Can anyone help my friend on the mange subject?
July 17th, 2010 | 
Author: Hi so I thought I would re post this as I left details out etc…
So recently my friends girl had puppy’s (a cross breed litter of 6 4x black and 2x mixed color’s) and the b@tch got really ill and had to go for a op so was taken away from the pups from the start (she was with them for the first 2 hours) then had to have the op and was then put back with the pups once she was home, as all pups they had a weak immune system and so did mum (my friend then being a complete and utter idiot let a dog who had demodex mange around the mum and pups, the vet told her that she can carry the mange and ‘pass’ on the mange to the pups and mum as their immune systems where weak so she had to use and anti bacterial gel every time before handling the pups!).
After 3 weeks she took the pups for another check up and the vets noticed that they had little bald spots and done skin scrapings on every pup and it was diagnosed as demodex mange so she was treating it with advocate and it appeared to be working but obviously it is an ongoing treatment (other than the mange the puppy’s where in healthy condition putting on weight very well etc etc, so before anyone says they must have been left in appalling conditions to get this mange they were not they were in good condition and she has vet recs to prove so!), she then advertised the puppy’s for free but told everyone who inquired about them that they have the demodex mange but it is treatable with advocate from the vet (she explained that the vet would have to either do another skin scraping or would just visibly see that the puppy needed to have more of the treatment).
Recently she received an email of one of the people who took two of the puppy’s (one for her one for her friend) saying the puppy’s had sarcoptic mange…email shown below
‘i have had the worst 72 hours of my life….
my hairy dog fell in a lake and ended up coasting me £400 at the same time i mention to my vet about puppy itching… and pointed out a rash on my arm…. he then points out that its mange…
so not only have i had to treat her my 2… my rats.. and me…. the vet bill is now 650…. you promised me that she didn’t have mange and that it was just the black ones…. and its sarcoptic mange not the one you said it was….
my friend is fuming as well.. i feel upset that you didn’t tell me from the start…
i could of treated her alot earlier to of saved pain and discomfort…. and also my animals… and myself as its more time of work for me….
she has been treated with advocate and has 6 months worth and so are mine my rats are not in a good way as there old…
i am still unsure as to what i am going to do about this situation…..
i am hoping that me telling you that me you and my friend can come to some sort of arrangement…..’
the thing is she told everyone that the puppy’s had demodex mange, she said it was clearly visible on the black puppy’s BUT she couldn’t see it on the mix colored puppy’s but that didn’t mean they didn’t have the mange and she should go to the vet and get them checked telling the vet that the puppy’s had/have demodex mange. This woman is now expecting my friend to pay for her dog falling in the lake and the treatment for her other dogs and animals (and this wwoman’sfriend is expecting my friend to pay for all the animals in her house as well), but they where told that the puppy’s COULD still have the demodex mange and should be checked by the vet and even told them what treatment to use.
I didn’t think that sarcoptic mange could be treated by advocate?
Is my friend in any fault? as she did tell the people from the start that there is still a good chance that the puppy’s have demodex mange as they where diagnosed with it from the start and where being treated with it. Shouldn’t they have taken the puppy’s to the vet and got them checked out anyway?!
Also how could the puppy’s have developed sarcoptic mange if they where diagnosed with demodex mange? none of the other puppy’s have sarcoptic mange they all have demodex mange?!
She was willing to pay for the puppy’s treatment but only if they where brought back to her as the new owners hadn’t taken the puppy’s to the vet until a week later. None of the other puppy’s given away have the sarcoptic mange only these 2 which makes no sense!
She has told the women that she is willing to pay for the puppy’s treatment if they are brought back to her but she is not willing to pay for the other animals treatment as it is the people’s fault as they did not take the puppy’s to the vet (like any normal people would!)
anne b: i said above why i deleted the question!!! the puppy’s didn’t have sarcoptic mange before going to new homes they had demodex mites which was being treated just needed on going treatment, she explained this to everyone and people where still happy enough to take the puppy’s so she was not scamming anyone or anything as they where FREE!!!
Why should she have to pay for other animals catching this mange when while the puppy’s where in her care they never had it?! vet records can prove they never sarcoptic mange that they had demodex mites and none of the other puppy’s that where given away had sarcoptic mange they have demodex mites.
Going with your questions at the end here:
1. I didn’t think that sarcoptic mange could be treated by advocate?
-No, it can’t be.
2. Is my friend in any fault?
-Hard to say.
Demodectic mange would be the mange a vet would suspect in young, indoor-raised puppies with an unhealthy dam, absolutely. That’s what she was told by HER vet was going on, and she dutifully treated for it and informed puppy buyers.
