Should have said if a vet gives a heartworm preventative without testing.

Depends on the vet and the area of the country. I'm in a heavily mosquito infested area. My vet started it at 16 weeks.

true. it can prevent/control hookworms, roundworms, and whipworms!! :thumbup:

this is my take on the whole homeopathic thing...for both dogs and humans i believe this:

Natural medicine is AMAZING, however one must realize that it is used as a preventative measure for good overall health and wellness. natural medicine is not always the SOLUTION to the problem. yes it helps the immune system and yes it's great as a wellness thing, but you need doctors and medicine for treating issues and you need an antibiotic to kill the bacteria when they are prevent. natural stuff to prevent and maintain, medical stuff to treat and get rid of....make sense? that's just me! i trust drs and vets, i research what they say and i learn my own views, but at the end of the day most of what they suggest is better for my pet or for me than nothing at all. natural medicine has a place but sometimes you need a science based and well researched medicine as well. hand in hand you'll be a healthy happy human Or dog.

nope they sure don't...they put em' down and the really sad thing is...they also won't pay to do it humanely. we're talking back of the shed type of thing here....it's sick and it's wrong and i don't get why the heck they wanted a dog if they don't give a crap about their health??

they are covering their own a$$es here. if they let someone have veterinary ONLY prescriptions and the pill kills their heartworm positive dog...they are at fault and they will be sued for the damages. they require HWT for HWP to save their a$$ from loosing their license or having a ruined practice over an owner's stupid choices. and it makes perfect and complete sense to me.

just like you can't prescribe meds to a dog without seeing it first, otherwise it's illegal because there is no client/patient relationship and if something happens to the dog the vet is liable.

heartworm prevention can be started at about the same age as first puppy vaccines as far as i'm aware. we don't tend to do the first HW test until 1 year for some reason.

someone came in the other day stating he used to own two great danes...after they had to be PTS he added up all their vet bills alone. nothing from like walmart or petsmart, JUST vet bills.... and the total:

Over 14,000 lifetime vet expenses on two danes!!

imagine how much a yorkie would be?

What dog was that? Is that on YT? I hadn't heard anything like this. The friends I have that use ivermectin have never had a problem and never had a dog with HW.

If you have a puppy tested, start it on heartguard, then continue on heartguard, why would you need to get annual tests? If the dog got HW, the case couldn't be very bad, because you'd still be giving the heartguard. Unless you bought six months worth of useless Heartguard, the Heartguard should take care of the HW.

I frankly don't know how the preventive I get is shipped, what temp, etc. I bet it goes out UPS and can sit on a tarmac and cook for all I know. There is no reason to assume the ivermectin is shipped any worse. It is given to livestock, after all.

I've never heard of a single case were this has happened with HW.

Wow, I don't know of any vets getting sued! Sorry, this doesn't make sense. How would you ever know what killed the pet? The heartguard or the HW? Could I sue a vet if my dog died as a result of regular HW treatment? No.

here is the problem with over the counters, 1 800 pet meds, ext for getting prevention....

you don't know where it was made (some people are getting meds made in third world countries shipped to them in full on chinese from pet meds)

you don't know how old it really is (outdated won't work as well)

and you don't know if it's been frozen or over heated (most meds. require room temp. to be effective)

if you are buying things that aren't the actual thing you thought you were buying then you aren't getting an effective drug and you have a higher risk of getting worms. it's just a fact. not all pills work the way they should and sometimes even in just one missed dose heartworms develop. and any activity at any time those worms show up could cause one of them to dislodge into a lung and kill the dog. it only takes one missed pill for heartworms to form and if a HWP is given and it kills that ONE WORM insdie the dog and it just happens to flow into the blood stream and clot, well bye bye beloved dog...HWT are very very important, they can save lives if done. does that make more sense?

Neocropsy that's how you know. they'd have it done and find out it was a heartworm that killed the pet and then they'd sue the vet because they trusted that the preventative would treat and prevent heartworms and it didn't, instead it killed the dog...therefore it's the vet's fault that sold it to them without checking to be sure there weren't worms present and warning them of the risk!!

are you just trying to argue every point made? because we've been through the answers to all your current questions and you are refuting all of them again a second time. and just because in your small world you haven't heard of something happening doesn't mean in the "real" veterinary world that it hasn't happened. it HAS happened or they wouldn't create the rules about it.

There are lots of cases, especially in the south where dogs on preventative are testing positive for HW. Some will say it is because of poor compliance. Others say they have complied and followed the directions. However, in theory, just like any medication, if you do not follow the directions given, and an infected dog is receiving small dose every couple of months, it seems completely logical for the parasite to develop a resistance. Regardless of which side of the fence you are on, it is being watched by veterinarians and studied by the drug companies. All the more reason to test yearly. If nothing more than knowing your pet is parasite free, it does give the drug companies feedback that their products are continuing to work.

I don't think that is why they are doing it, to cover their butts? Yeah, there is every bit as much risk giving the HW treatment as there is to giving the heartguard. In both cases, a vet can cover his a$$ by telling the owner what the risk is. How is one different than the other? And this isn't about prescribing meds without seeing it first. If a vet is looking at a healthy pet and the owner declines the test, why not, if the owner understands the risks, just give the heartguard? Is it really better to let the dog just DIE from heartworms? A vet, IMO, should at least TRY to get the owner to buy the heartguard. The dog has a better chance that way.

What about the ignorant, money hungry vets still out there pushing annual vaccines? Rabies is by law, and if a vet is required by law, that is one thing, but what about the vets who push all the other vaccines? In 2006, the AAHA even changed their guidelines to every three years. Why aren't those vets who are giving annual vaccines worried about a lawsuit? What if a dog gets an immune system problem from over vaccination? Can the owner sue? I doubt it. Is the vet worried about his reputation? No. Will the practice be ruined? Doubt it.

