~Anne~

Several things come to my attention in the links you have provided (thank you for these). The 'adversereactions' website claims the following: And then goes on to point out that the recall of Proheart is a class 1. This to me gives the impression this recall is serious stuff indeed. But then, when you go into the FDA website and look at the current recalls the FDA have, and there are many class 1 recalls, it appears it isn't so scary. Of the current class 1 recalls there are; "Mini Angel Food Pack" A class 1 recall because...... REASON SuperTarget & Archer Farms brand Mini Angel Food cakes purchased before August 05, 2006 contain an undeclared Dried Egg White ingredient. Serious stuff indeed I guess for those who may be allergic to egg white products but for the majority.... Or perhaps this class 1 recall; "Kroger Garden Blend Frozen Fresh Stir Fry Vegetables, Broccoli, Sugar Snap Peas, Green Beans, Carrots, Celery, Water Chestnuts, Onions, and Red Peppers." And the reason for this class 1 recall; REASON Product contains undeclared egg noodles (egg and wheat). To me, the examples above show that there is 'internet hysteria' being used in the debate. The second thing that occurs to me is that the most recent recalls (that were now 2 years ago) were on certain individual products of PH6 and not the entire range of the drug. They had issues with only certain batches. I will say howver that it is disconcerting that information regarding PH12 is very limited? Even a search of the FortDodge Australian website does not trun up anything of value and I would think with all of the contraversy surrounding the use of this product that they would have more information available. I am still absorbing the other information you supplied me and will comment later (work permitting). Thanks again for your links and info. It is all interesting reading but one thing that, to me at any rate, appears odd is that the focus for everyone is on PH6 which has never been available in Australia. As you know, we have Proheart12 and yet there appears to be limited information from both sides of the debate about this particular product.

Hmmmmm............ again.... the document doesn't give conclusive argument that Pro-heart 6 should not be used. After all of the presentations were made the question was asked: Based on the presentations and information provided is ProHeart 6® safe for use in dogs? Yes or No There were 7 experts who said 'Yes' it is safe to use and 8 who said 'no' it is not safe to use. It also states the following when qualifying the responses given; evelin - I have spent some time perusing the 'dogsadversereactions.com' site and can not find any link to the active ingredients of Proheart 6 or 12. Are you able to direct me? I need it to be a primary source.

Thanks for this. I'll certainly look into the links you have supplied.

If you are in a high risk area then and you feel uneasy about giving an annual injection perhaps a monthly preventative is a good alternative? I am not sure that a bi annual test is appropriate. If something goes awry with one test or you forget to have it done then you could open yourself up to problems. Remember, treating heartworm is a serious business and the possibility of permanent damage to the heart and other organs from the treatment and from the heartworm is quite high. On the other hand....... if you have never had any issues then why not continue with the way things are?

In my opinion, this is the critical decision to be made. This is exactly why I have decided to revert to monthly prevention because I do not like the thought that the drug is effective in my dogs system for such a long period of time should future studies prove conclusively that the drug has more side effects and or adverse reactions then previously expected. Again I reiterate though thatthere is no conclusive evidence to say it is any more harmful or has a higher number of reactions then many other drugs on the market that we routinely give our pets.

evelin.... you do realise that the product that was removed from the shelves in the US is not the same product available in Australia don't you? (Psst....... to type in uppercase is considered 'shouting' on the internet and is not kosher or polite)

I am not denying Julie that there are Vets who believe there are problems with this drug, or indeed, any drug for that matter. I am a little unclear just what point you are making here? My understanding of recent tests carried out in Australia is the the drug is still not proven to be the direct link with many of the claimed adverse reactions. There is a line of thought that it may be a combination of adminstering a vaccination against other canine diseases (i.e. a C5) and the heartwrom injection at the same time that may be the cause of the adverse reactions that are claimed to have occurred. A drop in income? How? Why? If my vet publicly stated that he would not administer a drug that he believed caused problems but instead advocated the use of alternative treatments how would this make him lose business? In fact, I'll go as far as to say that some Vets have already done this. There are several posts here that make that very claim Julie. I agree with the 'sticking their neck out' statement because that is exactly what it would be as there is no conclusive evidence to say that this injection causes these problems and that is precisely my point and the reason behind the comment of 'internet hype'. At this point in time that is what it is. Agreed. I am sure there are many Vets that say people should feed over the counter food. In fact, I'd say there are many breeders that say to feed over the counter food and I can't imagine that food companies or any offical organisation would hound them for making their claims, regardless of which diet they advocate! As I said, I trust my Vets advice explicitly and the Vets that I use advocate 'raw' diets and to my knowledge they have never been harrassed by any company or from the AVA. I would say that claim is nonsense Julie. Your statement doesn't make sense and rather then guess at what you are implying I'll leave it to you to perhaps explain it a little more before I comment in detail. I will say this though. If the drug company states clearly on its packaaging and advice sheets that there are contraindications and the Vet ignores this advice and uses the drug in the incorrect way or to the wrong subject then the Vet is responsible for the outcome. Do your really think all Vets would ignore the given advice and risk claims against them from their clients?!! I have never said the Vets are not aware of what warnings accompnay the drugs. I have said that the 4 vets I spoke with about this drug have not seen any of the severa adverse reactions claimed and that in their belief it was internet hype. I'd also like to add that I have never said one way or another what I think of the drug. It appears it is just 'assumed' because I have stated what the 4 Vets I have spoken with have said that I am an advocate for this drug. I, personally, had decided more then 6 months ago that I would revert to monthly preventative for my dogs after using the yeraly injection for the last 3 years on my dogs. As you are aware I have an epilpetic dog and I have researched this drug and the claims made against it extensively, hence why I have spoken with 4 different Vets as well. Two of which are Vets that I use personally and have known for more then 20 years (both professionally, as a client and as friends). What I discovered is that this drug has no higher incidence of severe adverse reactions then many, many other drugs we currently administer to our dog and cats in the course of keeping them healthy. To me it is an individual's choice to use this drug, just as it is to use a C5 or Drontal worming tablets, or indeed to desex at whichever age and as with anything there are risks. The fact that people on this forum, such as Morgan, believe they have the right to denigrate Vets or anyone else because they hold a different opinion reflect more on their own character then the education or beliefs of others.

