Sudden infestation

[cooked]

2 hours ago, wildewillie89 said:

If there is no host then even if the eggs hatch, then the ticks will die (as the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states), and I emphasis the 'Prevention' part of the department. You think eggs that form into ticks can survive without a host? Survive without feeding? 

 

If there is no hosts, usually  you will find there is no infestations. It is why tick treatments advertise as avoiding future 'thorough' clean-ups if you keep up to date with the treatment. If an owner forgets to treat their animal, then that is when clean ups will need to occur due to infestations. So it is purely on the owner, rather than the treatment (depending on which treatment is used). Science doesn't lie as much as humans do fortunately, or as much as humans forget to treat their animals/choose not to treat them.  

I have previously posted studies on different types of treatments and their efficiency, and also tick borne diseases in this thread. I suggest you read them. They are scientific research papers, not opinions. Dogs are clinically infested at different times throughout the specific time periods to see how efficient these treatments are. 

Will not survive many tick borne diseases? Take Ehrlichiosis for example, one of the most common diseases in Thailand. Mahidol University (Thai's number one uni), state Rickettsia (which Ehrilichiosis is) and Babesia as the two main diseases threatening pets and humans in Thailand. Ehrlichiosis has three stages in animals; acute, sub-clinical and chronic. Healthy dogs will generally eliminate the bacteria at the sub-clinical stage. Those who are fed proper immune boosting diets anyway. Even in Thailand, with poor diets, like my in-laws dog - only a routine blood test confirmed the disease (the vet also said more often that not there is no symptoms in animals compared to humans). And Doxy treated it. So I am not sure where you got your information from, but please don't claim 'fact'.   

 

I live in rural Issan on a rai of land, with two houses opposite me, and farm land all around me. Stray dogs, soi dogs, house dogs, cows, rats (Leptospirosis and Ehrlichiosis cases in humans right next to my house) etc are all frequent passer-bys. The dog is also walked on a daily basis through farm land and also the local village (interacts with street dogs). Healthy diet helps tick borne diseases and Leptospirosis be passed through the body, without serious complications. 

Like I have said earlier, prevention is the key to avoiding infestations, not reaction. As reaction is a lot more dangerous than prevention. All it takes is consistently not allowing a host around the area (treating the dog). If you forget/choose not to like you seem to do, then I have no doubt there will be infestations. 

The OP was writing about a tick infestation, which will likely as not happen to you too one day. That's a bit late for prevention.  I am doing prevention in my own way, I never insisted that anyone else do it my way, although in my experience, this is the best way.

Tick eggs can survive for years before hatching. The larvae that emerge can live for some time before finding a host, and they are very mobile. 20 000 eggs, maybe, if only 1% make it through to the stage where they start biting, that is still way  too many.

By the way, I don't live in dirt, we clean the house regularly but I don't remove the skirting boards, clean out the roof space etc,  thank you very much.

I prefer to take the risk with chemical treatments (the house remains empty for at least 12 hours after treatments, followed by vigorous airing) than catching, or having one of my dogs catch, one of the diseases associated with ticks.

I also take exception to the implication that I feed our dogs incorrectly. Even if I did, that wouldn't solve the tick problem.

I am used to the knee jerk reaction, 'chemicals are bad', I can also remember when there were way fewer possibilities, apart from DDT, for combatting pests. They weren't romantic good old days.

I won't be answering any more, at least I did answer the OP's question, where I stated that these posts always devolve into arguments about the merits of different treatments.

[wildewillie89]

1 hour ago, cooked said:

The OP was writing about a tick infestation, which will likely as not happen to you too one day. That's a bit late for prevention.  I am doing prevention in my own way, I never insisted that anyone else do it my way, although in my experience, this is the best way.

Tick eggs can survive for years before hatching. The larvae that emerge can live for some time before finding a host, and they are very mobile. 20 000 eggs, maybe, if only 1% make it through to the stage where they start biting, that is still way  too many.

By the way, I don't live in dirt, we clean the house regularly but I don't remove the skirting boards, clean out the roof space etc,  thank you very much.

