Question

They were on heartgard, then changed to triheart, given once a month. I live in a high infest area, but the vets have seen several cases of the prevention failing.

Could they get a note from the vet that states the reasons behind not using preventative?

I can see the rescue's point (with no other info than the overdue test it appears that they have "given up" on the older dog and now want a younger animal), but if they aren't willing to take a vet note explaining the situation, then I think the ire at their decision is warranted for sure.

So far I haven't heard any good reason for testing or giving prevention to a 16 year old dog other than parasites (which is a good point btw).

It is like doing a biopsy on a tumor of a 16 year old dog. What's the point? Are you going to treat it? 16 is pretty old for a dog

The only reason I could see for testing is because if the old dog is positive and it is still mosquito season, it increases the risk that the foster dog can be bitten by a mosquito that bites the old one and then bites it, thereby transmitting the heartworm.

That being said, I would not test or treat the old dog (not even preventative), but I would make sure the foster is on preventative.

Jewlieee

I think that is jumping to conclusions to say that someone is giving up on an older dog. That would be true if they turned the dog in to a shelter but that's not the case.

ah but people love to do that!

Is it also giving up if you have the 16y/o put down? no that's "letting them go". Is it giving up to not try meds for incontinence and just start using diapers? Is it giving up if you stop vaccinating the dog? Is it giving up to not give them Rimadyl or Metacam or Glucosamine supp's that cost the Earth and just use baby aspirin or just buying them a comfy ortho bed or let them sleep on the couch cushions?

People sure do like to slap their criterium of care onto others and it really frosts my donuts...speaking from a personal my own self viewpoint. Every situation and individual is different. Not everyone is about to run to the ends of the Earth for a few more months or even years. It is THEIR call. The rescue can do and say whatever they want...but making these people who have raised and loved a dog for...yes I am going to use caps again...SIXTEEN YEARS...feel "not good enough" is laughable. again JMO.

 Just to clarify, I'm not saying that's how I would see it with the info we have, but I would be pretty suspicious if someone wanted to adopt a young dog but was not keeping up with vet care for an older dog.  An older dog with health issues that preclude giving preventative, especially on the recommendation of the vet, is a wholly different situation imo.

Age doesn't necessarily mean that the dog was taken care of amazingly well, it can just be that the dog was naturally a healthy, long lived sort - my parents' dog lived to 14yo with epilepsy, but died from a lung infection that went undetected for several days because she was an exclusively outdoor dog.  She wasn't neglected or abused but she wasn't given the level of care that my dogs get, nor what my parents' current dog has.  I'm pretty sure she was overdue for some vet care (annual exam, heartworm test, etc.) at the time of her death as well, so perhaps that colors my response to the situation?

stardog85

Age doesn't necessarily mean that the dog was taken care of amazingly well, it can just be that the dog was naturally a healthy, long lived sort - my parents' dog lived to 14yo with epilepsy

well duh, lol. I know that. That is why I referenced COMMITMENT and not standard of care. Your standard of care is different than mine...and so on and so on. Some people recoil in horror when a dog is fed Ol Roy...and not raw or special $80 a bag food. That is elitist to some, totally understandable to others. 

But the fact is it takes SOME form of attachment and dedication for a dog to stay in the same home for 16 years...period. You can step into ANY shelter and see how true that statement is.

For all we know the people kicked the dog twice a day and never groomed it....but we don't know that. The only fact we know is that the dog has spent a longer time alive in this home...than most people have their dogs...I think that is a fair statement to make. Especially...ESPECIALLY given the mindset of people today...and the amt of animals surrendered for "stupid" reasons.

I have known many a rescue and breeder both who like to micromanage and overstipulate this that and the other with their placements. You know what? They ALWAYS have too many dogs, IMO the two things are connected. If you are so incredibly concerned over every little thing, from diet, to housing, to finances, to medical care, keep the dog yourself.

Common sense and basics are easily assessed without resorting to micromanagement, controlling, and overbearing behavior. I will likely always feel that way.

Jewlieee

So far I haven't heard any good reason for testing or giving prevention to a 16 year old dog other than parasites (which is a good point btw).

My reason for testing would be that it would just be good to know as much about the health and condition of the dog as possible.  If the dog had a bad HW infestation, that will definitely effect the dog just like the failing liver will.  I might not do anything about it, but at least I'd know why the dog was behaving a certain way.  It's sort of like my dear Grandma who died in Jan. and I still don't know why....It doesn't really matter b/c she was old and already had been suffering from three unrelated health conditions that can each cause death by themselves, and when I went to visit her for the last time several of her organs were already shutting down....but at the same time it's just something I will always wonder about.

But, like Gina says, whether or not I really WOULD test the dog depends on the dog's condition.  The vet might be the last place I'd want to take the dog if it was immunocompromised and/or stressed easily.  I don't even like taking my healthy puppies for their shots, always carry in and carry out.  A senior dog with a known condition would give me the same cause for concern.  Depending on the severity, it might *not* be safe for the dog to even visit the vet for a HW test.

The HW test itself I don't see as a problem for any dog, it's the stress involved and possibility for exposure that I would have to weigh.

