|
|
Discussion on Will I need a new coggins?
|
| Author |
Message |
|
Posted on Friday, Jun 28, 2002 - 2:26 pm:
My horse was tested for Coggins in Jan and came back negative. On July 7th I move my horse to a new barn and where I stable currently the barn manager thinks I will be needing a new Coggins. Since she has been a bit unhappy about me leaving, I'm not sure if this is just to 'get at me' or is truly a good idea.
I have a call into the new barn to confirm through them if they will require a new Coggins. And of course if they ask me I will do it.
Meanwhile, I read the articles here and this appears to be an annual test. Is there any 'good' reason why a 6 month old negative Coggins test wouldn't be sufficient?
|
|
Posted on Friday, Jun 28, 2002 - 6:43 pm:
Your horse could have got infected the hour after the blood was pulled for the last coggins. While probably not highly likely, if I were the owners of the barn you were moving to I'd want a new negative report within 30 days of your move. Those owners owe an obligation to the rest of their tenants to take every precaution not to have a sick or coggins positive horse brought onto their premises.
|
|
Posted on Saturday, Jun 29, 2002 - 7:38 am:
Scotts points are valid. But, a lot may depend on the incidence of the disease in your area, does your current barn keep just horses that are tested frequently and how well your new barn manger knows the policies of the old barn...etc etc.. The request for a new test would not be unreasonable.
DrO
|
|
Posted on Tuesday, Jul 2, 2002 - 10:19 am:
My current barn is a closed 8 horse barn. Each horse is tested on a regular basis, and on a regular worming schedule etc... The barn I am moving too is a bit more busy - around 14 horses. The distance from one barn to the next is 4 miles; and both barns know each other. I have talked to the new barn and they will accept my 6 month old Coggins test.
So if the logic is that my horse could be infected one moment after the test was done, how does this apply to traveling to horse shows where Coggins tests can be anything up to a year old?
|
|
Posted on Tuesday, Jul 2, 2002 - 12:24 pm:
Following this logic, your horse could get infected the next day after the new test too, right?
Some states require an annual test, some every six months. Neither make much sense following the "next day" theory. It's a complicated situation, and we REALLY need something better than the Coggin's test 
Suzy
|
|
Posted on Tuesday, Jul 2, 2002 - 7:34 pm:
I'd be the first to admit that the Coggins test is a poor indicator however until something better comes along, it is the only safeguard we have. Considering the ramifications of a positive horse (death or isolation)the coggins is better than nothing at all. With all the advances made in the past several years in medical research I find it difficult to believe that some type of immunity treatment can't be developed. After all a immunity treatment was developed for West Nile in less than four years after it was discovered. Howabout it Dr. O. what is the problem with developing such an immunity?
|
|
Posted on Wednesday, Jul 3, 2002 - 3:50 am:
Hello All,
The problem with developing a vaccine for EIA is the slow moving, intracellular hiding nature of the virus, and its shifting antigenicity. It is a target that stays hidden from our immune system and when visible it keeps changing its appearance so the immune system does not well recognize the disease. It is not just researchers that have had trouble creating a vaccine but mother nature herself does not seem able to get a handle on a immune sequence that eliminates the virus and is the reason for the slow progression of the disease in horses.
The "next day theory" does not mean yearly testing is senseless, just look at the results. Using these procedures has greatly reduced the incidence of this disease in the past 30 years and taken it from a common killer of horses to a rare oddity in the majority of the country. In my experience the problem has not been the new infection of already tested horses but the occult disease present in horses that have never been tested before.
How frequently we test in order to continue to reduce the incidence of this disease is mandated by the rate of infection in a population, called the morbidity. Though outbreaks in large numbers of horses pastured together still happen, EIA is not a terribly infectious disease. It takes a special set of circumstances to come together for one horse to infect another. In a state like ours with a very low rate of morbidity I am very comfortable with just a once a year test when I go and show or stable my horse. Is states where the incidence is considerably higher I think twice yearly testing seems prudent.
DrO
|
|
|