I prefer to take the risk with chemical treatments (the house remains empty for at least 12 hours after treatments, followed by vigorous airing) than catching, or having one of my dogs catch, one of the diseases associated with ticks.

I also take exception to the implication that I feed our dogs incorrectly. Even if I did, that wouldn't solve the tick problem.

I am used to the knee jerk reaction, 'chemicals are bad', I can also remember when there were way fewer possibilities, apart from DDT, for combatting pests. They weren't romantic good old days.

I won't be answering any more, at least I did answer the OP's question, where I stated that these posts always devolve into arguments about the merits of different treatments.

It is not a 'knee jerk' reaction when it is classified by government bodies as dangerous goods lol. 

Regarding the food, if you took that as a personal implication then that is completely on you. All I said was if people feed good diets then diseases like tick borne and Lepto will go through the system without many complications. It was purely to show you that what you thought was 'fact' was extremely far from what the veterinary science actually shows. 

 

Dr. Karen Becker and Dr. Ronald Schultz are two examples of very well known vets (with excellent credentials) who live in endemic areas, and don't even vaccinate their dogs for Lepto or tick borne, as they understand that a good diet, and the fact the disease can be treated is actually less dangerous than the non-core vaccines. We all know they are classified as non-core due to their high rates of side effects and the fact they don't work.

I think it is different eras on this forum. I am 27 years old, so i have grown up believing science, as there is the actual experiments to prove the best way to do things. Whereas many members on the forum like 'old school' ways, which to them work out just fine, but they just quite don't understand the future health complications that will come about. 

But it seems you have a lot of knowledge about the life cycles of ticks, which will help you in future battles. Good to see someone on the pet forum with at bit of knowledge. Good luck :)
 

[meatboy]

time for this forum to have a good clean.

[wildewillie89]

I agree. Some more 'fresh' or 2017 ideas would be good :). You know, for the health of the pets (as I would have thought that is why we are all here).

[dick dasterdly]

With a bit of luck, Bravecto and NexGard will prove to be 'miracle' cures for the next few years .

[wildewillie89]

22 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

With a bit of luck, Bravecto and NexGard will prove to be 'miracle' cures for the next few years .

How's the NexGard going?

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, wildewillie89 said:

How's the NexGard going?

Brilliantly!

 

Having frequent infestations despite using Frontline/Controline/Revoultion/collars etc. etc. every month - I've not seen a tick for approx. 5 months since using first Bravecto, and now Nexguard .

[overherebc]

Now have been tick clear for a month. Two injections each dog a month apart and then front line every month since.

Last tick found on the dogs, just over a month ago was in the process of dying when we found it.

Final garden spray today so hopefully that is the end of it this time.

[Lite Beer]

On 7/15/2017 at 3:30 PM, dick dasterdly said:

Brilliantly!

 

Having frequent infestations despite using Frontline/Controline/Revoultion/collars etc. etc. every month - I've not seen a tick for approx. 5 months since using first Bravecto, and now Nexguard .

We gave our two Goldens Nexgard Spectra yesterday.

Not cheap but if it works it will be worth it. 

[dick dasterdly]

14 hours ago, Lite Beer said:

We gave our two Goldens Nexgard Spectra yesterday.

Not cheap but if it works it will be worth it. 

I hope it proves as effective for you and your dogs as it has for mine .

 

Having said this, one of my dogs has recently been suffering skin/hair loss problems (presumed to be an environmental allergy), so next month I'll go back to giving her Bravecto to see if this helps/is better for her.

[Lite Beer]

I started with Nexgard. Lasts one month.

Bravecto lasts 3 months and looks to work out cheaper.

Might try that next time.

[wildewillie89]

Dogs react differently to each drug, both drugs or neither drug. 

 

One of my dogs does wonderfully on Bravecto, but the vet wasn't in stock one time so we tried Nexgard for that month. The dog became itchy and also lost energy (enough for me to make another vet visit). The vet was of the opinion it was the Nexgard and reported the side effects to the company. I will not touch the stuff ever again for that dog.

Have had friends who have had neurological symptoms with Nexgard. So the legs and arms twitch/shake at random times.

