Winter turns to Spring turns to...Ticks


The whimsy of weather keeps every Canadian connected with (and frequently at the mercy of) nature. And, while the country is currently getting a blast of chill, we’re also entering the ‘end of February’ slide to spring-summer steam.


So, whether you’re dreaming of prepping your garden, getting ready for bird-watching or anticipating the start of lobster season (Oops- that’d be me!), be aware that the incoming warmth also feels good to creepy crawlies, i.e. ticks. Temperatures above 4’Celsius mean tick bites and the consequent need for tick bite prevention- for you and your 4 footed family members.

If ticks do bite and attach, it's pretty important to remove them, identify (ID) them AND test them for potential pathogens. Tick testing provides awareness of what’s ‘out there’ and enables a One Health approach to education on risk, disease and prevention for animals as well as people. Since Canada’s public health monitoring of ticks on companion animal program has been discontinued, a gap has needed to be filled. As such, tick identification (& testing) on ticks found attached to companion animals will be starting again this spring. This ID and testing will be performed as a collaborative approach through Canadian veterinary clinics nationally and coordinated through the the Canadian Pet Tick Survey on

Additional information can be found on the Canadian Pet Tick Survey and this latest blog posted by lead researcher Dr. Katie Clow:

Similar to the Canadian K9 Lifetime Study (UPDATE), these types of studies can only be performed through dedicated veterinary clinic and pet-owner involvement. Having a mutual goal of improving health (for the 4 and 2 legged) Canadians across the country is a wonderful thing !





Why Preventive Care is Necessary (Prevalence review)

Dear Canadian Veterinary Community, Ask, and you will receive. Here are the prevalence and ‘change over time’ numbers you requested …or the reply to why preventive care is needed, i.e. not a conspiracy.

There are many reasons why I adore the country in which I have gainful employment …Psst! Don’t tell anyone that providing me with a paying gig may not’ve been wise. And, near the tippy top of that ‘I love Canada’ list would be: “The Canadian Veterinary Community”. The following publication was driven not by my love of epidemiology (…and lo’ ye shall know them (clinicians) by their dislike of EPI…), but by my desire to give a ‘lil something back to the people who make up this very special community.

Tick alert sign.jpg

Over the past number of years, there have been an increasing number of veterinary teams in Canada who told us they were seeing more. More what? More ticks, more test positive dogs, more Lyme disease, more clients asking about Lyme and other tick-borne diseases, and more of other things related to vector-borne bug exposure and disease. In order to put some numbers to these concerns of ‘more’, and help vet teams do their jobs, we wanted to figure out if these jitters were valid (granted-we were pretty confident they were legit), and if so provide this information in a journal article that was freely available to all vet teams and their clientele.

So, we went to work to try and do exactly that.

Here is the end result of that effort- it definitely was not a solo venture- and I’m grateful to everyone who encouraged me to get it done. The publication establishes prevalence of a few common vector-borne (tick and mosquito) pathogens in Canada, how that has changed over a recent chunk of time, and frequency of co-infections, i.e. how often a given dog may be exposed to more than one of these pathogens.

We hope it helps you with our twin veterinary goals- keeping animals and their people safe!


Lyme Disease (LD) in Ontario: S.O.S.


A backronym is a group of words used as the explanation for an acronym. Hmmm…I suspect I’ve gone about that backwards. My apologies, as what I should have begun with is the explanation for an acronym, i.e. a word or name that is actually an abbreviation of letters (typically the first letters of the various words, common examples being HBC (hit by car) or LD (Lyme disease, lethal dose, let’s dance or lame duck).

A classic backronym example might be SOS, which many think equals ‘Save our souls’ and in fact is based on the desire to have a simply identified Morse code. Another being SPAM, i.e. commonly believed to mean ‘something posing as meat’, which now a days is more likely to mean an e-message nobody wants. 

Where is she going with this you might wonder? And quite rightfully so as it’s a segue way into one of my ‘love to hate because it’s entirely preventable’ topics, i.e. LD (purposely not defined so feel free to pick an LD used above).

