Jump to content

Titre Testing Only For Rabies?!


Serket
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've never had to pay a consultation fee, just the $60 for the test, depends I guess in whether you want the annual check etc or happy to just have the blood drawn and sent. I always let them know when I first enquire that they see their regular vet regularly and a full consult or check is not required. Will get back to you re the vets in North Sydney. How far are you from Russell Lea? there is a big all natural vet there, they were one of the first in Australia to start doing it. When you do get it done get them to request an actual value for immunity, not just the positive/negative that they have started to give vets. It tells you nothing really.

I haven't titre tested yet. Just so I understand...

I should expect to pay for the titre test only ($60) and not the consultation fee (usually $49)?

It's just that I can't imagine my vet not charging me for a consultation when I'd have to make an appointment, and have a consultation, to have the test done. Also, I remember reading somewhere that it costs more to have the titre test done with Vetpath if your vet hasn't set up an account with them.

Totally dependant on your vet I'd imagine. :)

Check when you're booking the appointment, just say you only require bloods drawn for a titre test and will it include a consult fee.

Last time I had the tests done (no consult fee) I paid:

$79 - Parvo only

$196 - Parvo, Distemper, Hepatitis

Prices have dropped since then though.

VetPath gives you an antibody value, not just a yes/no.

Edited by moosepup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

When I asked at my vet, after some discussion as they don't usually do them, they said they charged around $200 for titre testing, so I have chosen to do 3 yearly vaccination instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never had to pay a consultation fee, just the $60 for the test, depends I guess in whether you want the annual check etc or happy to just have the blood drawn and sent. I always let them know when I first enquire that they see their regular vet regularly and a full consult or check is not required. Will get back to you re the vets in North Sydney. How far are you from Russell Lea? there is a big all natural vet there, they were one of the first in Australia to start doing it. When you do get it done get them to request an actual value for immunity, not just the positive/negative that they have started to give vets. It tells you nothing really.

I haven't titre tested yet. Just so I understand...

I should expect to pay for the titre test only ($60) and not the consultation fee (usually $49)?

It's just that I can't imagine my vet not charging me for a consultation when I'd have to make an appointment, and have a consultation, to have the test done. Also, I remember reading somewhere that it costs more to have the titre test done with Vetpath if your vet hasn't set up an account with them.

Totally dependant on your vet I'd imagine. :)

Check when you're booking the appointment, just say you only require bloods drawn for a titre test and will it include a consult fee.

Last time I had the tests done (no consult fee) I paid:

$79 - Parvo only

$196 - Parvo, Distemper, Hepatitis

Prices have dropped since then though.

VetPath gives you an antibody value, not just a yes/no.

Okay thanks :)

The lady at Vetpath told me they don't test for Hepatitis, only Distemper and Parvovirus. Have you had a test for Hepatitis through Vetpath?

That's good that they give you an antibody value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I asked at my vet, after some discussion as they don't usually do them, they said they charged around $200 for titre testing, so I have chosen to do 3 yearly vaccination instead.

I have a feeling that if your vet has a regular account with Vetpath the test is only $60, but $200 if they don't have an account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I've had Hepatitis (Adenovirus) tested by VetPath. This is what you get...

My understanding is that Parvo is higher than Hep and Distemper as they're much more likely to have encountered it in the environment and thus the body will have a higher antibody count. H & D are fairly rare.

photo_zpsdee3b0c2.png

Edited by moosepup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I've had Hepatitis (Adenovirus) tested by VetPath. This is what you get...

photo_zpsdee3b0c2.png

Oh thanks! The silly receptionist said they didn't do it!

eta

I will copy that and show it to my vet so she knows that they actually do do it.

Edited by Queen Maeby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know vetpath will organise the testing for all 3 if you request it, but the hepatitis is still being sent overseas for testing which is why it costs so much more. There are no labs in Australia set up to test for it and last I heard there was nobody really in a rush to do so as the disease hasn't been seen in Aus for 30 years.