 

Can try both drugs (and different times obviously), but watch very closely for side effects, and get annual routine blood tests of course to make sure the dog is handling the drugs okay. Generally, most dogs will be okay, however there are a lot of campaigns against these drugs who seem to think they have a lot of evidence to back up their claims that many dogs suffer. The only real study done on the drugs was funded by the company and performed on Beagles (who are pretty tough with drugs). FDA/EPA is also starting to add warnings to the drugs - such as chance of seizure etc. 

But nothing else of any relevance to many in Thailand as of yet,  so we are incredibly restricted.

[dick dasterdly]

20 hours ago, Arjen said:

What is the difference between Bravecto and Nexguard? I am a happy user from Bravecto (well my dog uses, and I am the happy person)

 

Why do some of you change to Nexguard?

 

Arjen.

 

Nexguard protects against heart worms as well as ticks, so no need to buy Heartguard.  Additionally, I hoped a once a month tablet would be less toxic than one that lasts 3 months.

[dick dasterdly]

17 hours ago, wildewillie89 said:

Dogs react differently to each drug, both drugs or neither drug. 

 

One of my dogs does wonderfully on Bravecto, but the vet wasn't in stock one time so we tried Nexgard for that month. The dog became itchy and also lost energy (enough for me to make another vet visit). The vet was of the opinion it was the Nexgard and reported the side effects to the company. I will not touch the stuff ever again for that dog.

Have had friends who have had neurological symptoms with Nexgard. So the legs and arms twitch/shake at random times.

 

Can try both drugs (and different times obviously), but watch very closely for side effects, and get annual routine blood tests of course to make sure the dog is handling the drugs okay. Generally, most dogs will be okay, however there are a lot of campaigns against these drugs who seem to think they have a lot of evidence to back up their claims that many dogs suffer. The only real study done on the drugs was funded by the company and performed on Beagles (who are pretty tough with drugs). FDA/EPA is also starting to add warnings to the drugs - such as chance of seizure etc. 

But nothing else of any relevance to many in Thailand as of yet,  so we are incredibly restricted.

V interesting post wildewillie, especially as I've noticed that my dog with skin problems has also been v tired recently.  I put it down to the anti-allergy tablets, but perhaps it's the Nexguard.

 

Worryingly, my other dog's back legs sometimes shake when standing - so thanks to your post I've realised it's also possible that this could be due to the Nexguard!

 

Only one way to find out of course - I'll have to change back to Bravecto and see if the skin problems/tiredness and leg shaking improve/disappear.

[wildewillie89]

19 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

V interesting post wildewillie, especially as I've noticed that my dog with skin problems has also been v tired recently.  I put it down to the anti-allergy tablets, but perhaps it's the Nexguard.

 

Worryingly, my other dog's back legs sometimes shake when standing - so thanks to your post I've realised it's also possible that this could be due to the Nexguard!

 

Only one way to find out of course - I'll have to change back to Bravecto and see if the skin problems/tiredness and leg shaking improve/disappear.

Hopefully it is the Nexgard and not something else. The good thing is if it is the Nexgard, then the body will not take long to dispose of it as it is only a one month treatment - rather than 3 month. My dog was herself again reasonably quickly.

 

Usually milk thistle is used to detox these drugs. Will not counteract the drugs, but stories from owners and vets say that it helps. 

I think, for many, it will be possible to even extend the Bravecto to 4 months (instead of 3). It is quite a strong product and seems my dogs haven't had any ticks for that extra month. It is not overly expensive, but no real research has been done on prolonged use of it so I would be wary. Yes, it eventually leaves the system, but then we just give the dogs another dose of it. 

 

I was a member for a while for the Bravecto/Nexgard campaigns, just to get information from both sides before giving it to my dogs. Some dogs clearly have suffered from the drugs, but where the campaigns are let down is that they think any illness their dog gets is related to the drug. A lot of the time it is merely coincidence due to the fact the dog is on the drugs 100% of its life (it is why vets ignore the campaigns). They were calling for a full banning of the drug, I wanted a restricted use of it (as the side effects are smaller than the rate of tick diseases in some parts of the world - Thailand lol). So they asked me to leave the group. Some good people, but a lot of out right nutjobs in the group too. 

