Wow! Here are my thoughts regarding Peter Dobias’s recommendations…
Heartworm DNA testing. Dobias wrote “This test has virtually no false negatives, which is great news for your dog.”
PCR tests in general are very sensitive and so that statement may be technically true. But the manner in which he is applying the test I think false negatives will be the norm. The test is based on DNA which is in a cell’s nucleus. Heartworm larva migrate in the sub Q tissue. How is it that larva cells can get from the sub Q into the circulatory system? They are too big to cross vessel walls. The larva do leave the sub Q and enter the circulatory system and at that point I’d expect they can be detected. However the dog is now infected with young adult heartworms. The time frame to prevent infection has passed.
Preventatives are effective against young larva, the older the migrating larva are the less effective the kill rate. Even if this test can pickup migrating larva, by only testing every 4months, the infection cold be four months old and difficult to arrest at that point.
His temp data doesn’t look accurate. Heartworm development in the mosquito progresses with warmer temps. Units referred to as heartworm development units. need to accumulate. Sustained high temps are not required.
The reason for extending prevention beyond exposure dates is that it is documented that one dose of preventatives doesn’t always prevent infection. In one study one does didn’t prevent infection and three doses a month apart from each other did.
In my opinion the alternative program as outlined by Peter Dobias is reckless at best.
