Rebuttal article to Anti Heartworm Prevention

[megansmomma]

Heartworm Preventive Medication in Dogs: The Debate
by LORIE HUSTON, DVM on JULY 28, 2010

Recently, I came across an article about the use of heartworm preventive medications in dogs written by Dr. Karen Becker. Dr. Becker opens by quoting an article that I wrote for Examiner.com about the currently recommended methods of heartworm prevention in dogs and asks in the title of her article why I did not share various “facts” with my pet-owning readers.

Quite simply, and with all due respect to Dr. Becker’s opinion, I did not inform my readers of these “facts” because I do not believe them to be true.

Further, I believe that advising people not to administer heartworm preventive medications to their dogs when they live in endemic areas places their dogs at risk needlessly. And, to be quite clear here, we are talking about the risk of death. Heartworms can be a fatal condition!

Conspiracy Between the American Heartworm Society and Pharmaceutical Companies?

Dr. Becker implies that there is a conspiracy between the American Heartworm Society (AHS), an organization that recommends heartworm prevention for all pets, and the major pharmaceutical companies. In my opinion, this is stretching the truth a bit. Is the AHS sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. Probably. Does that mean that their recommendations are not based in science? No. What it means is that the AHS has examined the issue thoroughly (based on the known science) and made appropriate recommendations to provide adequate protection for your dog. It also means that the pharmaceutical companies have realized that helping the AHS educate veterinarians and pet owners about the fact that this protection is necessary helps sell their products. However, it does not invalidate those recommendations.

Are Heartworm Infections in Dogs Uncommon and Not Usually Lethal?

Dr. Becker says “Heartworm disease is more difficult to acquire – and less lethal – than the dire warnings and marketing claims for chemical preventives would have you believe.” This has not been my experience. I’ve diagnosed heartworm disease in more dogs than I care to count and some of them did not survive the infection. Others were critically ill as a result of the infection, making treatment for the disease much more difficult and dangerous.

My experience is shared by April Ellis Mitchem, the Birmingham Dog Care Examiner at Examiner.com and long-time rescue worker, who says “We take in enough heartworm positive dogs with rescue that I completely disagree with the assessment that it’s hard to acquire.”

April’s assessment is shared by Karen Wood Philhower, who runs a Beagle rescue group. Karen says, “We get A LOT of heartworm positive dogs and not just from the South, though it’s all too common there. I’ve had dogs from New Jersey that were infected as well. I also disagree with Dr. Becker’s statements and I am alarmed that a practicing veterinarian would potentially jeopardize the health of pets by following this advice. Heartworm preventatives have been around a long time and when given at the proper intervals and in the correct dosage they are very safe and effective. I give monthly ivermectin/pyrantel to my own dogs as well as foster dogs year-round. I’ve lost foster dogs to advanced stage HW disease and it angers me because it is so preventable. Treatment is expensive and hard on the dogs, even under the best of circumstances.”

In my experience, April and Karen are absolutely correct. Heartworm disease is seen frequently in the south and often enough in colder climates that not administering heartworm preventive medication, in my opinion, is irresponsible and risky.

Are There Less Toxic Alternatives to Monthly Heartworm Preventive Medicines?

In my opinion and experience, the monthly heartworm preventive medications are both effective and quite safe. I have serious doubts about whether Dr. Becker’s recommendations are sufficient to prevent heartworms, especially in endemic areas with high risk of exposure.

While I respect Dr. Becker both as a colleague and as a person, I believe that she is somewhat misguided in these recommendations for heartworm control. My fear is that her recommendations will cause pet owners to forego administering heartworm medications to their dogs, thereby unknowingly exposing their pets to unneeded risk.

[Wylie's Mom]

Great article, thanks for posting this !

[rubymoon2072]

I will not forego and we even get the yearly tests. to me it is not worth the risk for my lil ones..

[107barney]

Thanks for posting this. Great article!

[Maximo]

Thank you for posting this.

I admit that living in one of the highest risk areas in the country makes this an easy decision for me. But I would not forgo the preventatives anywhere. The preventatives also protect against other worms, saving my dogs from unnecessary illness and treatment. The benefits far outweigh the risks.

[P-Nut Mom]

Our vet showed me a dog he had to hospitalize for heartworm last year. So sad! P & P are protected and will stay that way. Thank you for sharing this!

[gemy]

Dr. Becker implies that there is a conspiracy between the American Heartworm Society (AHS), an organization that recommends heartworm prevention for all pets, and the major pharmaceutical companies. In my opinion, this is stretching the truth a bit. Is the AHS sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. Probably. Does that mean that their recommendations are not based in science? No. What it means is that the AHS has examined the issue thoroughly (based on the known science) and made appropriate recommendations to provide adequate protection for your dog. It also means that the pharmaceutical companies have realized that helping the AHS educate veterinarians and pet owners about the fact that this protection is necessary helps sell their products. However, it does not invalidate those recommendations.

Look in science one of the hallmarks of good independent study is to ascertain freedom from bias. That means the researches in appearance and fact, demonstrate that their conclusions are not colored by outside influence.

The fact if indeed it is true that AHS is sponsored by Pharma companies should give one pause for thought. An independent body, should be an independent body, pure and simple.

One would need to look at the structure and protocols on how the AHS reviews scientific literature to make their informed opinions. Similar to Cochrane reviewed studies. If that is not present then..... I would not validate them as an independent authorative body on anything.