I’ve never understood lack of movement towards prevention because of the ‘I’m waiting for the paper’ philosophy…this seems similar to creating backronyms for acronyms. In the case of Lyme disease, we know there has been a rapid expansion in tick ranges in Canada, we know these ticks carry pathogens that can cause illness in dogs and waiting to actively work towards tick prevention makes as much sense as a belief in backronyms.

Lyme tick warning.jpg

A recent article was published on LD (which here means Lyme disease) emergence in Ontario, Canada between 2010 to 2016. The paper showcases the fairly common-sense conclusion that increased ticks equals increased human Lyme disease, and that reported disease is rising over time (i.e. more cases each year) with the highest number of Ontario human Lyme cases in 2015 & 2016. 

Lyme disease isn’t going away. And that’s because Ixodes scapularis ticks that carry the agent of Lyme disease (Borrelia burgdorferi), along with potential other pathogens, are here to stay. And for those who feel comfortable heading for a hike (or into their own backyard) without appropriate tick prevention, I hope a read of this blog & CDC’s article is interpreted as my S.O.S. call for you (and your dog) to make choices to stay safe from LD, particularly as temperatures drop into this tick LD (let’s dance) zone.












Slàinte & step 2 towards veterinary spectrum of care

 Picking up from the previous post on veterinary spectrum of care,

here is my attempt at summarizing a few of the article’s proposed action initiatives. These appeared (at least to me) to focus on:

1) Awareness,

2) Education,

3) Research, and

4) Communication, in order to try to improve access to care for animal owners and also overcome barriers that prevent veterinary interventions to these across a wide spectrum of health care needs.

1.     Awareness of the concept of spectrum of care

This makes sense…as I suspect many DVMs & clinic staff members just don’t know that this is a rising concern, or if they do they feel powerless to do much about it or otherwise unable to prioritize and dedicate time towards it.

2.     Education on:

a.     Existing clinical guidelines available for animal health conditions (e.g. Antimicrobial use guidelines such as,

b.     How to critically evaluate these, e.g. Evidence-based practice and use of things like the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II)

c.     Development and the practice of skills to quickly assess these guidelines for approaches along this spectrum and ideally reduce dollar resources spent on ineffective tests or treatments.

Tools to help DVMs with this offbeat ‘what’s the evidence’ way of thinking, might include websites such as, Choosing wisely

or bestbets for vets.

It’s also critical to keep in mind that ‘evidence’ can come in many forms and levels, and although sometimes all we have is clinical experience as our form of evidence…this (IMHO) should not be discounted.  The key is to recognize and be transparent about this (e.g. lowest level of evidence ) and not be satisfied to settle with this for the future. There is much value (again- at least for me) in sorting out where we are (baseline) and looking towards what we need or would help.

3.     Research!!!!

As in ‘do research’, and do it in (or for) the vet primary care or general practice setting. This will hopefully aid veterinarians faced with these issues, i.e. those that are actually in private practice, aka the hardworking DVMs in the field. This style of research should also focus on the outcomes that we think matter most to the majority of pets and owners (e.g., quality of life, cost). Even if we don’t have all (or very many) of the needed answers for spectrum of care, once again that shouldn’t translate into ‘it’s no use to try’. 

4.     Communication

Much the same thing here…as in ‘communicate’, and do so with all involved groups to figure out what is needed and what is do-able. This type of stuff really does ‘take a village’ and that means, pet-owners, DVMs, clinical staff, baby vets (such as my students here at AVC ), folks in the animal health industry, practice owners, etc. should all get involved to problem-solve.

The bottom-line is, if ‘we’ think this is important stuff for our animals and the profession, then let’s trip the light fantastic and get started bringing these efforts into veterinary curriculums and hopefully from there into clinical practice and to animal-owners. In terms of New Year’s resolutions (for 2019), I think I’ve got a much better shot at this one than 5 minutes of daily meditation.