I have never had to pay for a consult, only the $60 per dog for the vetpath fee. That is at 3 different vets (2 in Sydney and 1 in Canberra). I have always requested to just have blood drawn however. My dogs are regularly seen by a vet chiro though (every 6-8 weeks) so I have no need for an annual check done on them, however if my dog was only seen once a year then I would prefer to pay the consult fee and have them given the once-over for peace of mind and early detection if there was anything going on. $49 seems pretty reasonable for a consult fee and I certainly wouldn't object to that :)

ETA if you look at that photo of the results you will see down the bottom that it was tested BioBest in Scotland, for Vetpath Australia :) Not actually tested by Vetpath themselves.

Edited by DeltaCharlie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know vetpath will organise the testing for all 3 if you request it, but the hepatitis is still being sent overseas for testing which is why it costs so much more. There are no labs in Australia set up to test for it and last I heard there was nobody really in a rush to do so as the disease hasn't been seen in Aus for 30 years.

I have never had to pay for a consult, only the $60 per dog for the vetpath fee. That is at 3 different vets (2 in Sydney and 1 in Canberra). I have always requested to just have blood drawn however. My dogs are regularly seen by a vet chiro though (every 6-8 weeks) so I have no need for an annual check done on them, however if my dog was only seen once a year then I would prefer to pay the consult fee and have them given the once-over for peace of mind and early detection if there was anything going on. $49 seems pretty reasonable for a consult fee and I certainly wouldn't object to that :)

ETA if you look at that photo of the results you will see down the bottom that it was tested BioBest in Scotland, for Vetpath Australia :) Not actually tested by Vetpath themselves.

That's what she said to me, the silly woman, but she didn't tell me that they used a company in Scotland if you wanted it.

Well, thanks very much for that! I suspect my vet will have no problem with not charging me for the consultation because I take my Pugs in so regularly for check ups. We go every 3 months for faecal testing (I use a herbal wormer and not chemicals).

eta

It makes me so happy knowing I'm doing the right thing by my babies (right for me, that is) :)

Edited by Queen Maeby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a vet, but I think it's fair to be skeptical of titering instead of vaccinating. "Correlation doesn't imply causation", and that's all we have with a titre - correlation. It does not measure immunity.

http://m.petmd.com/blogs/fullyvetted/2010/june/titering_or_vaccines-10182

Interesting article, thanks for sharing. :)

I'll still continue to titre instead of vaccinate as I consider my dogs' circumstances fairly low risk. Now if you could vaccinate against stick-fast fleas, I'd be all over that bad boy!

What a strange article. Seems the author can't really make her mind up either. This quote is at the end

Since this post, I’ve softened my stance somewhat. While everything I offered above is still true, I am using titers in many cases to help identify serious lapses in vaccine protection (as when we don’t know whether a pet is vaccinated or not) and because cell immunity and antibody immunity have been shown to roughly correlate. But to what extent we don’t know … and there’s the rub.

From what limited knowledge I have of vaccinations and antibodies (OK, admittedly pretty limited :) ) what she says doesn't make sense. In humans, we test for antibodies for Rubella all the time in pregnant women. Is she saying the presence of antibodies does not mean the woman are immune? This test has been performed for at least 30 years now. Many years ago I had my daughter tested for Measles antibodies as I don't want her to have the second booster measles shot. The test showed she had the antibodies so my doctor said she didn't need the jab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right teekay. I find the argument not to titre is just as flimsy as the argument for repeat vaccination over a dogs lifetime.

From the World Small Animal Veterinary Association.

Serological Testing to Determine the Duration of Immunity (DOI)

Most vaccinated dogs will have a persistence of serum antibody (against core vaccine antigens) for many years. Immunologically, this antibody reflects the function of a distinct population of long-lived plasma cells (memory effector B cells). Induction of immunological memory is the primary objective of vaccination. For core vaccines there is excellent correlation between the presence of antibody and protective immunity and there is long DOI for these products. This correlation does not exist for many of the non- core vaccines and the DOI related to these products necessitates more frequent revaccination intervals.

