Brucella & Romanian rescues

[AppleBlossomTimeNow]

I have a Romanian rescue I've had for 2 years. No health issues. Vet is now threatening to withdraw treatment if I don't test him for brucella (£100) & isn't clear what happens if he tests positive (some vets are recommending euthanasia which makes my blood run cold). From what i can gather, the risk he is positive is minimal, the risk of transmission to humans is minimal & some tests can show false positive results. It's all very concerning. Anyone else experiencing this?

I would be finding myself a new vet!

What? You mean find one that isn’t following expert government guidance? http://apha.defra.gov.uk/documents/surveillance/diseases/Canine-Brucellosis-Summary-Final-260421.pdf

Brucella canis is a potentially significant risk for vet staff - they have a duty of care to ensure staff and public safety

@AppleBlossomTimeNow there are a couple of different FB groups with advice for owners of imported dogs (some more balanced than other) they may be a useful source of support.

unfortunately this issue is arising because of the ‘industry’ of ‘rescue’ (trade) in dogs from Eastern Europe without appropriate health testing.

Thank you @FurAndFeathers - I can absolutely see the concern with the wider issue of importing dogs for adoption...but when it is your beloved dog that may not receive treatment or be euthanised, it's a horrifying prospect. The charity we adopted from has been excellent in all respects & uses any surplus funds to neuter dogs in Romania to reduce the number of strays. I know my dog was a legit rescue and not bred for 'trade' as I've seen photos/videos of where/how he was found. I guess I'm trying to justify myself for contributing to an awful situation I didn't know could have such terrible consequences. I understand that vets have a duty of care for their staff & the other pets they look after...but as it is mostly a blood borne disease surely normal hygiene/safety procedures minimises the spread? And all imported dogs should be tested as standard from now on obviously.

💐
I would get the test done- better safe than sorry.

I would also contact the rescue, maybe this is something they should do / pay out for in future.

... and should your dog come back positive, at least you know he's had a good life with you.

I contacted the rescue & they have been testing any new imported dogs for the last 18 months. So that's good.

I personally feel that if you have a foreign rescue you have an obligation to ensure your dog does not carry it.

OP how you are feeling is how many other owners will feel if your dog is infected and spreading it to UK dogs who at the moment have low risk but if we allow dogs with the disease in the UK it will spread.

The uk guidelines are clear as stated above. Your vet is correct.

If your dog was tested you should have documentation to state that

Its spread via any bodily fluid not just blood by direct contact or aerosol exposure

We've a foreign rescue. We had him tested because the impact on others is potentially devastating even if it is slim.

Yet another reason why these dogs shouldn’t be imported in the first place , there are already enough dogs here without bringing in others with potential diseases that native dogs don’t have . I fully support vets in insisting on testing .

The tests have a 50% false positive rate (I'm not normally one to share Facebook health stuff but this is a well qualified local behaviourist who owns foreign rescues herself)
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02QHK9zBeJ4PfqLXPcAViuc3D3oyJyfwGFYqQXNnzLxopePLNQwDuN4ymqbWArks9pl&id=100063748774989

Quite a bit of interesting information here
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100092373273024

Are you, by any chance, with a practice owned by CVS? The branding is pretty low key so you might have to dig around to check. They have a policy of offering euthanaisia only
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02Tnmk9kiRcTxo3GuJT3sGcezkgubTgpBjq4hUTRVyKLosNYa7UksgR7xGvvzk6Jc8l&id=100092373273024

The PCR tests are more likely to give false readings however if they are followed up by a serology test the results will be much more accurate than the 50% that is floated around

@countrygirl99 did you ask what the vet would do if the result came back positive? Is euthanasia really the only option?

Trouble is that, by telling people that euthanaisia is the only option, they're discouraging people from testing in the first place.

Would you have taken your kids for a COVID test if a positive result would have seen them given a lethal injection? Somehow I doubt it.

The vet said they advise euthanasia as the infection remains in the body for life but it's not compulsory. I don't think I could have forgiven myself if it had prevented my DC or a vet/vet nurse having children.

So what do you suggest as a solution?
that the consequences are hidden from people?

The problem is, you can’t actually get rid of it, so the alternative to euthanasia is neutering (if not already done) antibiotics, regular blood tests and wearing gloves if you’re going to be in contact with body fluids, which lets be honest is lots with your own dog and never taking them to public places... so no walking etc.

So pretty hard going for you and the dog.

Mine is also from Romania and I’ve seen the stuff about a high false positive rate too, though I’m not convinced the maths works out for 50%

Brucella canis is a notifiable disease so if a dog tests positive (on the blood tests from the government lab - nobody would be euthanasing based only on the Snap Dx screening tests) then APHA and Public Health will get involved. There was a very well publicised recent case where an owner ended up in hospital and all five of her dogs were euthanased after she introduced a E European rescue.
The only thing that is scandalous is that testing before import is not compulsory and that anybody can drag a dog off the street, vaccinate for rabies or falsify the documents and enter the U.K. 3 weeks later. The EU passport scheme was never intended to allow large scale commercial imports of dogs.
The contrast between the requirements for a pet to enter the U.K. and the requirements to enter Australia (as an example of an island that actually takes border control seriously) is stark - an import there takes months of planning and prep and extensive health testing.

Thanks everybody. This has been a helpful thread. I can see that testing is necessary. What is the test I should be asking for/insisting on?

There's no good solution, but I think you'd lower the rate of spread if all imported dogs were tested before departure, and owners were given the option of neutering and antibiotics.

At the moment we have a situation where owners won't get dogs tested at all because they are terrified of their dog being put down despite having an excellent quality of life. They're living in blissful ignorance and are far more likely to spread it than they would be if they were offered an acceptable treatment regime.

This makes about as much sense as when, during COVID, there were people who wouldn't get tested. Why? Because they couldn't afford the time off work to self isolate. Billions spaffed on the test and trace system, and it all fell down because people had bills to pay, didn't get full sick pay, and couldn't survive on SSP (or, if self employed, couldn't even get SSP). I was one of those people before you suggest they didn't really exist.

Why would I suggest they didn’t exist? 🤷‍♀️

honestly you seem to be spoiling for an argument.
you’re obviously very upset about your covid experience but its of limited usefulness here.

the reality with canine brucellosis is that euthanasia is currently recommended and we all have to work within that context.

hopefully the government will introduce mandatory testing but until that happens, vets have to be honest with owners about the potential consequences of testing.

You'd be surprised how many people suggested at the time that no one would actually do that.

It's not that I'm upset; I'm just drawing parallels. When the consequences of testing are too great, people will simply choose not to test - and that applies to covid as much as it does to brucella.

Ok, we’ll thanks for that

It’s scandalous how imports to U.K. are treated in such a wishy washy way.

ALL imports should be rigorously quarantined.

Australia is commendable- they don’t have van loads of strays entering without testing and quarantine.
Heck, I know someone who imported an antique rocking horse from
UK and it had the hair mane and tail removed in case it was a threat to Australian bio security.

Yet we wave through notifiable diseased dogs at huge risk to vet staff and people and animals here.

It’s sheer lunacy.