New Years Resolution.jpeg

Slàinte & steps towards veterinary spectrum of care

Christmas lights.jpg

The holidays can be a whirlwind of lights, colour, joy and in my house kids (& dogs) amped up on Santa-induced excitement and treats. There is no other time of year quite like it. However, there is a dark side to the holidays, and as every vet clinic staff member knows (especially those on emergency duty like I just was)…the season can be cold, bleak, and/or simply sad for many- whether 4 footed or two. For some, the diminished dazzle of the season can be related to economic and/or emotional concerns (i.e. sadness, depression, anxiety, or compassion fatigue), and this can be true for animal owners as well as vet teams

In the veterinary profession we are taking baby steps towards recognizing the challenges related to rising economic concerns (i.e. increasing veterinary costs), and the snowball effect that lack of coin has (especially at this time of year) on reducing pet visits to veterinary clinics. This down-sizing (and decrease in dollars available to spend by animal owners) has considerable impact on animal welfare. The most extreme example of which being an increase in decisions to end a dog, horse, or kitty’s life on the basis of financial factors.

Moving forward into 2019 and onward, there is a strong need for veterinarians who are prepared to assess, communicate, and deliver approaches to animal owners which include healthcare options along the spectrum of care, i.e. a range from lower cost to those regarded as ‘gold standard’ (+/- more expensive). Whether options that vary in cost also vary in effectiveness may be an open, yet undetermined (and potentially controversial) question…In other words does the ‘gold standard’ treatment really have a better outcome for the patient and owner? …And although it pains my clinician brain to think it, that is exactly the type of question that ties into a rising need for (and application of) evidence based-medicine and the day-to-day use of this in clinical practice, i.e. a vet clinic near you (and me). Other question examples could include, ‘What is the evidence for promoting one diagnostic test or treatment over another?’ and do we (i.e. you, me, ‘the experts’…whomever those people are) consider that evidence ‘good?’.

A recent publication sought to raise awareness of this need for veterinary spectrum of care. Additionally, the commentary didn’t just ‘chit chat’ about need….but proposed action initiatives to try to improve access to care for animal owners and also overcome barriers that prevent veterinary interventions to these across a wide spectrum of health care needs.

Unsurprisingly (at least to me), the bulk of these ideas centred on:

1) Awareness,

2) Education,

3) Research, and

4) Communication.

Because it’s the holidays, (aka my noggin’ is full of egg vs. brainpower), I’ll take a 24 h break (and another thoughtful read of the article) before making an attempt at summarizing a few of this fresh new group’s target areas for veterinarians & the profession.

B’Lyme-y, should I vaccinate the dog or not?

(Or…all I want for Christmas is for somebody to tell me if I should advise vaccination for K9 Lyme disease)

Lyme disease in Canada.jpg

On the fairly long list of things the average veterinarian might request from the rosy cheeked & jolly one this holiday season, (after world peace and mandatory pet insurance plans), might be a wish for clear consensus on all things related to Canine Lyme disease.

Failing that, a definitive stance on one aspect, Lyme vaccination, would be kind’ve nice.

Well, Santa (or a team from the University of Guelph) and a sackful of PRISMA prepped systematic review, may have come a bit early this year. Since, seriously, nothin’ says Christmas like meta-analysis, eh? However, bear with me when I translate (likely poorly) that these types of terms reflect a solid attempt by this group of researchers to try and deliver to practicing veterinary clinicians (and pet-owners) a much-needed evidence-based assessment on a topic that doesn’t require a cup of cocoa or a simmering fire to get folks heated. 

Using defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, or a ‘what’s out and what’s in’ list to tackle assessment of studies that reported the use of Borrelia burgdorferi (the agent of Lyme disease) vaccines in dogs, the researchers started with 1570 studies. That seems like a lot…. but using their standardized criteria, they ended up with 3 observational (the most current dated 2005) and 13 challenge studies (with only 5 of the 13 (38%) done in the past 10 years, and all done in dogs < 18 m of age).  

little drummer boy.jpg

Don’t worry, I am getting to the holiday miracle (or epiphany) portion of this, i.e. should we (or should we not) consider Lyme vaccination effective? [Cue the little drummer boy] The summary of evidence completed by the researchers suggests that vaccination lowers the risk of clinical sign (lameness, anorexia, fever) development in vaccinated dogs vs. unvaccinated dogs.


However, it is worthwhile (IMHO) to keep reading. [Cue the Grinch, get ready to have your heart shrink 2 sizes too small] As the article goes on to raise a number of concerns regarding study aspects frequently assumed when chatting about Lyme research, such as, were ticks infected with B. burgdorferi (i.e. did anyone check?), were dogs classified as negative before the study began (i.e. did anyone screen for B. burgdorferi status?), and ‘Are these articles relevant for the current vaccines (i.e. have vaccines changed over the years? And if so in what direction?’). Okay- I admit that last concern was mine.

