 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Pet Forum / Miscellaneous / Animal Health / June 2005Prescriptions from veterinarians
I think this subject has been addressed here before, but I don't recall exactly what was said. I'd like to get prescriptions from my vet for heartworm preventative and prednisone. He doesn't think I should use Iverheart instead of Heartgard (which is a separate issue) but offered to sell me Heartgard at what he said was his cost - - however, I can get it cheaper from a reputable catalog. I have three animals on prednisone, a cat on 5 mg, a dog on 10 mg and a dog on 20 mg, so I asked for a prescription for 1000 tablets. Vet said he would sell me 1000 for $40 - - but again, I can get it for half that from a catalog. The medications in question were prescribed by him or another vet at his clinic. All the animals taking the medications have been seen at the clinic within the last 2 months, all the dogs were heartworm tested, etc. I am not trying to cheat my vet out of any profit, and I'm not accusing him of being a money-grubber or anything like that. He's been generous in offering discounts to my rescue and we have a good relationship - - I think very highly of him and have referred many people to him, and I'm not going to damage that relationship to save a few dollars. However, I have a multi-dog and cat household, and they're getting older, which means their health needs are costing more, and I need to economize by getting them what they need at the best price possible. So: are vets required by law to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more cheaply elsewhere? Or is it an acceptable standard or practice? Or just a courtesy to clients? Also, there are veterinarians who believe that dosing with Heartgard or other heartworm preventatives every 45 days is effective (some holistic vets recommend this to minimize the amount of chemicals given). Any opinions on that? If a dog is on heartworm preventative regularly (i.e. during the mosquito season but not year-round), is a heartworm test necessary annually? What about if the heartworm medication is continued year-round (which some vets recommend against)? So many conflicting opinions...And yes, I've asked my vet, but his clinic is still recommending annual vaccinations, which I absolutely will not do. Sally Hennessey are vets required by law > to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more > cheaply elsewhere? NO! Or is it an acceptable standard or practice? It is acceptable but I wouldn't consider it standard. We still charge the client a prescription fee to give them a script as well. Or > just a courtesy to clients? It is more of a courtesy. > Also, there are veterinarians who believe that dosing with Heartgard > or other heartworm preventatives every 45 days is effective (some > holistic vets recommend this to minimize the amount of chemicals > given). Any opinions on that? I work for a homeopathy vet. In regards to heartworm and fleas, what she tells people is - in theory - if an animal is truely healthy and well taken care of, than mosquitos and fleas shouldn't bite it. I think thats a load of crock since there are MANY MANY healthy people that still get mosquito bites! They don't care who or what they bite, as long as they get their meal. I live in Canada so we only have a six month season (June - November) and we treat once monthly. If a dog is on heartworm preventative > regularly (i.e. during the mosquito season but not year-round), is a > heartworm test necessary annually? What about if the heartworm > medication is continued year-round (which some vets recommend > against)? The company makes us do the tests. It's a CYA thing (cover your a$$). The companies guarantee their products so if an animal comes down with something they are supposed to protect against they will totally or help cover the costs. If you don't do a test before giving their product, they can get around paying for anything by saying that its not that their product is ineffective, but that your dog had heartworm disease BEFORE giving the meds. And there is no proof to say that they are wrong. If you've given the medication properly and at the right time, there is less than 1% chance that they can have heartworm disease. >are vets required by law >> to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> just a courtesy to clients? >It is more of a courtesy. OK, thanks for the info. By the way, why the fee for giving a script? Doctors don't do that. The vet got an office call fee plus charges for whatever else was done; why a fee for a prescription? >I work for a homeopathy vet. In regards to heartworm and fleas, what she >tells people is - in theory - if an animal is truely healthy and well taken >care of, than mosquitos and fleas shouldn't bite it. I think thats a load >of crock since there are MANY MANY healthy people that still get mosquito Yeah, I think it's a crock too. We've been pretty lucky flea-wise, but last fall we had a bad infestation, and it wasn't because our dogs aren't healthy and well taken care of. It was because it was fall, when fleas double their efforts to get into houses, and because I didn't get on top of it soon enough. Also, it was evidently a particularly bad fall for fleas around here, and a lot of people, us included, found that Advantage and Frontline were not working. Sally Hennessey >>are vets required by law >>> to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more >>> cheaply elsewhere? >>NO! Wrong. There are a