Five vets operate on sedated 17-stone tiger for ‘tricky' paw operation
Tschuna, a 15-year-old Amur tiger, underwent the procedure after keepers noticed she was limping.
Head of carnivores Bex Brown said the team were able to identify the issue by asking Tschuna to stand up and put her paws on the mesh.
Vets then injected Tschuna with a short-lasting general anaesthetic to ease the procedure. Staff said she is now "getting back to her playful self".
The operation, which took less than 15 minutes, involved vets gently clipping off a claw on Tschuna's front left paw to stop the risk of infection and remove the discomfort.
'Tiger anaesthetics are particularly tricky, so it was a quick procedure to ensure everyone involved, including Tschuna, was safe,' said Dr Charlotte MacDonald, director of animals at the park.
'Tschuna came back round relatively quickly and should have a speedy recovery, though she probably has a bit of a headache from the anaesthetic.
'We're keeping her in the house at first to recover fully and then she'll hopefully be back to her playful self again very quickly.'
Ms Brown said: 'Any anaesthetic there would always be an element of nerves, it's something we always want to try and avoid, but trying to trim it would have caused her pain, she wouldn't have allowed us to do that. Leaving it would have been painful and uncomfortable for her.
'Also, because we don't sedate them often at all, it was a good opportunity to give her a full MOT while she was asleep.'
Tschuna arrived at the park in 2013 as part of an international breeding programme to help support the species, also known as Siberian tigers, which came close to extinction as numbers dwindled to around 30.
She gave birth to three cubs at the park in 2015 – one of them, Hector, has become a father at Cleveland Zoo in the US – and it is hoped she will partner with three-year-old male Altai, who arrived at the park earlier this year, to produce more cubs as part of the European Endangered Species Programme.
Ms Brown said Tschuna is 'a princess', adding: 'If we present her food she often puts the food on her other paw rather than off the ground.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
.png%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Poll of the day: Do you think resident doctors are fairly paid for the work they do?
Junior doctors are staging a walkout – but are they right to demand more pay? Talks between the British Medical Association (BMA) and the government have broken down, triggering a five-day strike starting on Friday and the threat of monthly walkouts until a deal is reached. The government has already awarded a 5.4 per cent pay rise this year, bringing salaries for foundation doctors to between £38,831 and £44,439, and up to £73,992 for those in specialist training. But the BMA argues this still falls short of where pay should be, after more than a decade of real-terms decline. It is calling for pay to rise to between £47,308 and £54,274 for foundation doctors, and up to £90,989 at the top end of specialist training – a 29 per cent increase phased in over time. Health Secretary Wes Streeting has called the strike 'completely unjustified' and says the current pay offer is fair. But the BMA insists current salaries don't reflect the demands of the job or the debt many junior doctors carry from medical school. The NHS Confederation warns that each 0.1 per cent pay rise across the service costs an extra £125 million a year, and with 75,000 junior doctors in England, meeting the BMA's request could run into the billions. So, are junior doctors being underpaid – or is their demand simply unaffordable?
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Almost 200,000 can claim huge state pension top-up after DWP error
Hundreds of thousands of parents are missing out on a retirement top up worth £5,000 on average as the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) admits it is struggling to reunite most with the money they are owed. An estimated 194,000 have been affected by the issue, which has seen their state pension being underpaid – or could in the future – due to a record-keeping issue which was no mistake of their own. The error relates to Home Responsibilities Protection (HRP), which was available between 1978 and 2010 for people in receipt of Child Benefit or with caring responsibilities. The scheme reduced the number of qualifying years a claimant needed for a basic state pension in retirement, meaning the amount of years spent in-work and paying national insurance. This was to account for their home-related responsibilities which made them less able to be in employment. Protection through HRP was meant to be applied automatically to those who claimed Child Benefit, with most claimants being mothers. However, the DWP says it noticed in 2021 that this had not happened in hundreds of thousands of cases, leading to underpayments worth £5,000 on average. But in its latest annual report, the department reduced the funds set aside for the repayments from £1.2bn to just £29.8 million – a deduction of over £1bn – conceding that it will not be able to rectify the issue in the near future. The report explains: 'Correcting HRP is inherently challenging. 'The number of people applying to correct their missing HRP has been low. Substantial numbers of people have not responded to government calls for them to apply to add missing HRP and the exercise has resulted in much lower activity levels.' Since autumn 2023, HMRC has issued over 370,000 letters to people who were potentially affected. However, during 2024/25, only 12,379 state pension underpayments were compensated, totalling around £104 million. In the year before this, it was just 419. In response to the low take-up, the DWP has decided to change the compensation scheme from a short-term repayment drive to an ongoing programme. This means those who are affected should face no time limit in claiming what they are owed, while the department saves considerable sums in the short-term. Anyone affected can retrospectively apply for HRP online or by post. For those who require more information, HMRC's national insurance helpline can be reached on 0300 200 3500. Former pensions minister Sir Steve Webb said: 'The DWP's latest report is a hammer blow to over 100,000 mothers who are receiving reduced state pensions because of errors on their National Insurance record. 'The Government's letter-writing campaign has been a dismal failure, and this was entirely predictable given its reliance on a complicated online claims process,' the LCP partner told The Telegraph. 'Although there will still be some ongoing publicity, the figures in the annual report are an admission that the Government itself does not expect these efforts to have much impact.' A government spokesperson said: 'We are determined to help people who have been left out of pocket as a result of historical errors which are no fault of their own. 'That's why we wrote directly to over 370,000 of those who were potentially affected and launched an online tool to help people check if they needed to claim. 'We carried out an extensive campaign to raise awareness of the issue and will continue regular communications to get people to check their National Insurance record.'