Similarly, there was only one observational study that looked at clinical signs, and as the researchers quite rightly point out, clinical signs of Lyme disease are not all created equal…and this lack of information on clinical signs (individually or clumped together), their duration or severity is fairly critical (essential) for those of us attempting to make recommendations based on risks of clinical disease and with respect to prioritization of canine quality of life.

It is tough to weigh the pros and cons of a vaccine decision without having the questions the researchers outlined answered. However, I think this research team has earned a wassail (or at the very least a latke) for raising further awareness regarding the lack (and limitations) of studies on Lyme disease. Particularly the need for clinically focused studies (i.e. those performed in the field), as unfortunately, a disease model (along with a gold standard test) for B. burgdorferi and Lyme disease in dogs continues to remain on future ‘letters to Santa’ wish lists. 

Engorged tick.jpg

It’s going to require some serious sugarplums (or a nutcracker) to entice veterinarians to initiate and participate in broader based studies reflecting what occurs in general veterinary practise for many (most) K9 diseases and prevention strategies. And until this style of research occurs, I’ll assume that Santa is going to leave me (and my still unanswered question regarding Lyme vaccination) on his ‘naughty’ vs. ‘nice’ list.


Rat-a-tat-tat (or Rin-Tin-Tin-Tin) …K9 Sentinels marching in

Rin Tin Tin.jpg

There are certain words that guarantee my interest, and a short list of these (in no particular order) would include: Dogs, Canada, Infectious, Food, and the names of my two human children (probably accessing the internet right now). As such, I was thrilled to see a review article featuring the first three, Dogs as sentinels for Human Infectious Disease and Application to Canadian Populations:

The publication takes on the valiant task of summarizing research utilizing man’s (or in my case, woman’s) best friend, Canis familiaris (aka the dog) as a sentinel for human infectious disease, i.e. dogs being sick with or that have had exposure to disease-causing pathogens acting as a flashing warning sign for risk to the 2 legged animal (i.e. you, me and…girls-it’s time to stop with the screen time!). As is no real surprise, the idea of using dogs as infectious disease sentinels isn’t very common and per the article is even more radical for us Canadians (only 3% of the included studies, or if you prefer 4/142).

Animals have long been used as human risk sentinels, and as someone who spent much of my childhood in Flin Flon, Manitoba ( the author’s use of ‘canary in the coal mine’ was a great way to consider (and re-consider) myriad ways animals have worked to warn us of threats to human health- be these environmental or infectious disease related.

In many ways dogs are the ideal sentinel for human health risk and I’ve written about this before on the Pets and Ticks website, while paraphrasing (parroting) Public Health Ontario’s Systematic Review on Companion Animals and Tick-borne disease (, which identified considerably more studies (n =44). For the very few of us who do research with dogs acting as sentinels, the human-animal bond and wealth of shared environment, e.g. dogs sleeping in the same room,+/- on the bed, and sharing a life full of things both of us (i.e. dogs and people) need (i.e. snuggles and all items unconditional), makes dogs the ideal (and admittedly just plain fun) research warning bell.

Most of the research (76%) identified by the review was on the use of dogs to estimate seroprevalence (blood antibodies in most cases) to certain pathogens that can cause infections, such as those spread by Ixodes scapularis (black-legged) ticks, most commonly Borrelia burgdorferi (the agent of Lyme disease), but also potentially emerging anaplasmosis, babesiosis and Powassen encephalitis. In ‘Our true north, Canada’, the researchers pointed out that using dogs to look for: 1) viruses like California serogroup viruses, Chikungunya and West Nile, 2) bacteria and rickettsia such as, Rickettsia and Ehrlichia spp., and 3) parasites, like the worm Dirofilaria immitis (canine heartworm), should be strongly considered due to disease emergence caused by our homeland’s increasing hospitality to ticks, mosquitoes and other disease vectors.

