You take a day off and what happens? You come home feeling even more tired and spend hours in the doctors waiting to be seen just to emerge without any drugs and yet another appointment!
While I was taking a tiny holiday, an article in our October issue seems to have whipped up even more of a storm than we were experiencing in our short break in windswept Northern France!
Our article on the KC's spat with the GSD folk made the front page of Dog World. And that front page article made the KC so annoyed they're put an open letter to Dog World up on their website. And that has made Dog World so annoyed they're responded with this on their website!
It all boils down to did Ronnie Irving ever threaten to expel breed clubs who don't co-operate with KC health reforms? Ronnie is saying via the KC website that categorically he did not.
I obviously need more paracetamol to get my head around it as the original KC statement published in Dog World didn't seem to say this and now everyone is getting very angry. Although, to explain, Ronnie was also out of the country when the story first broke (and no he wasn't with me in Le Touquet!)
I'm going to speculate now, and it is just that just in case it strays into print and becomes another scrap!
Did the KC enjoy looking a bit tough to the likes of Professor Bateson in the hope that it impressed him that they're actually a very safe pair of hands unafraid of taking action on meaty issues?
But when the GSD breeders and breed clubs started to get upset at getting picked on, did the KC's resolve begin to wobble like those infamous GSD hocks?
I've seen at least one blog that seems to back up what Jemima said in her original article, that the KC Chairman seemed to be talking the talk at a recent health seminar, but Ronnie obviously doesn't recall it and obviously wants to distance the KC from this stance.
Perhaps there was some sort of group hysteria going on with the audience that day and they all just wished that was what he was saying?
Let me lie down and have a think about this some more.
From what I can see a lot of people liked the new KC improved added-back-bone feature and those folk are going to be very disappointed if it was just a mistake and that they never did intend to play hard ball.
Personally I have to say this is one issue Jemima and I don't 100% agree on. The GSD issue wouldn't have been the first fight I'd have wanted to pick if I were running the KC, there are several other breeds in much more of an urgent and proven need of reform that would have been my first priority. The GSD fraternity have always struck me as ultra keen on mandatory health testing - often putting the KC itself to shame on that footing.
But Professor Bateson was especially moved by the compelling footage of banana backed German Shepherds in Pedigree Dogs Exposed - as were many onlookers. It was one of many 'Emperor's New Clothes' moments that suddenly revealed a strange exaggeration we'd all been turning a blind eye to.
If this isn't the right and just fight the KC needed to define a new era, there are plenty of others to choose from.
For me there is a twist in this tail and there shouldn't be.
Let the KC wage war of the Pug instead. Or more precisely the double helix twisty tail.
It seems to provide a much more urgent and known health issue than the slopey backs of the GSD - yet even after the much vaunted KC breed standard re-writes and the debates with the breed clubs on growing a nose - the double twisty tail of the Pug remained in the breed standard as a desirable trait - even though we now know it leads to the very unattractive twisty spines of hemivertebrae, too.
In short, if we inadvertently made the KC look tougher than they were ever planning to be on health reform, we're genuinely sorry.
It really came as quite a shock that this escalated the way it did. We actually thought we were being magnanimous and clicking and treating the KC for doing something almost right at last!