 

[dick dasterdly]

2 hours ago, wildewillie89 said:

Hopefully it is the Nexgard and not something else. The good thing is if it is the Nexgard, then the body will not take long to dispose of it as it is only a one month treatment - rather than 3 month. My dog was herself again reasonably quickly.

 

Usually milk thistle is used to detox these drugs. Will not counteract the drugs, but stories from owners and vets say that it helps. 

I think, for many, it will be possible to even extend the Bravecto to 4 months (instead of 3). It is quite a strong product and seems my dogs haven't had any ticks for that extra month. It is not overly expensive, but no real research has been done on prolonged use of it so I would be wary. Yes, it eventually leaves the system, but then we just give the dogs another dose of it. 

 

I was a member for a while for the Bravecto/Nexgard campaigns, just to get information from both sides before giving it to my dogs. Some dogs clearly have suffered from the drugs, but where the campaigns are let down is that they think any illness their dog gets is related to the drug. A lot of the time it is merely coincidence due to the fact the dog is on the drugs 100% of its life (it is why vets ignore the campaigns). They were calling for a full banning of the drug, I wanted a restricted use of it (as the side effects are smaller than the rate of tick diseases in some parts of the world - Thailand lol). So they asked me to leave the group. Some good people, but a lot of out right nutjobs in the group too. 

 

"They were calling for a full banning of the drug, I wanted a restricted use of it (as the side effects are smaller than the rate of tick diseases in some parts of the world - Thailand lol"

 

And therein lies the problem. Tick-borne blood parasites are a major concern for many of us in Thailand, so whilst we are worried about the possible effects of the effective treatments (Bravecto/Nexguard), we're even more concerned about the known, sometimes devastating effects of tick-borne blood parasites . 

[overherebc]

15 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"They were calling for a full banning of the drug, I wanted a restricted use of it (as the side effects are smaller than the rate of tick diseases in some parts of the world - Thailand lol"

 

And therein lies the problem. Tick-borne blood parasites are a major concern for many of us in Thailand, so whilst we are worried about the possible effects of the effective treatments (Bravecto/Nexguard), we're even more concerned about the known, sometimes devastating effects of tick-borne blood parasites . 

Friend just lost his dog to that problem. Went down very fast.

[dick dasterdly]

9 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Friend just lost his dog to that problem. Went down very fast.

Yes, I too knew 2 dogs that have died from these parasites - plus (of course) dogs that are already unwell will suffer badly, delaying (possibly fatally) vitally needed operations .

[wildewillie89]

We all just need to be careful, we can generally provide a better likelihood for these sorts of things than the local folk. 

 

The most common tick borne disease that threatens our pets according to Mahidol University is Rickettsia (anaplasma/ehrlichia). Both these bacteria can be naturally eliminated by the dog even without treatment  if the dog is well looked after (diet/exercise). If the dog is strong, and treated in the initial phase, then there is not many reasons why the dog shouldn't make a full recovery. 

If the dog is not strong (poor diet), then it is more likely to move to a chronic phase or the dog will become a carrier - which makes treatment tough. Of course, this is assuming we have missed the initial phase and dog seems back to his usual self after being sick (sub-clinical phase).

 

Also should be noted that the ridiculous over-vaccination that happens in Thai will make recovery that much tougher. My current vet graduated from Chulalongkorn University and when the I questioned the Thai protocol (with the WSAVA paper), he went off to do his own research and said will get back to me. Now, he is very happy with just giving our dogs the 3 in 1 and rabies every 3 years. So only 2 vaccines covering 4 diseases every 3 years, rather than the annual 7 in 1 plus annual rabies. Dogs cant fight diseases when  their immune systems are taking such a battering. 

[dick dasterdly]

42 minutes ago, wildewillie89 said:

We all just need to be careful, we can generally provide a better likelihood for these sorts of things than the local folk. 