Finally, the study concluded with what most of us who do this type of research already know…in order to achieve study ‘do-ability’ a number of critical factors are non-negotiable. I’ve summarized these (and added a few) to create a ‘Top 10 Needs for K9 Sentinel Surveillance Studies” list:

1.    Be very clear on what you are looking for, i.e. what disease, type of disease emergence, and/or range of disease spread

2.    Do the study in an identified risk (or emerging risk) region

3.    Ensure you have study participants (sentinel units) such as veterinary clinics and pet-owners who will participate, i.e. no sentinels = no study

4.    If you’re looking for something new (emerging), start with naïve (negative for the bug) dogs and follow them over time and space (see #2)

5.    Hope (really hard) that you can repeat your sampling. That means relying on your people (participants and sentinel units) and trusting that they will enable continued study participation (study engagement) and repeat that for as long as the study lasts. This is a big ask.

6.    Allow the researcher (s) time, so as to actually ‘do’ the study.

7.    Allow the researcher (s) funding, so as to actually ‘do’ the study.

8.    Be pet-ethical. Never forget that these dogs have a very important job in many cases- to be a beloved companion. So, don’t do any testing beyond what they are already receiving as routine care from their dedicated veterinary clinic, such as an annual blood draw. Think of them like your own pets i.e. they are not ‘study subjects’.

9.    Save your samples- so that if something changes (or a new test or disease emerges) you can go back and look for it (whatever ‘it’ may be)

10. Work with your community of dedicated pet-owners and sentinel clinics- they know the dog best- and can provide a wealth of information reaching far beyond a blood test. This can help you sort out health concerns, risk factors (for the dogs and their people) and put things like travel beyond or between regions into correct data interpretation contexts.

Working with our canine protectors is not a new concept, but it can be a novel for some researchers and particularly funding agencies. The review also does a nice job (IMHO) of emphasizing that enhanced communication and collaboration between doctors of all species (veterinary and human), is looking more and more likely to be the way to identify, increase knowledge and stay safe from intruding infectious disease, particularly in Canada.

It’s heartening to see that research such as the Canadian K9 Lifetime Study or Pet Tick Tracker are regarded as illuminating (at least by researchers from the land of bagpipes, whiskey & Gaelic), and I’ve no doubt that dogs will continue to shine a Lyme-light on ground-breaking studies, that similarly helps their humans.

Autumn is coming. And lepto may be more likely...

As a native of the Canadian prairies, for much of my life I was oblivious to the glory of fall, and the wonder of cooler nights, warm (but not hot) days AND brilliant red, orange and yellow foliage. However, now that I live in a part of Canada with a fall season > 1.5 weeks, my thoughts turn to the colour yellow for a more sinister reason than 5-star Atlantic Canada leaf-peeping. 

Yellow is the colour I associate with leptospirosis, and it’s a rather nasty bug (bacterium) that can infect and cause a range of illness in dogs. Vets typically diagnose leptospirosis as kidney (urine) and/or liver (jaundice) disease...which is why (for me), lepto = yellow. The bacterium is formally known as Leptospira interrogans, and in dogs we usually think about 4 serovars (strains of the bug) as key: L. canicola, icterohaemorrhagiae, pomona and grippotyphosa.

Typically, lepto is shed in the urine of animals like raccoons, rats and other rodents. These wildlife hosts also frequently populate urban (city and suburbs) environments, (e.g. Toronto where I think a raccoon is running for mayor), and then urinate into puddles or other water sources that dogs splash or wander through, thus becoming infected.

Lepto’s also a bug we tend to find in geographic ‘hot spots’ in N. America, and there’s been a few publications (from the U.S.A.) indicating these higher risk lepto locations (links below). A number of articles also show an increased risk during specific seasons, such as in northern climes, where we tend to see more lepto in late summer/fall…hence the title of this post and my hope to increase awareness and reduce dogs getting sick. 

Lepto links:

Spatial and spatio-temporal clustering of overall and serovars-specific Leptospira microscopic agglutination test (MAT) seropositivity among dogs in the United States from 2000 through 2007. Gautam, et al.

Hotspots of canine leptospirosis in the United States of America. White, et al.

Seasonality of canine leptospirosis in the United States and Canada and its association with rainfall. Ward, et al.