Nosode Heartworm Treatment 100 percent effective?

[Debaroo]

BSM or Rolf - have you heard/read about these heartworm cures? 20 dogs supposedly cured, what happens when then next 20 are not? Will that be reported? Very sketchy "evidence". It bothers me that some gullible owners will resort to these "treatments". This post came into my mailbox this morning:

"Heartworm - Alternative Treatment

The standard treatment for heartworm (intravenous arsenic) hasn't changed
much in the last half of this century. Before I get into a recent
development that shows great promise, I should mention that back in March
1993 an article in "Veterinary Forum" pointed out that studies from Cornell
University and the University of Pennsylvania indicated that when Ivermectir
or Milbemycin were given to heartworm positive dogs at the regular
preventive dose, progressive microfilaria suppression was demonstrated.
After approximately seven to eight months, most dogs were free of
circulating microfilaria.

Milbemycin appears to interfere with heartworm embryogeneses, and Ivermectin
also has a suppressive effect on nematode reproduction. Thus the use of
these drugs can be considered as an alternative modality for treatment.
Evidently this form of treatment is an "extra-label use" and an informed
consent should be signed by an owner before embarking upon this course. How
many vets have ever mentioned this alternative?
Now for the exciting news!

An all-breed rescue club in Florida has been getting astounding results in
treating heartworm cases with a homeopathic detoxsode for parasites called
"Paratox". Please understand that these are "rescue" dogs that were in
pretty sad condition when brought to them. For example, there was a German
Shepherd that was so infested with heartworm that the attending vet
commented that it was the worst case he had ever seen without the dog being
dead! In this particular case, they did a 5 day course of "Clearing"
(another homeopathic remedy made by the same company) prior to the Paratox
treatment. When the dog was rechecked in 6 weeks, the infestation was
deemed to be "very light". They repeated the Paratox treatment and
subsequent testing showed the dog to be "clear"!

So far, they have treated about 20 cases with 100% success! Evidently they
can see a physical change in 2 weeks - better color, more vitality, etc.
Another nice thing about this method is that they don't have to restrict the
animals during treatment.

The treatment is both gentle and simple, easy to administer and no side
effects! In general, for dogs over 25 lbs, 5cc of Paratox is given orally,
once a day for 24 days. One 40 oz bottle supplies a complete treatment. For
smaller dogs, they have been using 2cc per day for 24 days. For giant
breeds and severely compromised dogs they have been using double the usual
daily dose(ie 10cc for 24 days).

What about cost? I'm not sure if you are aware that the standard "arsenic"
treatment can run well over $1,000.00. The alternative of using Ivermectin
or Milbemycin is suggested to be for people that suffer from a "thin
wallet". I'm sure you all know the cost of these drugs.

Cost of one bottle of Paratox? Are you ready for this : $18.00!! How
effective is it? As you are probably aware, the "snap" test currently being
used to detect heartworm, registers titer levels and is sensitive enough to
detect the presence of even one microfilaria or one worm. After one
Paratox treatment, titers begin to drop in a very short time and within 3 to
4 months, usually register negative.

By the way, I should mention that the results of the "snap" test should be
read within 6 to 8 minutes for a true result. Otherwise the test will show
a false "positive" reading.

I now feel greatly relieved to know that I can use the heartworm nosode for
prevention and in the rare event that it doesn't provide the needed
protection, I certainly wouldn't hesitate to use Paratox as a safe, cost
effective, treatment. Thank you, thank you, Florida Rescue for this
wonderful "breeder network" information.

Site listing alternative heartworm cures http://www.danebytes.com/heartworm-cures.htm

(end of post)
*******
Deb

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

No idea, other than to state the obvious that if it is really an over-diluted homeopathic remedy then it is more likely that the story is not quite what it seems, but I'd need to read some properly validated evidence.

[Rolfe]

Since Dirofilaria immitis infection doesn't happen in this country, it's not something I'm terribly well up on. However, I do know they're wrong about the "arsenic". I've seen advertisements for drugs licensed to treat heartworm, such as "Advocate", and they don't contain arsenic.

I'd give this one about ten minutes to appear on a mainly-US alternative veterinary medicine email group I'm on, and about another fifteen to be thoroughly and totally shredded.

Rolfe.

