What's the deal about Lyme, Anaplasmosis and heartworm?

[Esprit64]

OK, guys, if anyone has knowledge about these subjects, please weigh in.

What's the scoop with the ACCURATE diagnosis for Lyme/Anaplasmosis Diseases in dogs? Is such a thing possible? Or is it a rip-off? I'm looking at cites from a Minnesota veterinarian named James L. Busby DVM, who is presently selling a book exposing exploitive veterinary practices. I researched his license online and learned that the Minnesota Board of Vets limited his license in 2002 (I presently have an eMail into the Board as to what they mean by that--the statement could mean many things--positive and negative). However, this vet goes on to say that according to the American Veterinary Medical Association, "Detection of antibodies against Lyme disease is not definitive evidence of active or incipient outbreak of infection or an indication of the need for treatment. Serologic status determined at a singular point in time is not predictive of future illness. Summation--THE TEST IS WORTHLESS except to generate income for the clinic. Up to 90% of normal dogs may test positive for Lyme disease, yet, when followed for years, don't come down with sumptoms any more often than those testing negative. The only symptom in dogs of Lyme disease is multiple leg soreness. The AVMA states that a dog must be in a Lyme area, show this symptom and respond rapidly to the correct treatment in order to be diagnosed as having the disease."

I'm still researching this matter. I simply came here to find out if anyone has further insight. I want to get to the bottom of this.

Oh, and this vet further states that yearly heartworm testing is a big money maker for vets (much like unnecessary vaccinations were in yesteryear). Monthly preventives are virtually 100% effective and 18 months of one preventive (Heartgard which contains ivermectin) will actually cure an animal of any infection. Therefore, yearly testing is hard to justify. The American Heartworm Society recommends treatment for an infected dog to be --give him Heartgard monthly for the first six months. This sterilizes the female worms and they shrink in size which results in much less lung damage when they later die and deposit in the lungs. This vet claims that the Heartworm Society reluctantly admits that 12 more months of monthly Heartgard will cure the animal. And, if it gets too cold for mosquitoes, there can be no danger of catching heartworm--hence, 12 months of taking preventatives are unnecessary, just six are needed in such climates.

[josie1918]

I have my own opinions regarding some of the things you mention, but have no opinion to share EXCEPT on ONE thing.
Someones dog will surely die (one of my rescues almost did) if I don't say something here about the using monthly heart worm preventative to "cure" heartworm. THE BURDEN OF HEARTWORMS is the deciding factor here. If you dog has a bad infestation, you can easily kill your dog using a monthly hw preventative. Too many of the heartworms die and overload the dogs blood stream. You do as you like, but NO WAY would I ever try that stunt. Now I believe if this bananna had done his research, he would know that if your dog is on hw preventative year around the manufacturers suggest your animal be tested every 2 years, not every year. This is to guard against human error, (forgot to give the preventative for a couple of months or did I???? that sort of thing)

[Esprit64]

Since I've encountered this controversy, I'm contacting the horse's mouths: The American Veterinary Association and the American Heartworm folks. However, depending on how these organizations are funded, I will also be checking alternative sources to avoid prejudice. At this point, I don't know what to believe. Do you remember how we were told for years to have annual DHLP vaccinations--only to now learn they are not necessary especialy when titres prove the dog HAS immunity and doesn't need the annual shots? What about rabies? There is presently a study being done that in 2-3 years will PROVE that rabies vaccinations need only be done for --what? -- 6-7 years? Yet, how many states are mandating yearly shots. I really don't want to be misdirected anymore or taken for a ride. I mistrust vets.

[Mattie]

Esprite, Josie is very knowledgeable about this sort of thing, she has to be it is part of her job but she also will question anything that is slightly suspect and we benefit. I am sure she will be only to happy to answer any questions she can for you or explain things if you don't understand. She is lovely really

[Esprit64]

Mattie: I am just reporting on my course of action and recounting my experiences. I believe Josie is doing the same thing. All credible sources are valued for their opinions.

[emmabeth]

I like debate and more.. I like questioning things. Just because we are told that does not mean we should automatically accept.

I believe that with the vaccine protocol, it wasnt ever in the vaccine manufacturers interests to test exactl HOW long vaccine might last for. Only to test how effective it is over a short term period because like it or not - they want to sell vaccines.

There is then little benefit in marketing a product that only needs to be used once or twice in the 12 year course of the average dogs lifetime, and quite alot of cost in finding out if it does indeed last 12 years. So they dont do it.

NOW because owners question, because there are tests we can run, because some of the 'vaccination is utterly perfect in every way and totally harmless' polish has worn off - some manufacturers do have a good sound business reason for seeing if vaccines last longer than the 1 year they originally stated. Whaddya know, they do!

So questioning is good, evaluating and analysing the source of questionsa nd answers is good too. The more we do it, the more answers there will be, the more useful adn trustworthy the sources will be too.