Liesje

The HW test itself I don't see as a problem for any dog, it's the stress involved and possibility for exposure that I would have to weigh.

Right. If one could find a vet to do a housecall, or teach you to draw the blood yourself...or get a mobile vet. But again. The trouble...is it worth the outcome?

and again what gets me, is that if the dog were dead...this rescue would be singing a totally different tune, and so would most people here at the forum, if someone showed up that'd just lost a 16y/o dog. Tell them at that time that the dog died a year out of date for a HW test and died of liver failure and most would shrug and say "I'm sorry for your loss" and admire the time the dog spent with the owner then move onto to other memories or discussion. I'll just shrug now and save time...lol. *shrugs*

There are reasons in my family we just don't deal with rescues. We don't have a fence, we walk our dogs on leashes. We're overall terrible people as far as most rescues are concerned.

I don't think we know nearly enough about the situation to judge either the people or the rescue involved.  As someone else mentioned, what's the time frame?  Did the owners find out the dog was terrminally ill a few months ago and at that point decided to skip HW testing/preventative?  Or has the dog not been tested in several years?  Big difference IMO.

I have a hard time with cut & dried discussions like this.  first off, I don't think 16 is old at all -- not for many breeds.  A "good life" sure ... but I never expect them to turn up their toes either. 

I've had a lot of dogs live way older than 16, and with way more health issues.  My Prissy lived to 21, Foxy to 19 (and neither shelties nor corgis are known as 'long-lived), and Kee was likely 18 or 19.  Socks was so heartworm positive at 10 1/2 when we GOT her no one would treat her with the immiticide b/c it would have been fatal.

I honestly don't like to see a dog treated with the immiticide -- NOR DO I LIKE HEARTGUARD.  It's pointless because it's failing so often.  But if it's a breed that tolerates ivermectin then treat it **Properly** the slow way.  that is NOT once a month.  (then that dog is a heartworm factory spreading it 30 other days of the 31 days in the month!)  You give the preventive dose (the PROPER preventive dose -- not this abbreviated dose HeartGuard tries to use so 'all breds' can use it).  DAILY.  It takes several months to kill all the adults -- but your risk is FAR lower and it's cheap. 

 I dont understand the reluctance -- I mean it's a $40 bottle of Ivomec for Heaven's sake.  That will treat daily and then the wean off doses for the full year of treatment, and then provide "prevention" for 3-4 more years and you'll still throw away more than half of the bottle. 

I *test* because I have to have the "paper" in order to do pet therapy.  That's the only reason.  My vet never asks us to test because he knows I give Interceptor faithfully (I'm lazy -- it's easier.)

But when there is a cheap, easy option to TREAT why wouldn't you?  Now the immiticide?  That's hundreds of dollars.  But it's also a painful difficult treatment.  Doing the daily amounts of ivermectin is not.  It's not risky.  You don't have to do the multiple painful treatments.

But cancer?  If something is malignant then there are things you CAN do.  You can put them on a cancer diet.  You can give herbs, etc. that help stem the growth of the cancer.  You don't have to do radical stuff like chemo or radiation. 

Why did I take an elderly peke for acupuncture and give her seizure herbs for petit mal seizures?  Because it made the quality of her life better.  And I'd wager (and I'd win) that David and I saw a dog in Kee Shu that NO ONE had ever known.  Because treatment -- even tho she was a senior dog - unlocked one of the best therapy dogs I'll ever know. 

Socks had "heart issues" for 6 and a half YEARS after we treated her.  she coughed?  Yep so she took heart meds and wore a t-shirt.  She had to be put to sleep at 17.  Because of heart damage?  Nope -- she had cancer.  And had LIVED with it for about 3 1/2 years (on a cancer diet).  When it became painful we helped her cross the Bridge.

For me life is a gift every day.  If anyone had judged whether or not how active I was able to be should determine my quality of life I'd have been "put to sleep" when I was about 9 years old.  cos in all my life I've never been able to run, jump or play like "other kids".  Soooo I did other stuff. 

Not only would I test and 'treat' the 16 year old dog it would probably be ME who would adopt that same dog. 

A rescue who would turn someone down?  Rescues all have silly rules -- because they want to boil down adoption to  a set of quick, easy, ABC's -- they want a "test" that absolves them from having to make a judgment call.  If you don't get 5 out of 5 right on their score, nope ... NEXT??

The answer to whether I would test and give preventative to a 16 year old dog is yes and don't know.  Yes, I would test and yes I would give preventative if the test were negative.  No, if it was positive for heartworms, especially a dog with other health problems.

Are some rescues ridiculous?  Yes.  Oh, you didn't ask that did you? lol

The main reason to test:    To prevent spreading the disease. Yes, I know prevention is SUPPOSED to 'prevent' that, but I know first hand it does not always work! My old mal was been coughing blood at one point. HW cause alot of damage to the heart and lungs. Treating the side affects can be very costly, even if you choose not to treat for the parasite.

IMO, if the dog is in too bad of shape to be stressed going to the vet clinic, is it healthy enough for a new addition?

Now, cancer, I can see not doing a biopsy or treating. Yet it is not contagious.