Antibody tests can be used to demonstrate the DOI after vaccination with core vaccines. It is known that dogs often maintain protective antibody to CDV, CPV-2, CAV-1, and CAV-2 for three or more years and numerous experimental studies support this observation. Therefore, when antibody is absent (irrespective of the serological test used) the dog should be revaccinated unless there is a medical basis for not so doing. Antibody determinations to other vaccine components are of limited or no value because of the short time period these antibodies persist (e.g. Leptospira products) or the lack of correlation between serum antibody and protection (e.g. Leptospira or canine parainfluenza). Important considerations in performing antibody tests are the cost and the time to obtain results.

The VGG recognizes that at present such serological testing has limited availability and might be relatively expensive. However, the principles of ‘evidence-based veterinary medicine’ would dictate that testing for antibody status (for either pups or adult dogs) is a better practice than simply administering a vaccine booster on the basis that this should be ‘safe and cost less’. In response to these needs, more rapid, cost-effective tests are being developed.

[http://www.wsava.org/sites/default/files/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf

From the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority

The APVMA supports the policy of the Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) (external site) and the position of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association (external site) who believe that vaccines should be administered on a needs-basis.

http://www.apvma.gov.au/news_media/community/2010-07_vaccination_dogs_cats.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends Georgie, some are of the opinion that if they show positive antibodies than they should be covered for life. If you wanted to 'be sure' you could do it every 3 years in place of the triennial vaccination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this PDF article on the Vetpath website:

http://www.vetpath.com.au/Portals/1/vetpath/V-Info/Vaccination%20VInfo.pdf

Duration of Immunity

Core vaccinations with modified live virus (MLV) vaccinations provide up to 9 years of protection and probably lifelong immunity. This is based on challenge and serological studies. Most commercial vaccines now indicate a minimum duration of action of 3-4 years. An interesting fact is that the use of these vaccines for annual revaccination is an extralabel use of the vaccine and should be performed only with the owners informed consent.

The duration of immunity for the non-core vaccines and especially the killed bacterin vaccines such as Bordetella bronchiseptica and Leptospira may be as short as a few months and animals at risk of these infections may need more frequent boosting.

Serological Screening to Monitor Immunity

Antibody tests are useful for monitoring immunity to CDV and CPV-2 in particular, especially after the puppy vaccinations and to assess the immune status of adult dogs with an unknown vaccination history. A positive titre indicates the presence of antibodies and therefore protection. The exact titre level is probably not important and any positive antibody titre indicates the animal has mounted a protective immune response.

The WSAVA recommends that puppies be checked postvaccination to ensure they have mounted an effective immune response and are protected. A puppy with a good immune response to the vaccinations probably has life long protection.

Do vets use these MLV live virus injections? Does this mean that dogs are immune for up to nine years (and probably have lifelong protection)? I must ask my vet.

Edited by Queen Maeby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends Georgie, some are of the opinion that if they show positive antibodies than they should be covered for life. If you wanted to 'be sure' you could do it every 3 years in place of the triennial vaccination.

That's what I plan to do :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mine have always come back as having the highest level of immunity so my vet has always recommended testing every 3 years. If they were to drop significantly or come back as being on the lower end I would probably check again in 12months, depending on the dog. In theory, immunity is always going to be present, but in a sick or older animal I would rather see a high level present.

It's like the old saying "Use it or lose it'. The analogy I always use to explain it to people is this.

I learnt Japanese in high school and university, have visited Japan and stayed with a family there. At that time, I was using Japanese regularly so was quite good at speaking and understanding the language.

I haven't needed to use it for at least 10 years now and could hardly tell you a simple sentence without having to consult a dictionary. If I was to move to Japan tomorrow though, I would pick it up again within a reasonable period of time. The knowledge and memory is there, it just hasn't been used for so long it needs to be woken up again.

It is exactly the same with immunity levels. If a dog is constantly exposed to the virus (always walked, attends dog parks, shows/competes in sports, etc) then they are always using that memory and it should stay at a high level. Whenever the dog is exposed to the virus, the body recognises it immediately and deals with it.