The issue is whether demodectic mange was the right diagnosis. Dogs with sarcoptic mange tend to scratch uncontrollably, so even though is very hard to diagnose with skin scrapings, chronically itchy puppies should have suggested to your friend and her vet that sarcoptic mange was potentially the issue. Skin scrapings fail to find sarcoptic mange mites AT LEAST half the time, and treating for it–the maybe mange test- is often necessary to properly diagnose sarcoptic mange.
The OTHER possibility is that the pup got sarcoptic mange after going to the new home.
3. Shouldn’t they have taken the puppy’s to the vet and got them checked out anyway?!
-Yes, absolutely, within 24-48 hours of bringing the pups home. Your friend should have required this in her contracts.
4.Also how could the puppy’s have developed sarcoptic mange if they where diagnosed with demodex mange? none of the other puppy’s have sarcoptic mange they all have demodex mange?!
They could have gotten sarcoptic mange by being around another animal with sarcoptic mange. It spreads quite easily from one dog to the next, from racoons, foxes, etc.
Yes, they can actually get both.
Are you 100% SURE the other puppies don’t have sarcoptic mange? If you are, then this one puppy got it after he went home.
http://www.marvistavet.com/html/body_sarcoptic_mange.html
http://www.marvistavet.com/html/demodectic_mange.html
ETA: Contrary to what another poster said, humans CAN get sarcoptic mange, although it’s a self-limiting infection in humans as the mites can’t reproduce on humans.
ETA: My dog had sarcoptic mange when I adopted her from the shelter. She had been in a foster home (as were all their pups) and the shelter didn’t know about the mange.
Because i took her to the vet w/in 24 hours, I had no problem at all getting the shelter to reimburse me for the costs of treatment.
My dog was one on which the scrapings didn’t find the mites, although she couldn’t even eat without stopping to scratch herself, so we began a series of ivermectin injections that cleared it. (The so-called "Maybe Mange" test.)
She had been living mainly outdoors with the foster family’s other dogs, so we’re pretty sure it came from foxes and ALL their dogs also needed treatment because it’s so contagious!
Posted in Sarcoptic Mange Treatment
9 Responses to “Can anyone help my friend on the mange subject?”
Leave a Reply
would think she is in clear if she told them and to take to vet.
References :
MANGE is MITE….a parasite.
Mange needs treatment w/the proper INSECTICIDE!!!!
Some is nearly incurable & requires euthanasia!
Humans do NOT get mange-Humans CAN get RINGWORM which is a FUNGUS!!!
All the excess babble posted has nothing to do w/anything.
References :
What I read is not you fault your not a vet
References :
Going with your questions at the end here:
1. I didn’t think that sarcoptic mange could be treated by advocate?
-No, it can’t be.
2. Is my friend in any fault?
-Hard to say.
Demodectic mange would be the mange a vet would suspect in young, indoor-raised puppies with an unhealthy dam, absolutely. That’s what she was told by HER vet was going on, and she dutifully treated for it and informed puppy buyers.
The issue is whether demodectic mange was the right diagnosis. Dogs with sarcoptic mange tend to scratch uncontrollably, so even though is very hard to diagnose with skin scrapings, chronically itchy puppies should have suggested to your friend and her vet that sarcoptic mange was potentially the issue. Skin scrapings fail to find sarcoptic mange mites AT LEAST half the time, and treating for it–the maybe mange test- is often necessary to properly diagnose sarcoptic mange.
The OTHER possibility is that the pup got sarcoptic mange after going to the new home.
3. Shouldn’t they have taken the puppy’s to the vet and got them checked out anyway?!
-Yes, absolutely, within 24-48 hours of bringing the pups home. Your friend should have required this in her contracts.
4.Also how could the puppy’s have developed sarcoptic mange if they where diagnosed with demodex mange? none of the other puppy’s have sarcoptic mange they all have demodex mange?!
They could have gotten sarcoptic mange by being around another animal with sarcoptic mange. It spreads quite easily from one dog to the next, from racoons, foxes, etc.
Yes, they can actually get both.
Are you 100% SURE the other puppies don’t have sarcoptic mange? If you are, then this one puppy got it after he went home.
http://www.marvistavet.com/html/body_sarcoptic_mange.html
http://www.marvistavet.com/html/demodectic_mange.html
ETA: Contrary to what another poster said, humans CAN get sarcoptic mange, although it’s a self-limiting infection in humans as the mites can’t reproduce on humans.
ETA: My dog had sarcoptic mange when I adopted her from the shelter. She had been in a foster home (as were all their pups) and the shelter didn’t know about the mange.
