Jump to content
BC Boards

Heartworm Administration


Guest LJS1993
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest LJS1993

I posted this in "General Discussion", however I received no input. Therefore I am hoping I get some type of input in this forum. A week ago while taking Freckles in for microchipping, I discussed preventative heartworm medication with my veterinarian. My vet told me that heartworm is not prevalent in this valley. However, he said if I have plans of taking my dog for any extended period of time outside of my current region, I should definately give her some type of heartworm medicine. My vet is highly respected in this region and has been the family vet for years. However, to be on the safe side I was wondering if anyone else could give my some type of assurance or input. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vets I have seen in this area have said the same. It worries me, though, because we're only a few miles from places it could be a serious problem, so I'd like to get Allie protected. They seem a bit reluctant to do it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and my old vet, who is in San Jacinto, and also a BC person, trialler, etc., always had me put them on Interceptor,

Anna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LJS1993
...and my old vet, who is in San Jacinto, and also a BC person, trialler, etc., always had me put them on Interceptor,

Anna

 

Man, this whole thing is confusing. I wonder if I should get a second opinion? I don't want to overstep my trusted vet, but at the same time I want the best for my dog. :rolleyes: I hate these type of situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LJS1993

Let me add on to this quandry. He gave me "IVERHART" 25.1 to 50 lbd" with instructions on the package to "give her if we leave the valley, with the medicine good for one month".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, over here, if a dog has not been on h/w preventative (at all, or for a significant time), vets will blood test the dog for h/w antigens before putting the dog on the preventative. From memory, there is a cheap "quick and dirty" test, and a more extensive and thorough one - I think they usually go with the simpler one if there is no real reason to suspect the dog has been exposed.

 

I live in an island which does not have h/w, but do travel a few times a year to h/w areas. To save messing around, I now have the dogs on Sentinel Spectrum - which as I mentioned on the worm thread is a monthly all-wormer, flea preventer and heartworm preventative. That way, I have all my bases covered (except of course for paralysis ticks - I have to deal with tick prevention separately.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LJS1993
FWIW, over here, if a dog has not been on h/w preventative (at all, or for a significant time), vets will blood test the dog for h/w antigens before putting the dog on the preventative. From memory, there is a cheap "quick and dirty" test, and a more extensive and thorough one - I think they usually go with the simpler one if there is no real reason to suspect the dog has been exposed.

 

I live in an island which does not have h/w, but do travel a few times a year to h/w areas. To save messing around, I now have the dogs on Sentinel Spectrum - which as I mentioned on the worm thread is a monthly all-wormer, flea preventer and heartworm preventative. That way, I have all my bases covered (except of course for paralysis ticks - I have to deal with tick prevention separately.)

 

 

Interesting, sounds like I might give hime a call and have her tested just to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LJS,

You might want to search this section for previous discussions on this topic. I know specifics have been discussed before regarding average temperatures and survivability of the mosquito that carries heartworm. If your area is one in which there are sustained periods of cooler temperatures (and I'm sorry I don't remember the details, but I think you'd find them with a search), then the mosquito, and therefore heartworms, may not be a problem in your area. If it were me, I'd do the research and then go with my gut. Prevention is relatively simple and not terribly expensive, and it would give you peace of mind.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I lived in CA and could find a vet to do it inexpensively, I'd probably just test every six months or maybe even once a year.

 

It just so happened that I was in an exam room last week and had forgotten my book, and we were waiting for the results of a test on Ben (which is basically how I spent the last ten days, bless his heart). I spent the time staring at a chart on the wall which mapped the distribution of reported HW cases by state.

 

CA was amazingly low, only double digits if I remember correctly. Considering how huge CA is, I was pretty shocked, especially after being immersed in dogs here in a state where only FL, GA, and I think TX has us beat. It's like a fifty/fifty chance now that ANY rescue dog with unknown history will have HW.

 

So that's how I happened to be thinking about it. If I didn't HAVE to give my dogs HW meds I wouldn't. Interceptor makes Ben sick and I'm just waiting for the first time a dog with unknown background comes in that actually turns out to be a collie cross. If Kris hadn't had papers I would have wondered about him, for sure, since the seizures happened just a few days after HW meds day.

 

Testing once a year would catch any problems before they are huge problems. If there's just a couple of adults (well, females, the test doesn't detect males), they can usually be taken care of with beginning HW treatment and staying faithful to it until they are gone. And of course if that happened I'd stay on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I lived in CA and could find a vet to do it inexpensively, I'd probably just test every six months or maybe even once a year.

Becca has a good point. If you add up the cost of paying for preventive for a year, it may actually be more cost-effective to just test once or twice a year (only if you live in a low-HW-incidence state of course!).

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LJS1993
Becca has a good point. If you add up the cost of paying for preventive for a year, it may actually be more cost-effective to just test once or twice a year (only if you live in a low-HW-incidence state of course!).

 

J.

 

 

Very interesting point you ladies make on this topic. To give you an idea about the climate here, it is basically hot and dry. Temperatures here in the valley rarely get below forty in the winter with minimal rainfall. I will check other threads again in regards to this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(only if you live in a low-HW-incidence state of course!).

 

Which is a big giant distinction I suddenly feel like I didn't make clear enough. There are suprisingly few states where I'd feel comfortable taking this course of action. From my perusal of the map, I seem to remember a couple of "top tier" states, CA, and Alaska, and oddly, Vermont, standing out particularly. One would of course have to ask one's own vet.

 

This is the map one sees most often, but the one I saw was pretty interesting because it showed total statewide cases reported in whatever year and the differences were marked. http://www.heartwormsociety.org/download/incidencemap.jpg

 

I can't find anything like what I was looking at, but maybe your vet has one, too, lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...