[Debaroo]

I'd give this one about ten minutes to appear on a mainly-US alternative veterinary medicine email group I'm on, and about another fifteen to be thoroughly and totally shredded.

Rolfe.

Can anyone join this group, or does one have to be vet? Sounds like an interesting group.

Deb

[Rolfe]

Can anyone join this group, or does one have to be vet? Sounds like an interesting group.The group was recently closed to non-vets, mainly because a couple of non-vets kept flooding the list with their very personal infighting. I believe non-vets can still subscribe read-only.

Rolfe.

[Darat]

6 months to treat heartworm - isn't that a long time?

[Rolfe]

You better get John Bentley and Dogdoctor in here. Us Brits have no practical experience with the condition. (Dogdoctor is on the email list I mentioned too, we'll see if anyone there has any comments.)

Rolfe.

[John Bentley]

You better get John Bentley and Dogdoctor in here. Us Brits have no practical experience with the condition. (Dogdoctor is on the email list I mentioned too, we'll see if anyone there has any comments.)

Rolfe.

Hi. Sorry I got here late. Been replying to BSM on the PM, and waiting until I calm down before I replied.

First, a short primer on heartworm disease for Brits:

1. Heartworm disease is caused by gruesome parasites, anywhere from 3 to 6 inches long (8 to 15 cm), that live in the right ventricle of the heart, with some extension into the main pulmonary arteries, and vena cava. These parasites are transmitted to the dog from mosquito bites. The mosquito bites an infected dog, sucks up some microfilaria (microscopic larva stage) from the bloodstream, the microfilaria undergo a change inside the mosquito gut into an infective larval stage, and when the mosquito bites another dog, the infective larvae are injected into the next dog. The mosquito is a necessary stage of the life cycle. Even if you gave an uninfected dog a blood transfusion full of microfilaria laden blood from an infected dog, the parasite would not be transmitted, because it didn't go through the mosquito first. Ain't parasitology grand!

2. The symptoms of the disease are heart failure, kidney failure, liver failure, primary pulmonary hypertension, and/or sudden death from lung embolisms. It can take years for an infected dog to show symptoms. All symptoms are caused only by adult heartworms, not by microfilaria or larval stages.

3. The test for heartworms mentioned in the OP tests for adult heartworm antigens circulating in the bloodstream.

4. Treating a dog with ivermectin or milbemycin, as mentioned in the OP, may kill off the microfilaria, but may not kill the adult heartworms. It may make the adult heartworms sterile, so the dog may not produce any microfilaria. So What! The dog probably still has adult heartworms, which are the only form that causes disease. Adult heartworms will die after 5 years or so. Ivermectin hastens that death, so they may die in 2 years. Even so, the dog has adult heartworms for 2 years. The damage done to the heart, lungs, and kidneys is permanent. So for 2 years, the dog is undergoing irreparable damage. And it only clears the adult heartworms in about 75% of the dogs. Very bad alternative to Immiticide.

5. Immiticide is technically an arsenical, but only to a chemist. It is pretty non-toxic to the dog. It is not given IV, but in the back muscles. It is expensive because it is the only approved drug on the market, and it is still under patent. The patent runs out in a couple of years, I think, at which time, the price will plummet.

6. Looking at the web sites for Paratox, I must say it is unadulterated BS. I am trying to find out which, if any, veterinarians are recommending this claptrap, and sending their names into the Florida Veterinary Board. That will probably do nothing, but it will make me feel better.

[Rolfe]

Thanks. Very similar messages now coming up on AltVetSkept. If I knew what was in "Advocate" (apparently licensed for heartworm here, but possibly only as preventative I don't know), I'd ask you about it.

Tomorrow.

What are these people thinking of? Where are they getting their so-called data?

Rolfe.

[Bronze Dog]

Given the information on what those worms do to the dogs in item number 4, and the the thought that many people are probably "treating" it with quackery like homeopathy... I think I've hit a new, higher plateau in my quiet rage against nonsense.

[Zep]

Heartworm is common in tropical Australia. Most dogs there are medicated to prevent infections. I can't remember the name of the substance, but we used to give our dog "a pill" every day to prevent heartworm attack. That was 30 years ago, and I understand now they have either a monthly pill, or some form of vaccine.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Deb

I think I'd like to see some proper detail on the allegedly successful trial. It so defies belief that I can almost guarantee that it is not what it seems, but I'd need more precise information first.