If a dog is locked in the yard and rarely goes anywhere, perhaps an older dog who is no longer walked, then the dog is not constantly being exposed to the virus (perhaps only what you bring in on your shoes). It is not having to use that memory on a regular basis and the levels will reduce, much like my Japanese has :).

If that dog is then exposed to a high level of the virus, the memory does still exist and will kick back in, but it will not be instantaneous like it is in a dog with constant exposure. Just like me eventually remembering the language, the dog will be able to build the immunity and fight it off, but it will take a longer time. In an older, or perhaps already ill dog, I don't know if I would want to take the risk on having low immunity levels in case they can't adequately fight it while waiting for the levels to rise again.

That is why I would always prefer to know the actual levels present, rather than simply a positive/negative result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a vet, but I think it's fair to be skeptical of titering instead of vaccinating. "Correlation doesn't imply causation", and that's all we have with a titre - correlation. It does not measure immunity.

http://m.petmd.com/blogs/fullyvetted/2010/june/titering_or_vaccines-10182

Interesting article, thanks for sharing. :)

I'll still continue to titre instead of vaccinate as I consider my dogs' circumstances fairly low risk. Now if you could vaccinate against stick-fast fleas, I'd be all over that bad boy!

What a strange article. Seems the author can't really make her mind up either. This quote is at the end

Since this post, Ive softened my stance somewhat. While everything I offered above is still true, I am using titers in many cases to help identify serious lapses in vaccine protection (as when we dont know whether a pet is vaccinated or not) and because cell immunity and antibody immunity have been shown to roughly correlate. But to what extent we dont know and theres the rub.

From what limited knowledge I have of vaccinations and antibodies (OK, admittedly pretty limited :) ) what she says doesn't make sense. In humans, we test for antibodies for Rubella all the time in pregnant women. Is she saying the presence of antibodies does not mean the woman are immune? This test has been performed for at least 30 years now. Many years ago I had my daughter tested for Measles antibodies as I don't want her to have the second booster measles shot. The test showed she had the antibodies so my doctor said she didn't need the jab.

This is why you should consult your vet. They have studied the immune system and understand its complexities better than most random strangers on the Internet.

The article makes sense. The causes of transmissible disease and infection are many and varied and animals have evolved many and varied ways to combat them. Titres indicate just one part of these. More useful for some diseases than others.

There is no clear cut answer on this, which is why I think criticisms of vets who don't or won't titre are unfair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why you should consult your vet. They have studied the immune system and understand its complexities better than most random strangers on the Internet.

The article makes sense. The causes of transmissible disease and infection are many and varied and animals have evolved many and varied ways to combat them. Titres indicate just one part of these. More useful for some diseases than others.

There is no clear cut answer on this, which is why I think criticisms of vets who don't or won't titre are unfair.

Maybe you should start your own thread about vaccinating versus titre testing? This thread isn’t about that. This thread is clearly for people who are interested in titre testing and want to find out where/how to do it. Sorry, it's just that you seem to have your own agenda (defending your views) and it isn't helpful; it's actually quite negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why you should consult your vet. They have studied the immune system and understand its complexities better than most random strangers on the Internet.

The article makes sense. The causes of transmissible disease and infection are many and varied and animals have evolved many and varied ways to combat them. Titres indicate just one part of these. More useful for some diseases than others.

There is no clear cut answer on this, which is why I think criticisms of vets who don't or won't titre are unfair.

Maybe you should start your own thread about vaccinating versus titre testing? This thread isn’t about that. This thread is clearly for people who are interested in titre testing and want to find out where/how to do it. Sorry, it's just that you seem to have your own agenda (defending your views) and it isn't helpful; it's actually quite negative.

I don't see Aidan's post as negative. :confused: I also see a lot of threads wander from the topic but some of us have become used to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries LT, each to their own :)

It just frustrates me when I'm trying so hard to do the right thing by my babies and I know deep down it's the right thing to do. I trust my gut instinct fully when it comes to taking care of my Pugs.

If vaccinating is what is right for Aidan2 then that is fair enough, but I feel like he is pushing his agenda onto us, like he is expecting us to conform to his way if thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...