Sorry, I don't buy that a vet is so worried about a lawsuit.

It was a friend of a vet friend...

Feed stores don't always keep things according to package directions. It is somewhat safer to get it from a supplier shipped to your vet. I get drugs online, but try to stick to name brands (and only from very trusted sites). I get heartworm meds from Ellie's vet because it is too important, imo.

Any little mistake (or perceived mistake) and cases can go legal. The more is happens, the more vet prices will go up b/c the more insurance they will need. They have to be very careful what they do and say.

And as a side note, the more people (including me) buy from online pharmacies (btw, there will likely be a major pet pharmacy opening soon), the less people will buy from their vets. So, vet prices will go up even more b/c they have to make neough money to stay open.

The first rule of vet med is do no harm. Prescribing a drug before without the proper testing would have them going against this.

I understand what you're saying, but the test is important, things do go legal (and yes, vets are constantly concerned about it), and most are going to feel a certain responsibility to do things correctly. Heartgard may not kill a HW positive dog, but the disease can still progress. The owner can sign a waiver (and some vets don't think testing is necessary at all), but vets do tend to want to know what is actually going on with their patients.

And doxy is becoming very popular before treatment to kill the wolbachia. They wouldn't know to use this without testing.

Anyone can sue anyone for any perceived wrongdoing. They may not win the case, but it would cost the person being sued lawyers fees etc which can add up to a lot of money. People are so sue happy these days.

Oh,and a necropsy would help determine what killed a pet.

You may not personally know of any vets being sued, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Actually, there are some case of vets being sued in the deaths of dogs.

Here is just one of them:

Veterinary Malpractice Case Could Redefine Veterinary Care

I am sure if you searched the net you would find other cases where vets have been sued.

So, like human doctors, vets have to protect themselves.

I never knew continuing treating if they actually had a heartworm was so dangerous.

It can be done with ivermection (Heartgard). The others...not so much. But as for getting rid of the worms, imidicide therapy is still the preferred option most of the time.

As a receptionist to THREE vets, YES they are always covering their butts for a lawsuit. Constantly i hear them tell me that they will not fill a presc. because of legal reasons....you are wrong and have nothing and no research to base your rebuttle on.

and as for vaccines there are still some that are required for boarding and grooming such as distemper and rabies, bordetella and fecals...these are to protect other dogs from getting sick. we accept titers if the O. has them done so it's not pushing vaccines it's making sure the pets are healthy. most research still suggests rabies, distemper, bordetellas if around other dogs, ext. it's science and medicine NOT greed!!:mad::thumbdown

and not only lawsuits from clients but i forgot to mention loosing their veterinary board license.

So, you are saying that the ivermectin sold for livestock isn't actual ivermectin? Or is outdated, not kept at room temperatures? HUH?

For your information, after a dog is treated for HW, a worm can dislodge into a lung and kill a dog. How is that different than what you are saying above? And heartguard is being used, by vets, to treat HW, especially in pets deemed too ill to withstand the treatment.

HWP can save lives too. NOT giving it can't. At least a dog has a chance, a real chance to live if it gets preventive. HWs can and DO kill dogs.

All I am advocating, and I mean all, is that in the case of someone who won't pay for the test or can't afford it, at the very least a vet could do is try to get them to put the dog on heartguard. Do the same thing you would do if it were the treatment the dog was getting, warn the owner about the risks and what to look for.

I don't understand why I have to repeat myself. ALL I am saying is that, at the very least, giving the heartguard rather than NOTHING is better.

I DO get annual HWT on my pets. I am not advocating not doing that. I am advocating that when a person can't afford or won't pay for a HWT, just give them the heartguard. AT least then the pet has a chance. HWs will kill a pet. Period. That's for sure. Most pet owners WILL get the annual test, if recommended by their vets, just like they get the annual immunizations if their vets recommend them (and that is a whole 'nother topic).

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Devil's advocate here...how do you know temp was maintained with the stuff you buy at the vet's office? It was probably UPS'd to them and in a truck subject to heat and freezing. Really just curious here.

I agree w/the being unsure of the source though...scary especially considering all the dog food recalls/issues with China in this area.

Ok - not to get bashed here - but...... I do not have my dogs on any heartworm medication. They do not go out at all. They are indoor dogs and not exposed to mosquitos. When I do take them out, they are usually carried in a bag. They get tested every year. What are your thoughts???

Kristan, I get where you are coming from. However, how long do you think it would take for another customer to come into a practice and say "so and so" got HW meds without having to pay for a test why can't I? Word of mouth spreads like fire. Also, the price of the test, is a drop in the bucket compared to the price of the meds. It is for mine anyways. If someone is not going to pay for the test, I highly doubt they will pay for the meds. Vets not only treat their patients, but they are not idiots when it comes to reading the "people" before them. It is easy to look at their history with the practice, the patient before him, the "person" before him, evaluate the entire visit, and make a pretty spot on informed decision about the "whole" picture. What the customer stands there and tells the vet, is not always what the picture before him says, and it is ultimately up to him to make that decision.

Really though, if you have a good, long standing, loyal relationship with your vet, there is no limit to what they will do for you. My vet gives me advice I know he doesn't just give to anybody. He also knows I will not turn on him when something goes wrong. I trust him completley, he knows my animals, how I care for my animals, and he gives me advice according to what I can handle based on my experience and history with him, not always based on medicine alone. Trust and loyalty is a two way street.


Cally: It only takes one infected mosquito bite to become infected.