Having said all this, which is merely a rebuttal to the bolded statements above, I too believe that heartworm preventative is important. I abide by the CVMA recommendations and will continue to do so, until and unto such time there is a preponderance of evidence that suggests otherwise.

[megansmomma]

I posted this article before I did a little further research on Dr. Becker. It seems that she in involved heavily with Mercola which has a HUGE website selling all type of homeopathic remedies. Here's a link to what I posted in the other thread. Seems that Dr. Becker supported Mercola has their own agenda for discrediting pharmacutical companies. It's all about the $$$$$

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/4422535-post60.html

[gemy]

It almost always is, money or power, two big motivators.

[kjc]

I just re-read Dr Becker's article... she DOES NOT recommend not giving heartworm preventatives.... it seems her concern lies more in her belief that the efficacy of current treatments is in question. She states that there is concern that the HW is becoming immune to the current preventatives bc they are being dosed in quantities that are more than what is needed for actual control. The manufacturers claim that the reason for their products' failures to protect against HW infection is non-compliance by pet owners!

Dr Becker has changed her recommendations from yearly testing to testing for HW every 4 months, so infections can be caught and treated early. Yes, she is a Holistic vet, and does recommend a holistic alternative, BUT she says to alternate the holistic preventative with the chemical preventatives, so as not to create a problem like there is now with antibiotics and resistance to them.

I think she made quite a few very good points in her article, and I won't 'write her off' just bc she tends towards holistic medicine.

[bchgirl]

I no longer give my HW preventive. I rely on the test alone. And if you research it heartworm is not a common problem in most states.my own vet has treated 5 cases in 15 years.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by bchgirl

I no longer give my HW preventive. I rely on the test alone. And if you research it heartworm is not a common problem in most states.my own vet has treated 5 cases in 15 years.

Looks like it's a problem in a lot of states http://www.heartwormsociety.org/down...e-Map-2010.pdf certainly is safer for a dog to take heart worm prevention monthly then getting treatment for heart worm that your dog might not make it through. I won't mess with heart worms.

[jp4m2]

Originally Posted by kjc

I just re-read Dr Becker's article... she DOES NOT recommend not giving heartworm preventatives.... it seems her concern lies more in her belief that the efficacy of current treatments is in question. She states that there is concern that the HW is becoming immune to the current preventatives bc they are being dosed in quantities that are more than what is needed for actual control. The manufacturers claim that the reason for their products' failures to protect against HW infection is non-compliance by pet owners!

Dr Becker has changed her recommendations from yearly testing to testing for HW every 4 months, so infections can be caught and treated early. Yes, she is a Holistic vet, and does recommend a holistic alternative, BUT she says to alternate the holistic preventative with the chemical preventatives, so as not to create a problem like there is now with antibiotics and resistance to them.

I think she made quite a few very good points in her article, and I won't 'write her off' just bc she tends towards holistic medicine.

I was recently reading about this... It seems a woman by the name of Kari Blaho-Owens, Ph.D., who had been the global head of pharmacovigilance for 4 years for Merial was told to destroy some documents showing Merial was lying about the effectiveness of Heartgard since at least 2002. She thought the public should know about this so they would be aware of it. She brought a lawsuit against the company and was then fired. From her work she was able to determine Heartgard had a failure rate of about 20%. I can't find any recent articles on the outcome of this lawsuit.There is also some concerns about the use of the heartworm products creating some resistance to the products, the same way as in the antibiotics. This article has some links explaining it more in depth.....

Have Dog Heartworms Become Resistant ?

There are some articles claiming this is already happening with Frontline and possibly Advantage and the fleas becoming resistant to their chemicals.


This is just an article about the lawsuit against Merial.....
Courthouse News Service

[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by jp4m2

I was recently reading about this... It seems a woman by the name of Kari Blaho-Owens, Ph.D., who had been the global head of pharmacovigilance for 4 years for Merial was told to destroy some documents showing Merial was lying about the effectiveness of Heartgard since at least 2002. She thought the public should know about this so they would be aware of it. She brought a lawsuit against the company and was then fired. From her work she was able to determine Heartgard had a failure rate of about 20%. I can't find any recent articles on the outcome of this lawsuit.There is also some concerns about the use of the heartworm products creating some resistance to the products, the same way as in the antibiotics. This article has some links explaining it more in depth.....

Have Dog Heartworms Become Resistant ?

There are some articles claiming this is already happening with Frontline and possibly Advantage and the fleas becoming resistant to their chemicals.


This is just an article about the lawsuit against Merial.....
Courthouse News Service

The guy you are linking had his Veterinary LICENSE SUSPENDED 12 years ago

http://online.wsj.com/public/resourc...ents/board.pdf

and he's been barred from talking about animals
https://www.courthousenews.com/2013/04/10/56537.htm

[Maximo]

Originally Posted by megansmomma

The guy you are linking had his Veterinary LICENSE SUSPENDED 12 years ago

http://online.wsj.com/public/resourc...ents/board.pdf

and he's been barred from talking about animals
https://www.courthousenews.com/2013/04/10/56537.htm

Not really barred from talking about animals. He was in violation of Texas law forbidding veterinarians from giving advice "unless he or she has first physically examined the animal." To me, this is rather broad. There are info websites where questions can be posed by pet owners and a licensed vet answers. The answers almost always include the advice that the person should take the pet to the vet.

For instance, a person will ask, "My dog is pooping blood. What does this mean?" The vet will respond with a list of possibilities and advise the person to take the dog to the vet. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Hines did start charging money for his online "services." I don't understand why he would want to risk such a thing, and I don't know how he would insure himself against liability.