Its all good!

[Esprit64]

Folks: I just got this response from the American Heartworm Society. Please note that each paragraph begins with my question to the Society, followed by their response.

Hello:

Is it your recommendation that treatment for a heartworm infected dog is to give nothing but Heartgard for the first six months? Are there any studies or statistical resources that prove your position?
As quoted from our guidelines: "While controversial due to the theoretical risk of selecting heartworm populations that are resistant to macrocyclic lactones, it is beneficial to administer a macrocyclic lactone for up to three months prior to administration of melarsomine, when the clinical presentation does not demand immediate intervention. The logic for this approach is to kill susceptible heartworm larvae and thus prevent re-infection of the dog, while allowing less susceptible juvenile worms, the opportunity to develop into more susceptible adult worms." We are not recommmending as much as 6 months but up to 3 months in non-clinical dogs, and any macrocyclic lactone (not just Heartgard) would be fine. There are many studies to support this and your veterinarian can research these for you. Everything we recommend to the veterinarian is supported by research in the United States and Europe.

Is it your position that 12 or more months of monthly Heartgard will cure an animal of heartworm? Studies or statistics to review?
I am not sure where you got this information. We do not recommend the use of any heartworm medication as a treatment for heartworm disease. Here is what our guidelines say:
"Long-term Macrocyclic Lactone Administration
Continuous monthly administration of prophylactic doses of ivermectin, moxidectin and selamectin is effective in reducing the life span of juvenile and adult heartworms. The older the worms when first exposed to macrocyclic lactones, the slower they are to die. So, the adulticidal effect of macrocyclic lactones generally requires more than a year of continuous monthly administrations and may take more than two years before adult heartworms are eliminated completely. In the meantime, the infection persists and continues to cause disease. Therefore, long-term continuous administration of macrocyclic lactones generally is not a substitute for conventional arsenical adulticide treatment."

Why is it necessary to give heartworm prevention for 12 months in cold climates? Why isn't six months enough? Studies or statistics to review? Compliance in the United States by pet owners is very poor. We have estimated over a million dogs infected with heartworm. In the Northern climates there are many micro climates that will allow mosquitos to live for longer periods of time then initially thought. By giving the medication year around you are insuring that if you miss a month or the dog spits out a pill, you are less likely to have your dog infected. If you give it for 6 months and forget 1 or 2 months during that time, you are risking infection of your dog during the mosquito infection season. The FDA has asked us to recommend year around use and yearly blood tests due to the non-compliance issue and possible resistance to the preventive medications. Again, your vet can research the statistics for you.

Is it your position that yearly heartworm testing is unnecessary because monthly heartworm preventives are virtually 100% effective? Studies or statistics available to review?
I have answered this above. We recommend annual testing. Here is a link to the most recent release we made on resistance issues which will answer some of your questions as well.. Again your vet can help you with this: http://heartwormsociety.org/AHS-Resista ... icle-A.pdf

Encourage your vet to join The American Heartworm Society so he can help you with your excellent questions. We are a volunteer organization made up of veterinarians, academicians, parasitologists, and researchers. Please visit our website: http://heartwormsociety.org/. When your vet joins, he/she can contact us directly and discuss any medical issues with a board member. Again, your vet will need to supply all of the research journal articles for your use. If you are a member of Med-Line you can access all of the articles for a fee.


Dr. Sheldon Rubin
Past President
American Heartworm Society

Your Support Is Encouraged: The mission of the American Heartworm Society is to be the global resource for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of heartworm disease. The Society strongly encourages, funds, and supports heartworm research by awarding grants to scientists, and providing a forum for the presentation of heartworm related research at national and regional seminars. The Society also disseminates disease related information to the veterinary community through journal publications, newsletters and on the American Heartworm Society’s comprehensive website. Monetary donations are gladly accepted to help the Society in achieving its mission and goals and can be sent to The American Heartworm Society, Post Office Box 8266, Wilmington, DE 19803-8266.
General Disclaimer: The American Heartworm Society was organized for educational and research purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice to the public. Any information provided through the Society should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If a pet health problem is suspected, a licensed veterinary health care provider should be consulted. The members, editors, sponsors, and contributors of the American Heartworm Society shall have no liability, obligation or responsibility to any person or entity for any loss, damage, or adverse medical results alleged to have happened directly or indirectly as a consequence of communication with the Society.

[Duffy Jones]

Let me see if I can help shed some light on why we do what we do. You can agree or disagree but this might help give you an idea of where the vets are coming from.