[AnotherSillyAlias]

Heartworm is common in tropical Australia. Most dogs there are medicated to prevent infections. I can't remember the name of the substance, but we used to give our dog "a pill" every day to prevent heartworm attack. That was 30 years ago, and I understand now they have either a monthly pill, or some form of vaccine.

Yes, all correct. There is a monthly dose and, I believe, 6 monthly injections. (Not 101% certain this bit).

I was talking to my vet the other day about this and he said that in my area, southern tablelands NSW, there isn't much of it around and he hasn't seen any cases at all in his current practice.

[Debaroo]

Deb

I think I'd like to see some proper detail on the allegedly successful trial. It so defies belief that I can almost guarantee that it is not what it seems, but I'd need more precise information first.

Me too, however, there was no detail given.

Deb

[Debaroo]

Heartworm is common in tropical Australia. Most dogs there are medicated to prevent infections. I can't remember the name of the substance, but we used to give our dog "a pill" every day to prevent heartworm attack. That was 30 years ago, and I understand now they have either a monthly pill, or some form of vaccine.
Zep:

The daily pill is called Filaribits. Problem with daily dosage is if the dog happens to throw them up a couple of days in a row then s/he is unprotected.

They've come a long way with new medications such as Heartguard.

Deb

[John Bentley]

Heartworm is common in tropical Australia. Most dogs there are medicated to prevent infections. I can't remember the name of the substance, but we used to give our dog "a pill" every day to prevent heartworm attack. That was 30 years ago, and I understand now they have either a monthly pill, or some form of vaccine.

Current preventatives are:
1. Low dose ivermectin - given orally once a month. It kills all larval stages that can develop in 1 month's time.

2. Low dose milbemycin - same as above. Has the advantage of also killing the three common intestinal worms, i.e. hookworms, roundworms, and whipworms.

3. Selamectin - sold as Revolution (TM). Applied topically to the skin once a month. It is absorbed through the skin and enters the bloodstream, killing all larval stages than can develop in a month's time. Has the advantage of also killing about 80% of roundworms and hookworms, and redistributes to the sebaceous glands in the skin. When it comes out onto the skin with the skin oil, it kills fleas, ticks, mange mites, and ear mites. Really good product, but has had some breaks reported in it's heartworm prevention, with some dogs who were using the product coming up heartworm positive. Probably has to do with the fact that it is topically applied. If all of it is not absorbed properly, there's not enough in the bloodstream to do the job. I mainly use it for treating mange, fleas, and ear mites.

4. ProHeart(TM) (Moxidectin) - injected under the skin once every six months. It is a slow release pesticide that had been used in horses and cattle for years. Was recalled by the FDA in 2004 after several hundred deaths and thousands of adverse reactions were reported in dogs, including seizures, vomiting, diarrhea, liver failure. No longer available.

There is currently no vaccine available, although the big drug companies have been telling us it is "on the horizon" for several years now. All I can say is their horizon is certainly further away than mine. Possibly they are all on a different planet.


ETA: I don't think the daily preventative is available any more. It was called Filaribits, and if you missed a single dose, the dog was unprotected. Also, the product was reported to cause liver problems in a small percentage of dogs.

[John Bentley]

I just noticed that the site quoted by Debaroo gives an FDA registration number for the supposed product. Specifically: FDA Registration No. 2937060. Does anyone know how to track down what was submitted to the FDA (That's Food and Drug Administration for you furriners), in order to get that product registered? That would at least tell us if it is registered as a drug (which requires extensive testing and proof of efficacy before being sold in the US), or as a "food supplement" (which requires no testing or proof of efficacy or any d*mn thing at all to be sold in the US).

ETA: If sold as a food supplement, then they are technically breaking the law by claiming a specific medicinal effect: i.e. heartworm treatment. The FDA gets really touchy about that, so I'd really like to know how to track down that registration number.

[Goshawk]

That's a food facility registration number from the FDA. It's to "protect the food supply from bioterrorism".

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/fsbtac12.html
The owner, operator, or agent in charge of a domestic or foreign facility that manufactures/processes, packs, or holds food for human or animal consumption in the U.S., or an individual authorized by one of them, must register that facility with FDA by December 12, 2003.