lot of states where it is in fact illegal to refuse to provide a written prescription. Florida being one. Here is a nice link -- bit outdated but probably still holds true. http://members.verizon.net/~vze2r6qt/supplies/legal.htm >>Or is it an acceptable standard or practice? >>It is acceptable but I wouldn't consider it standard. We still charge the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Doctors don't do that. The vet got an office call fee plus charges > for whatever else was done; why a fee for a prescription? I know of a lot of vets who started charging a fee for a written prescription. It's really just a way to help make up for the loss of profit when clients go with internet pharmacies. The problem is, vets historically have undercharged for services, and made up for it by making money off of prescription items. But with the advent of internet pharmacies, who can buy huge amounts for cheap (or buy from overseas where things are cheaper, which is often illegal, but that's another diatribe... ;-)), many more consumers are not purchasing products from their veterinarians. Which means vets are making less money. Vets are starting to adjust prices and charge more for services, so we aren't so reliant on prescription profit to pay the bills, but we've got a long way to go. Doctors don't ever make money from medicine -- they couldn't sell drugs if they wanted to, as far as I know, so they don't have that loss of income to deal with. >>I work for a homeopathy vet. In regards to heartworm and fleas, what she >>tells people is - in theory - if an animal is truely healthy and well [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Sally Hennessey Regarding heartworm testing -- I recommend it annually, and think it's a good idea, simply because you never know if your dog is actually eating and absorbing the full dose every month. I have occasionally seen dogs test positive when the owner swears (and I believe them) that they gave the meds every month. Sh** happens ;-). We don't require it, however. We do require clients to sign a waiver if they choose to not get a heartworm test, stating that their pet has been on hwp and hasn't missed a dose, and they understand the risks. It is true that the heartworm prevention companies won't honor their guarantee if you don't do a heartworm test annually, or at least every other year, but if you're buying heartworm prevention over the internet that's a moot point, because they also won't honor their guarantee if you buy from anyone other than a licensed veterinarian! Deborah, DVM >>>are vets required by law >>>> to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >bit outdated but probably still holds true. >http://members.verizon.net/~vze2r6qt/supplies/legal.htm Thanks - - I thought it was illegal in some states for a vet not to provide a prescription. It's not in my state. >I know of a lot of vets who started charging a fee for a written >prescription. It's really just a way to help make up for the loss of profit [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >medicine -- they couldn't sell drugs if they wanted to, as far as I know, so >they don't have that loss of income to deal with. Right, but their charges for services more than make up for it. I think it's good that vets are starting to adjust prices so as not to rely on prescription profits. Doesn't mean I won't complain when my vet's prices go up, of course. ;-) >Regarding heartworm testing -- I recommend it annually, and think it's a >good idea, simply because you never know if your dog is actually eating and [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >internet that's a moot point, because they also won't honor their guarantee >if you buy from anyone other than a licensed veterinarian! I was looking at it from a medical necessity standpoint rather than whether or not the pharmaceutical company will honor their guarantee. What's your opinion of straight heartworm preventative vs. heartworm preventative plus other worm "control"? We had some roundworms here last year in spite of Heartgard Plus, so obviously the added wormers aren't a guarantee. Are we running the risk of parasites becoming immune to the chemicals if we're giving regular doses that are high enough to "control" infestations but not prevent or get rid of them? Mustang Sally >>>>are vets required by law >>>>> to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > Mustang Sally I wouldn't have any problem writing a prescription if a client can get something cheaper elsewhere. To me it just looks tacky to make a fuss about something like that. We don't charge for writing prescriptions, but that might change. For me it's not about the lost revenue, that should be made up by a general fee increase, but about the time it sometimes takes to check the record, figure out the dose, etc. It should be just a nominal fee, not anything crazy (like $25) or punitive. I think giving heartworm prevention montly is largely out of convenience. It's plain easier to remember that way, plus if you forget to give it (as I have on occasion) you have a built in grace period. If you are giving it every 45 days and forget for 14 days, then what? Why push it with something important like this? The dose of ivermectin used to prevent heartworm disease is puny. I don't know the half-life off hand, but if I remember right, it's a couple days at most, and probably more like 12 hours. I don't think the amount of "chemicals" is much of a concern there. Some people mistakenly think