Dogs and heartworm

[MalteseJane]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

And the reason your numbers theory might not be as convincing as you think it is might be that a lot of people are getting the meds for their dogs. If you read the anti-heartworm med propaganda in the worst light possible, I don't see any outbreak of dead dogs from the meds side effects. The "bad reaction" posts are often anecdotal, unverifiable & have disparate symptoms that don't even truly suggest a problem with the meds.

Further - the *most* convincing anti-heartworm site I've seen basically said that the meds are probably unnecessary, possibly too weak to do anything & suggested that you could buy the same active ingredients at the farm store & treat your animal yourself for only a few $ per year. It didn't say the meds were "risky".

As posted earlier - if you substitute "child" for "dog", and "measles" for "heartworm", all you're left with is pretty typical anti-vaxxer blather. "Nobody gets measles, so why take the "risk"". Nobody gets measles because most of us are vaccinated.

I wonder if you know that most vets don't vaccinate every year anymore. They changed the protocol years ago. The new protocol is every 3 years (distemper, parvovirus....). I to titers (and believe me they are more expensive than vaccination) and as long as the titers come back with enough immunity, I will not re-vaccinate.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by MalteseJane

I wonder if you know that most vets don't vaccinate every year anymore. They changed the protocol years ago. The new protocol is every 3 years (distemper, parvovirus....). I to titers (and believe me they are more expensive than vaccination) and as long as the titers come back with enough immunity, I will not re-vaccinate.

Are you a breeder?

[stevek64]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

And the reason your numbers theory might not be as convincing as you think it is might be that a lot of people are getting the meds for their dogs. If you read the anti-heartworm med propaganda in the worst light possible, I don't see any outbreak of dead dogs from the meds side effects. The "bad reaction" posts are often anecdotal, unverifiable & have disparate symptoms that don't even truly suggest a problem with the meds.

Further - the *most* convincing anti-heartworm site I've seen basically said that the meds are probably unnecessary, possibly too weak to do anything & suggested that you could buy the same active ingredients at the farm store & treat your animal yourself for only a few $ per year. It didn't say the meds were "risky".

As posted earlier - if you substitute "child" for "dog", and "measles" for "heartworm", all you're left with is pretty typical anti-vaxxer blather. "Nobody gets measles, so why take the "risk"". Nobody gets measles because most of us are vaccinated.

True, but compared to other states, especially in comparison to states with high mosquito populations in the southeast and gulf coast states, the number of heartworm incidences are very low in AZ and like you say, that takes into account dogs getting/not getting heartworm meds in all states.

As for side effects and such, perhaps your animals tolerate the meds well. But just because you haven't seen bad results with your animals, and believe people who say they've had issues are "propaganda", well, that's your right to have that opinion. I come from the position of being suspicious of both sides, especially when $ is in the picture, and take a more balanced approach based on personal experience and weighing out all factors/experience. My parents had generations of dogs throughout their lives. Some did well on meds/vaccines, some didn't do well. One would get diarrhea from the heart worm pill the day after taking it. It was like clockwork. They had another dog that blew up like a balloon when she got one of the standard vaccines just a few years back a few hours after getting the shot. She had trouble breathing and they had to rush her back to the vet to stabilize her. Based on their direct experience and not hype, my parents took a different approach as a result to how they vaccines/medicate their dogs, which btw is becoming favored by more and more vets(if that's the seal of approval that's needed for some). They never gave their dogs the yearly vaccine thing as adults(except the mandatory rabies vaccine), gave the vaccine series only as puppies, and did a titer to check their immunity and never had issues with this approach. And in most cases never gave the vaccines to their adult dogs throughout their lives, except again, the rabies vaccine. There are other alternatives. The bottom line is there's some gray area in how people/dogs react to meds and vaccines.

[MalteseJane]

Originally Posted by DetroitN8V

Are you a breeder?

Lol, NO. But I know quite a few Maltese breeders and am in contact with Maltese Owners from all over the United States.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by MalteseJane

Lol, NO. But I know quite a few Maltese breeders and am in contact with Maltese Owners from all over the United States.

Oh OK, just curious.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by MalteseJane

I wonder if you know that most vets don't vaccinate every year anymore. They changed the protocol years ago. The new protocol is every 3 years (distemper, parvovirus....). I to titers (and believe me they are more expensive than vaccination) and as long as the titers come back with enough immunity, I will not re-vaccinate.

Well sure - a titer proves immunity & that's way better & different than "vets are just making money off me, so I won't do anything". Not defending the vets in the slightest, they are most certainly opportunistic in how they bill people. The Humane Society has a huge line on the days they do vaccinations & I've been *in* that line a few times myself.

I know beyond any doubt that we have gobs of undiagnosed heartworm cases here in Phoenix, just because so many people have a hard time paying for *human* healthcare, much less testing & treatment for heartworms on an animal, so I don't take any comfort at all in hearing there are "only" 100 cases a year here.