What's the scoop with the ACCURATE diagnosis for Lyme/Anaplasmosis Diseases in dogs? Is such a thing possible? Or is it a rip-off? I'm looking at cites from a Minnesota veterinarian named James L. Busby DVM, who is presently selling a book exposing exploitive veterinary practices. I researched his license online and learned that the Minnesota Board of Vets limited his license in 2002 (I presently have an eMail into the Board as to what they mean by that--the statement could mean many things--positive and negative). However, this vet goes on to say that according to the American Veterinary Medical Association, "Detection of antibodies against Lyme disease is not definitive evidence of active or incipient outbreak of infection or an indication of the need for treatment. Serologic status determined at a singular point in time is not predictive of future illness. Summation--THE TEST IS WORTHLESS except to generate income for the clinic. Up to 90% of normal dogs may test positive for Lyme disease, yet, when followed for years, don't come down with sumptoms any more often than those testing negative. The only symptom in dogs of Lyme disease is multiple leg soreness. The AVMA states that a dog must be in a Lyme area, show this symptom and respond rapidly to the correct treatment in order to be diagnosed as having the disease.

These are used as screening tests not diagnostic test. Screening test by nature are a rapid (in house) way to see if there are antibodies/antigens to a certain disease that may or may not show clinical signs. Lyme is a difficult disease to diagnosis. Many dogs may come in limping that are lyme positive and do not have orthopedic problems. By screening every year, we are able to get a jump of these diseases before they become clinical. If you get a positive test then you follow up with titers to see if this is an active infection. Again, these are screen tests to try to catch disease before the pet starts showing clinical signs. Many people like to screen there pets for possible disease, some do not and then a plain heartworm test can be run.

Oh, and this vet further states that yearly heartworm testing is a big money maker for vets (much like unnecessary vaccinations were in yesteryear). Monthly preventives are virtually 100% effective and 18 months of one preventive (Heartgard which contains ivermectin) will actually cure an animal of any infection. Therefore, yearly testing is hard to justify. The American Heartworm Society recommends treatment for an infected dog to be --give him Heartgard monthly for the first six months. This sterilizes the female worms and they shrink in size which results in much less lung damage when they later die and deposit in the lungs. This vet claims that the Heartworm Society reluctantly admits that 12 more months of monthly Heartgard will cure the animal. And, if it gets too cold for mosquitoes, there can be no danger of catching heartworm--hence, 12 months of taking preventatives are unnecessary, just six are needed in such climates.

I thought the heartworm society did a great job but I will summarize. Heartworm prevention (heartgard) does not cure disease. It will only kill the microflaria (baby worms) and then sometimes the adult worms will die off over time on their own. This slow death causes significant inflammation and most likely causes more harm then treatment. However, worm burden does make a difference. The reason we test very year is that out compliance if not very good. We see lots of dogs who are on heartworm prevention get heartworm. We are always concerned about resistance and also many times the dogs may spit out the pill or there may be miss timing in the dosage.

Do you remember how we were told for years to have annual DHLP vaccinations--only to now learn they are not necessary especially when titres prove the dog HAS immunity and doesn't need the annual shots? What about rabies? There is presently a study being done that in 2-3 years will PROVE that rabies vaccinations need only be done for --what? -- 6-7 years? Yet, how many states are mandating yearly shots. I really don't want to be misdirected anymore or taken for a ride. I mistrust vets.

I am sorry you mistrust us. Vaccines technology has changed greatly over the last 15-20 years. Our first vaccines were killed vaccines which do not produce nearly the long lasting immunity that we now see with our MLV or recombinate vaccines. Now that we have better vaccines, we have longer duration of immunity and therefore have changed our recommendations. As technology changes, so do we. As for rabies vaccines - this is totally regulated by the state and county. We have no control over how to give this vaccine and must give it in accordance with the guidelines of your area. There are some areas that do not accept the 3 year vaccines. Rabies is really a government issue not as much as a vet issue. This is because rabies is 100% fatal to humans and we vaccinate our domestic animals to provide a buffer between the wild animal population and people.

Also remember when these vaccines were first used that we had many animals dying of parvo and distemper all the time. These vaccines have provided a great deal of good in veterinary world. It is now very rare to see cases of distemper and even parvo when just 10 -15 years ago it was everywhere.

As for titers, yes they can be done and will give you an idea of the immune status of your animal. However, the titer that is considered protective was done in a lab with no other factors. Do we know for sure that your pet will be protected from Parvo with a certain titer in the real world where enviromental factors or other concurrent medical problems might be occurring - no. I usually tell owners that titers give you a guess at their immunity but to remember they are not a 100% either.

So, I hope this helps some in your research. This is a topic that comes up all the time and people have strong feelings on all sides. I always tell everyone that the type and frequency of vaccines for each pet is an individual decision between you and your vet. There are many animals in my practice that do not get any vaccines and there are some that get them all. It depends on where they go, who they live with, their own medical status, and even the owner's medical status. We do not have a set vaccine policy for all animals but discuss it every year with the owners.

I hope this helps.

duf