< snip >

What does the registration number mean? It means that the owner of the facility has complied with this rule by registering with FDA. Assignment of the number does not convey FDA approval or endorsement of the facility or its products.

< snip >

Is registration information available to the public? No. Neither the list of registered facilities, any registration documents submitted under this regulation, nor any information derived from the list or the documents that would reveal the identity or location of a specific registered person is subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

so I'd really like to know how to track down that registration number.Sorry.

[Goshawk]

then they are technically breaking the law by claiming a specific medicinal effect

But...they aren't claiming any medicinal effect at all. You aren't reading carefully--literally--enough. Look again:

The is what is on the Paratox Bottle :
Parasite Detoxification for Veterinary Use. Allium Cepa, Allium Sativum, Croton Tigliem, Interleukin (IL/2), Lycopersicum, Tanacetum Vulgare.
FDA Registration No. 2937060
Net Contents : 120 m. (4 fl. oz.) contains an equal volume of (4.0) of each of five potencies (9x, 20x, 30x, 100x, 200x) for each homeopathic component. Potassium Benzoate (0.l%) Free of Alcohol - Sodium - Sugar
HomeoVetix, Vitic, Inc., Naples, FL 33942
"This is what is on the bottle"--just ingredients. No claims, other than the splendidly vague "detoxification for veterinary use". Nematodes and heartworms aren't even mentioned, just "parasites", which could mean anything. And it does contain interleukin, which does have a documented effect on gastrointestinal parasites.

They're covered. All the claims are being made by the purveyors, not the manufacturer. The FDA can't touch the manufacturer.

[John Bentley]

But...they aren't claiming any medicinal effect at all. You aren't reading carefully--literally--enough. Look again:


"This is what is on the bottle"--just ingredients. No claims, other than the splendidly vague "detoxification for veterinary use". Nematodes and heartworms aren't even mentioned, just "parasites", which could mean anything. And it does contain interleukin, which does have a documented effect on gastrointestinal parasites.

They're covered. All the claims are being made by the purveyors, not the manufacturer. The FDA can't touch the manufacturer.

Actually, I really wasn't thinking about going after the manufacturer, just the purveyors, especially if they are veterinarians. However, after re-reading the web site as you suggested, I find that no vets are specifically listed. Unless Dr. Wessner in FL is one. I'll have to check that out.

[Goshawk]

The trouble is, the FDA and the FTC aren't really interested in going after every individual purveyor who promises that the product he's selling will cure something. Look at all the folks on the Internet who makes claims for things like saw palmetto and ginseng; they never get prosecuted.

Googling around...Dr. Gerald Wessner is a homeopathic vet, with the Holistic Veterinary Clinic in Summerfield, Florida. As he's already a homeopath, I doubt whether any "do you realize what you're selling?" letters would have any effect. Yes, he certainly does know what he's purveying, and what's more, since it comes under the heading of "alternative medicine" and since he's not claiming flat-out that Protox can cure heartworms, legally he's copacetic.

[Rolfe]

Woo vets are a big problem. Tell me about it!

Just one extra comment from the email list.In terms of the tests for heartworms, the common "snap" style tests only register an ovarian antigen for heartworms. This is shed unevenly and only by adult female worms - thus a "strong" or a "weak" positive is not strongly correlated to a large or small number of worms. A given dog may exhibit varying degrees of positivity on SNAP tests taken over a course of a few weeks (as often happens with rescue dogs; a new rescue group gets the dog and retests it). Therefore, the idea that a dog might receive some non-effective treatment and then have a "weaker" snap test is quite within the realm of possibilty.By the way, I've just checked and "Advocate" is imidacloprid and moxidectin. Recently the subject of a big advertising campaign this side of the pond, claiming efficacy against fleas, flea larvae, roundworm, roundworm larvae, hookworm, hookworm larvae, whipworm, heartworm, sarcoptes, otodectes and demodex. I presume only preventative for heartworm. However (from John's post above)(Moxidectin) - injected under the skin once every six months. It is a slow release pesticide that had been used in horses and cattle for years. Was recalled by the FDA in 2004 after several hundred deaths and thousands of adverse reactions were reported in dogs, including seizures, vomiting, diarrhea, liver failure. No longer available.Mmmm, Advocate is a spot-on. Safe by that route? Sorry, not a pharmacologist, but I know the UK VMD is quite tough so I'm assuming they won't have licensed something that has been withdrawn in the States without a lot of evidence that the previous problems have been overcome.