 

The most common tick borne disease that threatens our pets according to Mahidol University is Rickettsia (anaplasma/ehrlichia). Both these bacteria can be naturally eliminated by the dog even without treatment  if the dog is well looked after (diet/exercise). If the dog is strong, and treated in the initial phase, then there is not many reasons why the dog shouldn't make a full recovery. 

If the dog is not strong (poor diet), then it is more likely to move to a chronic phase or the dog will become a carrier - which makes treatment tough. Of course, this is assuming we have missed the initial phase and dog seems back to his usual self after being sick (sub-clinical phase).

 

Also should be noted that the ridiculous over-vaccination that happens in Thai will make recovery that much tougher. My current vet graduated from Chulalongkorn University and when the I questioned the Thai protocol (with the WSAVA paper), he went off to do his own research and said will get back to me. Now, he is very happy with just giving our dogs the 3 in 1 and rabies every 3 years. So only 2 vaccines covering 4 diseases every 3 years, rather than the annual 7 in 1 plus annual rabies. Dogs cant fight diseases when  their immune systems are taking such a battering. 

I'm concerned/interested as to your frequent reference to "poor diet".

 

I started a thread (a long time ago) asking for advice on raw meat diets but (from memory!) the links provided were US based, so unhelpful.  Not to mention one of the dogs I 'knew' that died from tick-borne blood parasites had 'owners' that certainly did their best to provide the best food possible, including all the extra supplements considered a 'good idea'.

 

This is way off-topic, but I'm sure we'd all be v interested in your views as to a good diet.

 

This sounds sarcastic, but it's not meant that way!

[wildewillie89]

27 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm concerned/interested as to your frequent reference to "poor diet".

 

I started a thread (a long time ago) asking for advice on raw meat diets but (from memory!) the links provided were US based, so unhelpful.  Not to mention one of the dogs I 'knew' that died from tick-borne blood parasites had 'owners' that certainly did their best to provide the best food possible, including all the extra supplements considered a 'good idea'.

 

This is way off-topic, but I'm sure we'd all be v interested in your views as to a good diet.

 

This sounds sarcastic, but it's not meant that way!

As a puppy, I would just feed puppy or all purpose dog food (for bigger breeds) with a bit of raw to get them used to it. Purely as you don't have to worry about the phosphorus calcium ratios having negative impacts on skeletal development. As the dog gets a bit older and forms more, then I see it as better to feed raw (as most adult dog food has nothing of any real substance in it unless it is the top price stuff most people won't buy - not to mention the bloat/teeth factor). Breeds are also a factor, I have owned ancient breeds and newer breeds and have found the older breeds just do better on raw. Variety is important though if feed raw, so not just feeding one source of meat everyday to the dog. 

Depending on who you ask you will get different percentages. But generally a raw diet will be made up of predominantly of meat and meaty bones, bones and the rest should be organs and dinner left overs that include fruit and vegetables, some carbs etc. Interestingly enough, table scraps also help reduce the likelihood of the dog developing bloat. 

All that is relative to where you live of course and your own diet in terms of table scraps. Some times, especially this time of year, the shops will lack what I want. 
 

In saying all that, what I do with my dogs is give a whole fish in the morning with a boiled egg. The egg shell helps prevent things like joint disease, arthritis etc which my dogs need as they work hard body slamming concrete walls all day. The fish is for the fatty acids (boost immune system) and the dogs coat. 

Dinner is on and off. So the dog will sometimes purely get one of their regular 3 sources of protein meat (chicken, pork, beef) with a bone of a different source of animal, or some nights will get their filler foods as I call them. The bits of fruit, veges, organs and carbs. My dogs aren't really into table food so what I will do is blend in the organs with it which will give them enough of a sniff to eat it.

 

So night time maybe something like a couple of chicken thighs with pork bones. Sometimes some beef with a chicken carcass etc. Then one or two nights a week I might have had a stir fry or something similar with lots of veges (I eat boring so no sauces), so any left over I will mix in with some organ and some apple cider vinegar and blend it in for them. Or if have left over fruit I will mix some heart or liver in to give the dogs as a snack. I am sure the correct way is to feed the right % daily but I am of the belief that dogs in the wild wouldn't necessarily get the exact right diet daily and would make up for it a few days later.  