'Prepared' is an unusual choice of word Julie? Can you elaborate?

Typical response from you Morgan and something I have come to expect. Just because a Vet doesn't believe what YOU believe doesn't make them ignorant. Fair chance they have far superior knowledge then you at any rate and that is something I'd be personally willing to put money on. Each of the Vets I have spoken with have said they have not experienced any major adverse reactions and it is in their opinion that it is all internet hype. These Vets are intelligent human beings and as such I trust their judgement.... more so then anything you would claim or anything I would read on the internet. Besides dearie... they are not 'my' Vets. I would love to own a Vet but I am not quite sure how I would purchase one. Do you Morgan?

Perhaps there are several who live in this bubble as I have discussed this very subject with at least 4 different vets and their reactions were either that it was internet hype or they were not aware of any need to withdraw the product because of adverse reactions *shrugs*

Phew - glad to hear he is ok. Which vet Myzska?

Let's not forget these either.................

Hmmm.....what of these then? You are looking more foolish by the second...... next you'll be making petty little comments about them all being small dogs. As I said, you know nothing about my resuce services or me for that matter, so it might be wise for you to think a little more (if that's possible for you) before you post and attempt to attack me, my integrity or my rescue.

;) How arrogant of you to assume that you know anything about my rescue services. ;) Perhaps I should give your pathetic and petty post a little pictorial help that is self explanatory........

Yes, Morgan, your wisdom as usual is astounding. ;) Actually I would feel comfortable in declaring that 'most' rescuers don't give a tinkers cuss whether the dog they are rescuing is pure or mongrel.... wrong group sweetheart, you appear to have confused us with elitist breeders. ;) Actually, rescuers want people to put the welfare of animals first. The welfare of the animal above current breeding practices, above the show ring, above the personal likes and dislikes of dog owners and above the limited, blinkered and selfish views of certain people.

After a recent conversation with a veterinarian friend I believe that a hysterectomy may not be the viable solution to pet homes either and considering pet homes (as opposed to breeders) make up the greater majority of pet ownership in this country this becomes a major problem. He said it is very difficult to remove all the uterus without leaving some remnants of it at the uterine/cervical stump. Apparently because some uterine tissue still remains, the dog will still display all (including bleeding however reduced) normal signs of oestrus making it a poor option for most pet owners. A friend of his had her dog speyed two and half years ago. The bitch has been coming into season as per usual since desexing. The friend continually complained and had a falling out with her vet. Last month the bitch got quite sick and emergency surgery discovered an abcess on the uterine stump and closed pyometra. One ovary was still intact. So..... What to do? Who and what to believe? Personally, again from a rescue point of view I will continue to advocate early desexing. If this means 8 - 12 weeks then so be it. My own animals (both cats and dogs) have always been desexed at 6 months and I have never experienced any problems. With more than 60,000 dogs euthanased across Australia every year and the fact that this figure is increasing by up to 10% every year, I think that early desexing IS essential and a serious consideration for the future of animal wefare in this country.

Ahhh yes, the crux of the matter. Sadly, although we probably ALL believe that irresponsible people should not own animals, they DO.... and they CAN.... and they WILL.... and there is nothing to stop these irrespnsible people owning animals. Hence the need to find other ways and methods of dealing with the issue of unwanted animals and feral animals.

What you are describing is a tonic/clonic or grand mal... there are many types of seizures and this is just one type. My epi has even experienced seizures where he continues to walk around and acts as if he is drunk and choking on something but he is not aware of anything or anyone during this time and if there was a pool in front of him he would fall in and not notice. That is the lack of conciousness. If he were still concious he would fall in and be aware that he was in water even though he may not be able to control himself or attempt to swim. The one thing that is common with all seizures is loss of conciousness and awareness even if it is only for a few seconds and not overly noticeable.

steve - :p Thank you for providing this insight into commerical pet food! I admire the way you enjoy finding a subject and exploring it and the end result is education. You are a born teacher.

Hi dogcop, I've never met anyone before with a dog that suffers hypoglycemia. What do you do when things happens with your dog? Do you have to have them on a specfic diet?

Your dog doesn't sound like he is experiencing any type of seizure that I know or am aware of. I have a dog with epilepsy and so I have read, researched and spoken to many, many people about seizures. His symptoms do sound odd but to me they sound more like he is in pain and there isn't any pain related to a seizure. Is it possible they could take him to another vet for another opinion? Why the bendadryl I wonder?

Maybe it appears that that you are running an anti-desexing campaign. Perhaps you should learn to articulate better.

I'm not sure why there is even debate. Doesn't this (below) give an alternative that satisfies both sides???? Obviously there would be 'for' and 'against' for performing a second operation and so I guess this owuld mean weighing up the pros and cons and incidence of developing mammary cancer and pyometra.

Thanks for that. I like his summation. Perhaps this is the way to go?

But is it a problem that he is taller? Or is it just owner perception and owner acceptance? Is it because we all want to say what a perfect specimen our dog is or is there medical reasons that support the thought that dogs should be the same height as their litter mates? Genuine question.