that it's a "long acting" type of thing, but it's not. For demodectic mange we use something like 83X the monthly heartworm prevention dose DAILY for weeks to months. Draw your own conclusion there. I don't have any problem with people using injectable ivermectin for heartworm prevention. I don't recommend it, and if the dog gets heartworm or gets overdosed (seen both happen), I reserve the right to be irritated with the owner... at least privately. I think it's a good thing to have the intestinal parasite prevention in the heartworm prevention. Let's not forget these worms have the potential to affect people, so that's an important consideration. I'm not aware of any significant resistance to pyrantel in the common intestinal parasites. In some cases the prepatent periods of the worms are less than 30 days, so you may occasionally see some parasite eggs in the stool, but it won't necessarily mean the dewormer isn't working. Check the stool again about a week after giving the heartworm prevention. If there's still eggs present then it may not be working. Also, I believe pyrantel is about 80% effective in removing the worms, so a few may remain after treatment. That's part of the reason several doses are usually given of the straight pyrantel dewormer for treating parasites. I rarely find any intestinal parasites in dogs on heartworm prevention with dewormer in it. I pretty often will find parasites in dogs not on prevention, and that's often my clue that they've not been getting it. Heartgard Plus is labeled for "removal" of roundworms and hookworms, which means is gets rid of them versus "control" which means it prevents infestations, but won't get rid of any worms already there. Interceptor is labeled for removal of roundworms and whipworms but only control of hookworms. So if you have hookworms you need to get rid of them with another dewormer initially. I believe in annual heartworm testing. I live in a heartworm endemic area and I give my dog heartworm prevention monthly year-round. I test her annually. Nothing is perfect, and if she does get heartworms, however unlikely, the sooner it's discovered the easier it is to treat. She's very important to me. The test isn't that expensive, so I consider it worthwhile insurance. I don't have a problem with testing every other year if that's what a cliet wants, but I try hard to get everyone to test at least every other year. MK DVM >I wouldn't have any problem writing a prescription if a client can get >something cheaper elsewhere. To me it just looks tacky to make a fuss about [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >the record, figure out the dose, etc. It should be just a nominal fee, not >anything crazy (like $25) or punitive. In this case, he wouldn't even have needed to do that - - I asked for the prescription right when the condition was diagnosed and the med prescribed. I think it looks tacky too, particularly since I've paid this clinic $1480 since May for everybody's annuals (including HW tests, dentals, and a couple of unusual things) and we may have a large surgery bill in the near future for one dog. >I think giving heartworm prevention montly is largely out of convenience. >It's plain easier to remember that way, plus if you forget to give it (as I [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >control of hookworms. So if you have hookworms you need to get rid of them >with another dewormer initially. Do you think that Heartgard Plus on a regular basis is more effective in eliminating rounds and whips than Ivomec monthly plus Drontal Plus twice a year? >I believe in annual heartworm testing. I live in a heartworm endemic area >and I give my dog heartworm prevention monthly year-round. I test her [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >what a cliet wants, but I try hard to get everyone to test at least every >other year. Thanks much for taking the time to respond - - you've covered everything! Sally Hennessey >>I wouldn't have any problem writing a prescription if a client can get >>something cheaper elsewhere. To me it just looks tacky to make a fuss [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > > Sally Hennessey The dewormer in HG+ is pyrantel pamoate and it isn't effective against whipworms. Dogs can be constantly exposed to infective worm egss or larvae, especially outdoor dogs, so treating for them monthly will provide better control than treating twice a year. Drontal Plus is made up of another type of pyrantel, praziquantel (Droncit) for tapeworms, and febantel, which cover the whipworms and maybe some other worms. Ivomec at the low heartworm prevention dose will not have any effect on intestinal parasites. MK DVM >>>I wouldn't have any problem writing a prescription if a client can get >>>something cheaper elsewhere. To me it just looks tacky to make a fuss [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] >the whipworms and maybe some other worms. Ivomec at the low heartworm >prevention dose will not have any effect on intestinal parasites. I was told that Ivomec at a somewhat higher dose (I can't find my Ivomec dosage information right now) will help with intestinal parasites. But it sounds as though the best bet would be Heartgard Plus (or an equivalent such as Iverhart Plus) monthly and Drontal Plus maybe once a year. Sally Hennessey >MK DVM >>>>I wouldn't have any problem writing a prescription if a client can get >>>>something cheaper elsewhere. To me it just looks tacky to make a fuss [quoted text clipped - 125 