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
DIY health tests relied on by thousands could be delivering false results and putting lives at risk, major study reveals
Many DIY tests for the likes of high cholesterol, vitamin deficiency, fertility and prostate cancer are not fit for purpose, a study suggests. Researchers examined tests that patients can buy in supermarkets, pharmacies and shops which they then use at home. They found the checks risked giving users the wrong result and could delay diagnosis. Most of them recommended following-up with a doctor regardless of the result, prompting experts to question the point of using them in the first place. Scientists from the University of Birmingham are now calling for much tighter regulation of the sector, adding that the NHS may face additional demand after patients self-test. They said: 'In the absence of guidance from healthcare professionals, individuals might use tests inappropriately or without a clear understanding of the implications of the results. 'False positive test results can lead to unnecessary anxiety, increased healthcare usage, and additional costs, whereas false negative test results may delay appropriate treatment or engagement with screening programmes. 'Test errors can stem from inherent limitations in the accuracy of the test, as well as user-related issues such as sampling errors, incorrect processing, and difficulties in interpreting the results.' However, the team said that in the future home tests could have great potential for patient care. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said it would look at the findings. Self-testing is becoming increasingly popular and the UK market for self-tests is expected to reach £660million by 2030. Overall 30 self-tests costing £1.89 to £39.99 were included in the study, published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ). The tests covered 19 different conditions, including vitamin deficiency, blood sugar levels, cholesterol, thyroid function, prostate health, HIV, menopause and bowel cancer. Researchers said only eight of the 30 tests provided information about who should or should not use the test, while four specified the presence of symptoms. External packaging on fewer than half of the tests (14) included any statement about their accuracy. Meanwhile, 90 per cent of the tests recommended following up with a healthcare professional if results were positive or abnormal, while 47 per cent recommended this if the outcome was negative. Accuracy claims were made for 24 of the tests, including in pamphlets, and most (58 per cent) claimed a performance of at least 98 per cent accuracy, sensitivity or specificity. However, the researchers said evidence supporting accuracy claims was largely unavailable or did not provide sufficient information for people likely to purchase the tests. Professor Jon Deeks, from the University of Birmingham, said: 'A plethora of new health self-tests have emerged in recent years and are available to buy from many high street supermarkets and pharmacies in the UK. 'While these kits have been approved for sale, they are not subject to the same stringent regulations as pharmaceutical products. 'Our recent research raises concerns about the suitability, accuracy and usability of many of the self-testing products available that require users to sample, test and interpret results themselves. 'In some cases, it is unclear how accuracy claims are supported, and there is no requirement of manufacturers to share the evidence behind these claims.' Professor Deeks said the UK is looking at a 'new world' when it comes to self-testing, but there is more work to do to show claims made were robust. He said much of the literature contained with tests was 'not easy to understand', while some of the results could lead to a 'wrong diagnosis'. In one example, he said the self-tests for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, a marker of prostate health, were fixed at a certain concentration level. However, he said this depended on how old the patient was, adding 'if you're age 70 you need to have your PSA done at a very different level to when you're 20'. Professor Deeks added: 'Current regulations for the use of self-testing kits in a commercial setting are not adequately protecting consumers.' Dr Clare Davenport, clinical associate professor at the University of Birmingham, said: 'The wide range of off-the-shelf tests now available to the public are not endorsed by the NHS and evidence for their benefit is lacking. 'This is in contrast to well-established self-tests, such as pregnancy tests. 'We are worried that consumers concerned about their health and tempted by the convenience of buying a test over the counter may be harmed if they use these tests in the wrong way.' A spokesman for Suresign, which provides three of the self-tests studied, said: 'We find this blanket condemnation of a small range of home tests available to be unreasonable and unprofessional, since they admit they are content with many of those examined. 'This is not a clinical approach to a highly scientific subject. 'We are content our tests give the public access to healthcare screening not easily available with the NHS at the present time.' Joseph Burt, head of diagnostics and general medical devices at the MHRA, said the regulator is 'overhauling the medical device regulations to further strengthen standards'. He added: 'In the meantime, we strongly encourage anyone using a self-test to check for a CE or UKCA mark, read the instructions carefully, and seek medical advice if they're unsure about their result.'