 

On occasions as treats I may just throw down a some head, leg, tongue, lung, heart, brain etc of various meats I can find. 

Supplements, in my opinion, come from the food. I am no nutritionist, but in the 2 years of living here the dogs have never had any disease or been sick (other than puppy mange), bloods and even coat is now perfect and only get washed once a year (to protect guard hairs). I have no doubt the dogs have been exposed to Leptospirosis where I live and got over it themselves due to functioning immune systems.

[dick dasterdly]

My dogs won't eat fish or uncooked eggs, especially when there are egg shells in the mix.

 

Even my vet told me that chicken is an allergen to many dogs here in Thailand - better avoided!

 

I haven't found any 'meaty bones' available, other than chicken or pork - and of course raw pork has to be frozen for 3 months.

 

In short, I'm still clueless about a good diet here in Thailand.

 

Beef and lamb mince is expensive, but that's the best I can come up with as part of the daily diet, other than the occasional stripped beef bone and lump of beef .

[wildewillie89]

Crush the eggs shells into a powder and sprinkle it onto their food then. There is always ways to get dogs to eat things if you try. 

I get the pork argument, and although it can be an issue for dogs, it is much more problematic for humans. A lot of dog owners see it as a bit of a story that was relevant before, but now not so much due to regulations (even in Thai). I buy my meat in bulk so freeze it for various amounts of times. The symptoms a dog may have from any parasite will depend on, again, how strong its immune system is. So for me, a risk analysis would say feed the dog pork (I am yet to have problems). The only meat the dogs have had issues with is lung, which caused the runs for a day. Boiled rice and boiled chicken fixed that. Interesting Thai vets (like most vets) will almost always recommend chicken if a dog is sick, but yours seems to say no? 

Also it is useful to see where the pig comes from and what they are feeding them. The village shops are helpful with that as generally you will know the owner and be able to see their farms. Also now, even in rural Thai, the pork must be killed in a controlled slaughter house which is inspected by public health officials before being legally sold in even the village shops, whereas before it was more backyard killings/dirty equipment etc. 

Chicken is an allergen for dogs, but most foods are if deciding to feed raw (many dry dog foods are also). So if a dog does react, you do an elimination diet to find the cause, and replace that protein source with a new source. If the argument is just not to try that food, then the same argument should be applied with eggs, beef, lamb, pork and fish (most common allergens according to pets.webMD). 

So again, it comes down to a risk analysis. Worry about everything without even trying it and just feeding a diet that has one or two sources only and will not benefit the dog (may as well feed dog food). I would say considering there are constant posts about dogs being continually infected with diseases, people not socialising/taking their dogs out due to fear of disease, the chance of a reaction to food that can be immediately eliminated from the diet is far outweighed by the overall better health/happiness of the dog.

[dick dasterdly]

18 hours ago, wildewillie89 said:

Crush the eggs shells into a powder and sprinkle it onto their food then. There is always ways to get dogs to eat things if you try. 

I get the pork argument, and although it can be an issue for dogs, it is much more problematic for humans. A lot of dog owners see it as a bit of a story that was relevant before, but now not so much due to regulations (even in Thai). I buy my meat in bulk so freeze it for various amounts of times. The symptoms a dog may have from any parasite will depend on, again, how strong its immune system is. So for me, a risk analysis would say feed the dog pork (I am yet to have problems). The only meat the dogs have had issues with is lung, which caused the runs for a day. Boiled rice and boiled chicken fixed that. Interesting Thai vets (like most vets) will almost always recommend chicken if a dog is sick, but yours seems to say no? 

Also it is useful to see where the pig comes from and what they are feeding them. The village shops are helpful with that as generally you will know the owner and be able to see their farms. Also now, even in rural Thai, the pork must be killed in a controlled slaughter house which is inspected by public health officials before being legally sold in even the village shops, whereas before it was more backyard killings/dirty equipment etc. 