Rolfe.

[John Bentley]

Woo vets are a big problem. Tell me about it!

By the way, I've just checked and "Advocate" is imidacloprid and moxidectin. Recently the subject of a big advertising campaign this side of the pond, claiming efficacy against fleas, flea larvae, roundworm, roundworm larvae, hookworm, hookworm larvae, whipworm, heartworm, sarcoptes, otodectes and demodex. I presume only preventative for heartworm. However (from John's post above)Mmmm, Advocate is a spot-on. Safe by that route? Sorry, not a pharmacologist, but I know the UK VMD is quite tough so I'm assuming they won't have licensed something that has been withdrawn in the States without a lot of evidence that the previous problems have been overcome.

Rolfe.

Rolfe,

Fort Dodge (the manufacturer of the moxidectin product over here) is making noises about bringing ProHeart back on the market. I have some problems with Fort Dodge anyway. They have a history of rushing unsafe or unproven products to the veterinary market, and then having to recall them.

As far as safety with moxidectin, I'm pretty sure that it was not the route of entry (injection vs. spot-on) that was involved, but rather the amount of material deposited. I assume that Advocate is a once-a-month product, whereas Proheart was an injection that was supposed to last 6 months as a slow release bolus. I suspect that it didn't release quite as slowly as expected in some animals, thus causing overdosages.

I would be very interested in the claims for Advocate in treating demodectic mange. We have very few treatment modalities over here for that problem.

Finally, there are many examples of veterinary pharmaceuticals approved and used on the European continent, England, and Canada for years before gaining FDA approval in the US. So does this mean that the FDA is more stringent than the equivalent agency in those other countries, or just protectionist? I don't know, but I would bet that Advocate is safe as a once-a-month product. I can tell you that it isn't marketed over here. I've never heard of it, and if it treats demodectic mange, there would be a big market for it here.

[Rolfe]

I asked Badly Shaved Monkey about this, and he said he'd only had a rep visiting him and claiming 80% success against demodex. (Your thought was mine - when I saw the demodex claim, I thought this could be great.) I wasn't that impressed with the 80% claim because we've all heard that before, but since then I've talked to a colleague who has actually used it in a handful of demodex cases, and he was really quite impressed.

I know, we've been there before, and it will take some time and clinical experience before we really know how it performs in clinical situations in the field, but at the moment I'm cautiously optimistic.

Someone has stolen my 2005 Compendium of Data Sheets so I can't check the details of dosage regimen right now.

By the way, do you really not have trilostane yet? It's the greatest!

Rolfe.

[John Bentley]

The trouble is, the FDA and the FTC aren't really interested in going after every individual purveyor who promises that the product he's selling will cure something. Look at all the folks on the Internet who makes claims for things like saw palmetto and ginseng; they never get prosecuted.

Yeah, those jerks.

Googling around...Dr. Gerald Wessner is a homeopathic vet, with the Holistic Veterinary Clinic in Summerfield, Florida. As he's already a homeopath, I doubt whether any "do you realize what you're selling?" letters would have any effect. Yes, he certainly does know what he's purveying, and what's more, since it comes under the heading of "alternative medicine" and since he's not claiming flat-out that Protox can cure heartworms, legally he's copacetic.

Yeah, I had found that out as well by the same route. However, if I really wanted to push it, I could still cause some trouble for him. If he doesn't have an approved veterinary license, then there are laws prohibiting him from practicing veterinary medicine. If he has a license, then I can complain to the Florida state board for his unethical behavior in selling those products to his clients. If I can trap him into saying that those products treat or prevent heartworms, then he can have his veterinary license yanked.

Hmmm....How vindictive can I be? Maybe I can start a stink in Florida like Rolfe's trying to do on her side of the pond. Force the Florida Veterinary Board to actually grow a spine and take a stand on the subject of alternative therapy in veterinary medicine.

Couple of problems with that:
1. I'm not licensed in the state of Florida, so they probably won't care what I think.

