jerk, plain and simple. He hasn't treated a single person with an ounce of respect this entire time. I'm sure he, in one way or another, deserves all of this negative attention. But what if it was someone else? What if the exact same situation occurred with someone who generally believed that his frogs were healthy, was genuinely sorry that the frog died, but did not believe it was his fault and simply couldn't afford to give refunds when he was not to blame? Would you be saying the same things? Would you be working to spread the word that he sells sick frogs when the evidence just isn't there to back it up?
I'm backing up Ed, not because I like him, or because I think he's just a nice guy with a bad rap. Hell, I wouldn't buy from him EVER. I'm defending him, per se, because I believe that nobody should be able to just throw accusations around. I'm working to begin breeding snakes, and hopefully in a couple years, I'll have my first clutches to offer. Now, I'm sure I'll be able to offer better customer service than Ed, but what if something unfortunate does happen and I'm not to blame? Should I have to endure accusations that threaten my very modest business when I've fulfilled my TOS? Should I have to undergo severe financial loss just because, very unfortunately and through no fault of my own, one person's experience with me didn't live up to expectations?
and floats around this forum like nothing matters, and that, if they ignore things long enough, or go away for a little while Everything is OK again. Screw that. and screw the lot of ya. To the trash where you belong. 
