Quote: connie sutherland

 Quote: jenni williams

It's a decision I've made and a risk I take. I don't expect everyone else to agree, but I do think they need to do exercise some due diligence and arrive at their own conclusion.

Edited to say do a simple google search on ivermectin deaths and side effects; the preventative is far from harmless.

Yes, it's something that every dog owner should be educated about.

My pre-owned dogs have been turned around to the best health I think I can help give them, with excellent food, no "boosters," good exercise, etc. But not having raised them from puppyhood, or even from young-adulthood, means that I'll never know the real state of their immune systems -- or even their personal histories. For me, they just don't fall into Dr. Pitcairn's example of dogs protected from chemicals and toxins since birth, fed the most appropriate foods since weaning, etc.

Good point. I should've mentioned that my immune basket-case is wormed more than the others w/Ivermectin. My "never-eaten-dog-food-never-had-a-shot-dogs" are not.

When using ivermectin as HW preventative, it is still an effective preventative when given every 45 days instead of once a month. So that would be another option to consider.

I live in MI and my dogs only get HW pills from April or May thru Nov as we don't have mosquitoes here year 'round.

I live in PA. I work in rescue and we get the majority of our dogs from the south. Heartworm treatment costs about $600 in our area and is not very pleasant for a dog to go through. Of the dogs we take from the south, about 90% are heartworm positive. I have seen dogs have miserable side effects and the shots themselves are very painful. It is so much better to be safe than sorry.

 Quote: jenni williams

I am fully aware that many people think I expose my animals to unnecessary risks by my beliefs. I would rather have my dogs die of an acute illness, virus, disease, accident, etc. than suffer chronic problems their entire lives because of slowly poisoning them, which is how I feel about excess vaccines, flea preventatives, heartworm meds, etc. It's a decision I've made and a risk I take. I don't expect everyone else to agree, but I do think they need to do exercise some due diligence and arrive at their own conclusion.

This is how I feel as well. I have had dogs die slowly of Cancer most certainly caused by the "precautions" I had used to keep them healthy.

My current animals are perfectly healthy, with having minimal vaccines, NO heartworm preventatives or other toxins introduced into their bodies.

This is not a decision to make lightly... everyone needs to do plenty of research, talk to people and come to their own conclusion as to what is best in their situation.

 Quote: colleen safarowicz

It is so much better to be safe than sorry.

Yes, it is. However, what you believe is "safe" and what I believe is "safe" may be very different. There is much debate on the safety of preventatives such as vaccines and hw preventative, so to say "better safe than sorry" in reference to GIVING hw pills is unfortunately, oversimplifying. There are many cases of dogs getting hw even on the preventatives, and your rescue example is a good point, however, these are unhealty dogs, as a whole, largely unable to fight their own battles, so to speak, immune system-wise.

Like Kelly said, so many serious ailments later on can be traced (although likely not proven)to vaccines, hw preventative, etc.

Wow good timing on the thread, I was just thinking of what to do for this year. My dog has never been on HW preventative and was on kibble for the first 13 mos of her life. She's been on raw for the last 11 mos.

I'm with Colleen on this one - better safe than sorry. While I'm a firm believer in raw feeding and minimal vaccination for my dogs, I do not mess around with heartworm - I've seen what this parasite can do, and what the treatment involves, and neither is pretty. Bear in mind that if your dog tests positive for adult heartworms, the only treatment currently available requires repeated deep intramuscular injections of an arsenic compound into the lumbar muscles - painful and unpleasant - and due to side effects the dog generally has to be hospitalized during treatment. Both ivermectin (Heartguard) and milbemycin (Interceptor) actually have decent safety records, although ivermectin should not be given to collies.
I have used plain Heartguard for years. I minimize the amount of ivermectin the dogs are exposed to by getting them tested every April, giving the first dose in late May, and then only every 6 weeks after that until early November (I'm in a short mosquito-season area). Then we stop until the next year. BTW, ivermectin does not prevent heartworm infection - it prevents any larvae already present from developing to adults. As it is effective against larvae that have been present in the dog for up to 2 months prior to dosing, giving it every six weeks is plenty. There is useful technical information, including details of the life cycle of heartworm, at http://www.heartwormsociety.org.
One other point: an infected dog becomes a parasite reservoir long before it develops symptoms. A mosquito biting that dog can pick up heartworm larvae and transmit them to another dog. So your decision about how to deal with heartworm is not just about your dog - it potentially affects others in your neighborhood too.

 Quote: sarah ward

I'm with Colleen on this one - better safe than sorry.

I think my point was missed; I am not at all convinced of the "safety" of hw meds. It's not that I'm questioning whether a dog can get heartworm and doubting that the treatment is awful; I'm just weighing my odds and leaning toward keeping them pesticide-free as much as possible. It is a calculated risk, like I said, but if I believed hearworm meds were totally SAFE, then of course all my dogs would be on a monthly.

This debate is not a question of whether hw treatment is painful or not; it's about whether risking chronic disease is worth giving a monthly pill that may or may not actually protect the dog, and whether the dog would even be susceptible in the first place.

I equate it to vaccinating yearly "just in case." But that's just me. Wiegh your risks and benefits, and make an educated PERSONAL decision based on research, not scare tactics and bias or agenda-based advice (vets, drug company inserts, etc.)

Call me selfish, but I worry about my own**, and let everyone else worry about theirs, so I am not comfortable potentially poisoning MY dog just in case a mosquito bites them and then another dog. I take their health into consideration first and foremost.



**Now, let's not go applying my statement to things like Parvo, etc.....

 Quote: Mara Jessup

When using ivermectin as HW preventative, it is still an effective preventative when given every 45 days instead of once a month. So that would be another option to consider.

This what I'm considering doing.

Jenni posted a link on another thread (maybe on this one, too) to a site that recommends not giving it monthly.

Since giving HW medication to a dog that has adult-stage heartworms is dangerous, what is the longest period of time you can safely go between dosing? Is it 45 days or can you spread it out even longer?

It takes about 6 months for the larvae to develop into adult worms in the dog. But the older the larvae, the less effective compounds like ivermectin become at killing them. After two months the larvae are not yet adult worms, but they are developed enough that heartworm "preventatives" become ineffective. So the 45 day recommendation errs a little on the side of safety - longer intervals between doses run the risk that larval development will be too far along.

I'm curious to know where Jenni found information on dogs getting heartworm while being appropriately dosed with a reliable preventative? Every vet I've known over the years has treated heartworm cases, and every one of them has told me it was due to the dog either not being on a preventative during mosquito season, or going too long between doses.