lines] >> >>MK DVM Hi, Correct, ivermectin at a higher dose is effective against intestinal parasites. Personally, I just give my dog Interceptor and check a stool sample once a year. She is an indoor dog, so less likely to have worms. If there have been no whipworms on the fecal exams, then you really don't need to do Drontal Plus. You should have a stool sample checked once or twice a year to keep track of things. That's not a big deal, we just have clients drop a sample off. I try not to make things more complicated than they need to be. Here's a link to the CDC information on parasite prevention: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dpd/parasites/ascaris/prevention.htm And another on intestinal parasites: http://petplace.netscape.com/Articles/artShow.asp?artID=216&cboArticleContentsNa mes=12508 MK DVM >>>>>I wouldn't have any problem writing a prescription if a client can get >>>>>something cheaper elsewhere. To me it just looks tacky to make a fuss [quoted text clipped - 136 lines] >drop a sample off. I try not to make things more complicated than they need >to be. It's a big deal with 12 dogs. We've always had foster dogs in and out, and they usually come from the track with worms. Rather than do fecals on the fosters and run the risk of false negatives, we just worm them all with Drontal Plus. Since I have it around, I usually give it to all my guys once a year too. Sally Hennessey snipped >> I was looking at it from a medical necessity standpoint rather than >> whether or not the pharmaceutical company will honor their guarantee. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> Mustang Sally snipped > I think giving heartworm prevention montly is largely out of convenience. > It's plain easier to remember that way, plus if you forget to give it (as > I have on occasion) you have a built in grace period. If you are giving > it every 45 days and forget for 14 days, then what? Why push it with > something important like this? Exactly. We all know that people forget things like heartworm prevention. Heck, I've had my dog for only a year and I've probably been late on her heartgard at least 2-3 times. Which is why, even though I know it works if given every 45 days, I give it every month! Then when I forget and am 1-2 weeks late, there is no real risk. > The dose of ivermectin used to prevent heartworm disease is puny. I don't > know the half-life off hand, but if I remember right, it's a couple days [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > year if that's what a cliet wants, but I try hard to get everyone to test > at least every other year. Ditto, ditto, ditto to everything above. Deborah, DVM > The problem is, vets historically have undercharged for services, and > made up for it by making money off of prescription items. I don't understand this philosophy. Why did it become a common practice to take advantage of the clients with pets with health problems? Not only does the client suffer the stress of a sick animal but also inflated prices. > I don't understand this philosophy. Why did it become a common practice > to take advantage of the clients with pets with health problems? I don't understand your "take advantage". It would be ok to raise service prices and sell drugs at a loss, but not to do the reverse? > Not only does the client suffer the stress of a sick animal but also > inflated prices. A vet's prices are whatever the hell she wants them to be. If you don't like them negotiate or take your business elsewhere.  SignatureJohn Hasler john@dhh.gt.org Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA > I don't understand your "take advantage". It would be ok to raise service > prices and sell drugs at a loss, but not to do the reverse? Where did I say they should sell drugs at a loss? Here is what I said: "I don't understand this philosophy. Why did it become a common practice to take advantage of the clients with pets with health problems? Not only does the client suffer the stress of a sick animal but also inflated prices." What is your reading comprehension level? > I don't understand this philosophy. Why did it become a common practice > to take advantage of the clients with pets with health problems? Not > only does the client suffer the stress of a sick animal but also inflated > prices. You seem to find it particularly offensive for vets to underprice their services and make up the difference on drugs, but apparently find the reverse quite acceptable. This makes little sense. > What is your reading comprehension level? Quite high. That must be my problem. I'm having trouble reading down to your level. SignatureJohn Hasler john@dhh.gt.org Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA >> The problem is, vets historically have undercharged for services, and >> made up for it by making money off of prescription items. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > only does the client suffer the stress of a sick animal but also inflated > prices. You're making a jump that ain't justified. It isn't "common practice" as you say. Vets are by and large underpaid as a profession, and when one area of profit gets squeezed, something else has to go up or your kids don't eat. > You're making a jump that ain't justified. It isn't "common practice" as > you say. Vets are by and large underpaid as a profession, and when one > area of profit gets squeezed, something else has to go up or your kids > don't eat. Where is the jump? Dr. Deborah said: >>> The problem is, vets historically have undercharged for services, and >>> made up for it by making money off of prescription items. I just think everyone should pay their fair share and not just the people with sick animals. I am not complaining about how much veternarians make. I think my vets are wonderful. The policy of making a huge profit on medications to make up for services priced too low seems like it is kicking clients when they are down or taking advantage of the clients that care enough to treat their pets. Are you a vet yet? > I just think everyone should pay their fair share and not just the people > with sick animals. If you have a sick animal your fair share is the cost of treating that animal. Do you think people who don't have animals should pay your bills? > The policy of making a huge profit on medications to make up for services > priced too low seems like it is kicking clients when they are down or > taking advantage of the clients that care enough to treat their pets. You aren't making any sense. SignatureJohn Hasler john@dhh.gt.org Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA > Where is the jump? When you say "take advantage of the clients with pets with health problems". If you look at the breakdown of profits on sales, a big chunk of it comes from preventative stuff like heartworm and flea meds, which everybody (should) be using. I also would argue that saying it's "common practice" to make "huge profits" from meds sales to people with sick animals off meds isn't really accurate as the markups usually aren't that high, although you do raise a valid point about fee structures needing a re-evaluation for the whole profession in general. > Are you a vet yet? Nope. Fourth year. And loving not having to listen to six hours of lecture a day. I believe my vets office marks up medication about 100% most of the time. They give me a break on one of my dogs meds, Percorten V, because it is so expensive. I am sure cost is somewhere around $100 and I pay around $150. I really am not complaining because my animals get very good care. Sometimes my vet even calls when she is not working to check on a situation. From what I've heard, here and through my vets, the mark-up of meds keeps the services cheaper and that has just never seemed like a fair way to balance the budget. Good luck in your final year. Becky >> Where is the jump? > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Nope. Fourth year. And loving not having to listen to six hours of > lecture a day. >I believe my vets office marks up medication about 100% most of the time. >They give me a break on one of my dogs meds, Percorten V, because it is so >expensive. I am sure cost is somewhere around $100 and I pay around $150. Yeah, Percorten's a costly one. I think you'll find most vets (at least the ones I know) do have a different scale for expensive meds used on a chronic basis; stuff like Percorten and Anipryl are whopper expensive and it's not good medicine to charge so much the client won't use it. And BTW: I gave a dog two bags of platelet concentrate last week, as well as a blood transfusion. That came out to $1500. Some of this stuff gets pretty costly, doesn't it. > I just think everyone should pay their fair share and not just the people > with sick animals. By and large, preventive meds aside, pharmacy is not a huge profit center in veterinary medicine. Some vets may have a larger dispensing fee than others, but it's certainly not the 'bread and butter' some people think it is. >> I just think everyone should pay their fair share and not just the people >> with sick animals. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > others, but it's certainly not the 'bread and butter' some people think it > is. I don't work at a vet's office I am just referring to what I have read here and how much I pay for one of my dogs meds. In my post to Josh I explained that I pay $150 for my dog's Percorten V and it cost around $100 - and they aren't marking it up as much as they mark-up others. I thought she told me they usually mark it up 100% - that seems like a huge mark-up to me but I have never worked retail. Becky Again, I am not complaining. I would pay whatever my vets charged because I think they are wonderful. So: are vets required by law > to provide a prescription if a medication can be purchased more > cheaply elsewhere? Or is it an acceptable standard or practice? Or > just a courtesy to clients? .............Some vets have gone to charging for a script for items they carry in stock. If they don't carry it they have to give you a script - not charge for it I would think. When I had an Addisonian the vets (multiple ones over the years) would regularly write me scripts for the Florinef as they didn't carry much of it and were well aware the cost was killing even at the cheapter price at the pharmacy. ......Think of it like this. Each vet practice is really like a Dr.'s office, plus a hospital plus a pharmacy. They absolutely have to invest in a plethora of drugs to be able to serve their patients. If they don't get used they have to toss it out. While I've always fully supported my vets, when one of them put a notice on the front desk that scripts cost $25 for items they already had inhouse, well, that was the first nail in the coffin for that practice. Things went downhill from there. 