2. The Florida School of Veterinary Medicine is already teaching raving woo. Here's the course description:
(VEM 5208 Additional Approaches to Disease Prevention and Treatment - 1 credit. Additional approaches to alternative medicine to disease prevention and treatment by humans, owners of companion animals and veterinarians about the use of these modalities in animals. Course Coordinator - Dr. R. Clemmons; Grading System - Letter grade. )
I think we can assume that the Florida Veterinary Board has already decided to bend over and take it on this one, or surely they would not be giving accreditation to the school while they teach this crap.
At least it only gets 1 credit. No info as to whether it is a required course or not.

[Rolfe]

2. The Florida School of Veterinary Medicine is already teaching raving woo. Here's the course description:
(VEM 5208 Additional Approaches to Disease Prevention and Treatment - 1 credit. Additional approaches to alternative medicine to disease prevention and treatment by humans, owners of companion animals and veterinarians about the use of these modalities in animals. Course Coordinator - Dr. R. Clemmons; Grading System - Letter grade. )
I think we can assume that the Florida Veterinary Board has already decided to bend over and take it on this one, or surely they would not be giving accreditation to the school while they teach this crap.
At least it only gets 1 credit. No info as to whether it is a required course or not.Is that the "fuller and better particulars" of what I was talking about in this post?
http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?postid=1278672#post1278672

Rolfe.

[John Bentley]

Just out of curiosity, I Googled Dr. R. Clemmons, the course coordinator for the woo course taught at Florida's Veterinary School.

He seems well lettered, and has tenure there, has received many awards, etc. Lists Alternative Medicine as one of his research interests. Now here is the funny part. Out of over 50 publications in journals and textbooks, not a single one involves alternative medicine. Gee, I wonder why he hasn't gotten any of those published?

[John Bentley]

Is that the "fuller and better particulars" of what I was talking about in this post?
http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?postid=1278672#post1278672

Rolfe.

It's the only woo course listed in the vet curricula there, so I guess so.

[Goshawk]

Well, my son is in his first year of Pre-Veterinary, and in defense of the Florida SVM, I can see the point in their VEM 5208 course: it's not so much a course in "how to treat animals with alternative woo" as it is a course in "here's the alternative woo that's out there, so when the owners come in and ask you about it, you'll know what they're talking about."

Companion Animals is VERY big business in his coursework. You gotta deal with Flopsy's Mommy before you can deal with Flopsy...

It's only a 1 semester course, right? And it's only 1 credit, so that's really just "filler", a sort of "oh, by the way..." course. If they really meant to train vets how to apply woo to animals, it would occupy a bigger chunk of the curriculum.

not a single one involves alternative medicine.
Because he's not teaching them "how to heal animals with woo", he's just providing them with an overview of "what's out there".

[John Bentley]

Well, my son is in his first year of Pre-Veterinary, and in defense of the Florida SVM, I can see the point in their VEM 5208 course: it's not so much a course in "how to treat animals with alternative woo" as it is a course in "here's the alternative woo that's out there, so when the owners come in and ask you about it, you'll know what they're talking about."

Companion Animals is VERY big business in his coursework. You gotta deal with Flopsy's Mommy before you can deal with Flopsy...

It's only a 1 semester course, right? And it's only 1 credit, so that's really just "filler", a sort of "oh, by the way..." course. If they really meant to train vets how to apply woo to animals, it would occupy a bigger chunk of the curriculum.


Because he's not teaching them "how to heal animals with woo", he's just providing them with an overview of "what's out there".

You have truly made me feel a lot better, if what you say is true. However, there is this reference I found on a Google search. http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:wWQPLZL5blsJ:www.i-dog.com/board/messages/46/63863.html%3F1083886163+%22Dr.+R.+Clemmons%22&hl=en

Try the acupuncture tho -- I couldn't claim it "helps" so much if I didn't use it on ME, and frankly it was a VET who got *me* to try it! But I figured if this guy was a neurosurgeon, but he used acupuncture on horses and dogs because he found it SO helpful, and he was one of the top vets at the U of Florida at Gainesville, then he was worth listening to. He had told me he used acupuncture HIMSELF for his own arthritis (and I'm talking about Dr. R Clemmons at Gainesville - a top neuro-guy!)

Now, I admit that this is on another forum and not posted by Dr. Clemmons himself, so the poster could be lying. But I find it suspicious, nonetheless.

[Rolfe]

Well, I don't know anything first-hand, but I have heard that Gainsville has a terrible reputation for propagating woo. Some Merikan vets have been seen

:hb:

over it all. With many more stories like John's, above.

Rolfe.