Because i took her to the vet w/in 24 hours, I had no problem at all getting the shelter to reimburse me for the costs of treatment.
My dog was one on which the scrapings didn’t find the mites, although she couldn’t even eat without stopping to scratch herself, so we began a series of ivermectin injections that cleared it. (The so-called "Maybe Mange" test.)
She had been living mainly outdoors with the foster family’s other dogs, so we’re pretty sure it came from foxes and ALL their dogs also needed treatment because it’s so contagious!
References :
mb
What a dire situation.
The main thing your "friend" is at fault of is being an irresponsible, backyard breeder in the first place and breeding from a mongrel without prior health testing, that was obviously not fit and up to rearing a healthy litter of puppies.
The next thing your "friend" is guilty of is rehoming sickly puppies. Your "friend" should have paid for their treatment and waited until they were clear before rehoming them.
Demodex is a result of a weakened immune system and is totally different to sarcoptic mange, but because these puppies were were already compromised and already sickly, then any one of the puppies was more suceptible to catching other diseases, including the sarcoptic mange, which is probably what happened with this puppy.
Your "friend" should have insisted that the new owners of all these puppies should have taken the puppies to their own vet within 24 hours for a full health check and to receive any ongoing treatment from their own vet as needed.
The new owner of the puppy with sarcoptic mange is now responsible for this puppy and was a fool to take on a sickly puppy at all. Probably only doing so because it was free. Therefore, she is, like so many other victims of this nature, now paying for her desire to "get something for nothing".
No I do not think your "friend" will be forced to pay for this puppy’s vet fees although I do think your "friend" should and would do if she had been a reputable and ethical breeder in the first place.
#
EDIT – Bunk, Humans can most certainly get sarcoptic mange and it is VERY contagious!
http://www.dr-dan.com/sarcopt.htm
References :
Giving away puppies for free, oy vay…
What your friend should have done was drawn a sort of contract saying that the puppies have mange and have the buying party sign it with a few witnesses, so that she had proof that the person took the puppies knowing they had mange.
As far as the dog falling in a lake, that was the owners responsibility and not hers.
It’s not unheard of for a vet to misdiagnose mange, though whether it was the vet she went to or the one the other woman went to is hard to say.
References :
http://dogs.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Free_Puppies_to_Good_Home
I suggest you read up on both these types of mange, first off. Demodex is ‘not considered contagious’ but Sarcoptic Mange is, for example. I imagine it’s not impossible for a puppy with a severely compromised immune system to go down with both, to be honest.
Secondly, I suggest you get this owner to bring the puppy back, so it can be checked by your vet. Alternatively get both vets to speak to each other. Right now you only have the word of this owner about what’s going on.
Having been on the receiving end of a situation like this with a puppy I bought in good faith, at the very least I’d expect the breeder to be making the right noises, and maybe, once both vets have spoken to each other, or your vet has seen the puppy if possible, maybe offering to at least make a contribution towards vet treatment, even if the owner was ‘warned’. Obviously the costs involved with falling into the lake (£400 – for what?) are not the responsibility of the breeder.
And to be honest, siding slightly with the breeder here – had this puppy been checked by the owner’s vet within the first 48/72 hours, any health problems should have been found, and treatment begun – well before other household pets were compromised.
Keep the communication open before this deteriorates into a legal situation.
References :
Sarcoptic mange is highly contageous and it does seem possible that they could have both. Is it your friend’s fault? Absolutely. Demodex is a lifelong condition. Every time one of those puppies go through a stressful period, they’re going to get a flare up. They probably DID get it from mom, but even if they didn’t, it’s STILL your friend’s fault for putting them at risk by allowing an infected dog near them. And she gave two puppies to one person KNOWING they were going to pass one off to someone else? How irresponsible. Personally, I think your friend deserves EVERYTHING she gets in this situation, and that includes being sued for vet bills. Now maybe she’ll get her dogs fixed
References :
Why did you delete your other question about this?
The answer is the same. Your "friend" bred irresponsibly, and is 100% responsible for the results. She didn’t draw up contracts, she gave the dogs away for free to whoever, and apparently hoodwinked them on top of it all. She deserves what she is getting and needs to pay this person for treatment.
I do not see a demand to pay for a dog falling in the lake. I see a demand for her to pay for the spread of the Sarcoptic Mange, which is reasonable to me. She touched the pups, she touched her other dog, and she touched the rats. They now all have it, because your "friend" was not honest.
ETA: LOL! A TD does not change the fact that this "breeder" needs to pay the piper!
References :