25 bucks is usurious. > Also, there are veterinarians who believe that dosing with Heartgard > or other heartworm preventatives every 45 days is effective ........It's not a belief. Get the NADA number off the Heartgard box and go to the govt site for the Center for Veterinary Medicine and look in the FOI section for the original studies done for Heartgard (Heartgard Plus is a supplemental study). They built in a missed dose. They assumed at one point or another your dog might puke unnoticed and not get the Heartgard that month. They state this quite plainly in the first page. Also if you look at the results for 30 days and 45 days it's exactly the same. The only thing you'll be giving up is the right to push the maker to pay for treatment for your dog if they get heartworm and/or sue them, as you've voided the guarantee. Shrug. If you need to save some bucks see if your vet will talk to you about using Ivomec. If he understands how to dose dogs and trusts you to do it right, it will literally cost pennies per month. If a dog is on heartworm preventative > regularly (i.e. during the mosquito season but not year-round), is a > heartworm test necessary annually? What about if the heartworm > medication is continued year-round (which some vets recommend > against)? ......You'll have to make up your own mind on that, as it's just as you said......opinion. Vets generally push one message for the general public for simplicity's sake. It's not all that cut and dried. You might spend some time looking at some studies over the past couple of years that show that Ivermectin does have some efficacy on adult heartworms also. The general thinking of absolutely having to keep the dog on meds until 1 month after mosquitos are gone and putting them back on them 1 month after mosquitos come back might not be all that accurate. The margin may be a bit wider than that. It all depends too on what the mosquitos are like in your area and if you keep them out all night (which increases chances of heartworm infestation by 45%). buglady take out the dog before replying >......Think of it like this. Each vet practice is really like a Dr.'s >office, plus a hospital plus a pharmacy. They absolutely have to invest in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >items they already had inhouse, well, that was the first nail in the coffin >for that practice. Things went downhill from there. 25 bucks is usurious. I agree, and that would have been a nail in the coffin for me too. >> Also, there are veterinarians who believe that dosing with Heartgard >> or other heartworm preventatives every 45 days is effective [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >treatment for your dog if they get heartworm and/or sue them, as you've >voided the guarantee. Shrug. I'm not concerned about the guarantee. I don't do unnecessary vaccinations, so if they need heartworm preventative every 45 days I don't want to give it every 30 days. >If you need to save some bucks see if your vet will talk to you about using >Ivomec. If he understands how to dose dogs and trusts you to do it right, >it will literally cost pennies per month. He'd not be happy if I mentioned that. He didn't want me to use Iverheart, and that's just ridiculous because Iverheart is FDA approved. It's no different than me using generic drugs for myself, and I do wherever possible. I was using Ivomec for a while, and I know there are vets who think it's fine, because that's where I got the dosage information. I'm thinking of switching back to Ivomec again and worming everybody with Drontal Plus twice a year, not for economic reasons but because Heartgard Plus doesn't prevent intestinal worms anyway. >......You'll have to make up your own mind on that, as it's just as you >said......opinion. Vets generally push one message for the general public [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >area and if you keep them out all night (which increases chances of >heartworm infestation by 45%). I'm in northeast Ohio, so we have mosquitos or the potential for mosquitos from April through November, but I was reading something today about how the temperatures have to stay above 50 for two consecutive weeks in order for the larvae to develop, or something. Anyway, thanks. I need to do some research on this subject. Sally Hennessey sighthounds & siberians said in alt.med.veterinary: > I'm in northeast Ohio, so we have mosquitos or the > potential for mosquitos from April through November, but I > was reading something today about how the temperatures have > to stay above 50 for two consecutive weeks in order for the > larvae to develop, or something. Two straight weeks of 70degF (I thought) for the microfilariae to develop within the skeeter into the larvae that are reintroduced to the dog, which is why heartworm preventative meds aren't all that common here. > Anyway, thanks. I need to > do some research on this subject. http://www.heartwormsociety.org/CanineHeartwormInfo.htm Signature--Matt. Rocky's a Dog. >sighthounds & siberians said in alt.med.veterinary: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >reintroduced to the dog, which is why heartworm preventative >meds aren't all that common here. What I read quoted temperatures that weren't that high. Which makees sense, because we usually don't get temps that are consistently in the 70s until June, but heartworm is common here. Mustang Sally >>sighthounds & siberians said in alt.med.veterinary: >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Mustang Sally The American Heartworm Society has the details here: http://www.heartwormsociety.org/AHS%20Guidelines-Canine2005.htm MK DVM |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.