Chicken is an allergen for dogs, but most foods are if deciding to feed raw (many dry dog foods are also). So if a dog does react, you do an elimination diet to find the cause, and replace that protein source with a new source. If the argument is just not to try that food, then the same argument should be applied with eggs, beef, lamb, pork and fish (most common allergens according to pets.webMD). 

So again, it comes down to a risk analysis. Worry about everything without even trying it and just feeding a diet that has one or two sources only and will not benefit the dog (may as well feed dog food). I would say considering there are constant posts about dogs being continually infected with diseases, people not socialising/taking their dogs out due to fear of disease, the chance of a reaction to food that can be immediately eliminated from the diet is far outweighed by the overall better health/happiness of the dog.

An interesting and appreciated post, but we're wandering a bit far off-topic so hope you don't mind if I start a new thread on diet/vaccinations to continue the discussion.

[dick dasterdly]

Incidentally, I tried mixing a raw egg with the shell crushed into the lamb and beef mince this a.m. and it was v funny - and also largely successful!

 

One dog looked up at me with a 'what the hell?' expression - before eating it all  (!) whilst the other immediately started eating, but carefully avoided all the larger pieces of egg-shell.  Not a problem, as I will be more careful to crush the shell into smaller pieces in future.

[dick dasterdly]

2 hours ago, Arjen said:

I am still not sure about the vaccinations. I have a dog who travels on a regular base with me to Europe, and to be allowed to import him in Europe, and again in Thailand he must have his yearly vaccinations. So all our animals get them. And I do not see any suffering from this.

 

Arjen.

 

Another interesting post, so I included vaccinations in the new thread topic.

[wildewillie89]

1 hour ago, Arjen said:

I am still not sure about the vaccinations. I have a dog who travels on a regular base with me to Europe, and to be allowed to import him in Europe, and again in Thailand he must have his yearly vaccinations. So all our animals get them. And I do not see any suffering from this.

 

Arjen.

 

Travelling would be a different matter, as they are much more strict in keeping out diseases that are not in the country already. For example, if I was even to attempt to take my dogs to Australia I think they have to go into an approved quarantine centre for many months regardless if they have annual or 3 yearly vaccinations.

But for the most part, most dogs usually remain in Thailand. The link below is an overview of a report that conducted a survey with 700 vet clinics in Asia (including Thai). It discusses the lack of university research and training countries like Thailand have on vaccines and how far they are behind with global trends or the WSAVA guidelines (one of my vets had never even heard of the WSAVA). 

 

I had to go to my old vet the other day as my new one wasn't open. My female got her rabies shot, he said get another one next year. I said in 3 years. He then said, why why it is only 60 baht? Then his wife, who is also a vet, said I don't think it is the 60 baht that is worrying him, it is the side effects of the vaccine (full knowing that farang do 3 years). The husband had to accept that. The rabies shot was Defensor 3, the product literally says 3 years. My new vets is a different brand that says 2 years from memory. So research what brand you use, as when the guidelines changed, the 1 year product was just re-branded as 3 years (no change in ingredients). Just a change in the fact actual research was done on the product rather than guessing guidelines.

The rabies vaccine is blocked by the original rabies vaccine if over administered anyway. Currently research is trying to extend it even further (5 years). So if the vaccine is blocked anyway, all we are doing is risking side effects. So the most common 'long-term' side effects of rabies vaccines are cancer at injection site, seizures, epilepsy, auto immune/organ diseases, digestive issues and weakness in muscles. 

The 7 in 1 is a whole range of issues (I would spend a good day researching it). Particularly as Lepto is included in it (non-core for good reasons), and that they are all mixed in together. The WSAVA report makes mention to these 7 in 1 vaccines as controlling the market in Asia, which are forcing people to do them purely as their DOI is annual. One of my money hungry vets only stocks that. My good vet stocks the 3 core in 1 vaccine. Probably a good way in Thailand to see if your vets are any good/up to date is by the range of vaccines they house.  The other 4 things that are covered the dog will either get better by itself if healthy, or the diseases are easily treated. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25291304

[Lite Beer]

Two weeks after giving Nexgard we have seen a few small ticks walking over the dog's fur but nothing actually attached and feeding on the dogs.

So happy as we have been fighting this for years.