# What are your thoughts on the Coggins test?



## UWLEquestrian (Jan 17, 2011)

How many of you annually pull a Coggins on your horses?
For those that do, do your horses leave the property at all? 
Does your state, province, etc. require a current Coggins for your horse to travel outside of your property?


----------



## MIEventer (Feb 15, 2009)

I'm for it, and against it - 

I'm against it because, say my vet comes out, April 26th at 1:00pm and draws Nelson's blood. Then after I turn him out around 3:00pm, he gets bit my a mosquito that is infected.....so Nelson's blood test gets ran, and comes back negative, but guess what...he's not. So I go to HT's, and he now infects every other horse he's around.

I'm for it, because if the blood test comes back positive, the Vets and the State knows where the infected mosquito's are coming from *area wise*

~~~

I have to get coggins done, because we are Eventers and Coggins is required for every single entry to any HT of the season. Without it, I cannot compete.


----------



## UWLEquestrian (Jan 17, 2011)

MIEventer said:


> I'm for it, and against it -
> 
> I'm against it because, say my vet comes out, April 26th at 1:00pm and draws Nelson's blood. Then after I turn him out around 3:00pm, he gets bit my a mosquito that is infected.....so Nelson's blood test gets ran, and comes back negative, but guess what...he's not. So I go to HT's, and he now infects every other horse he's around.
> 
> ...


I agree with you on both counts. 
Stupid question: Is EIA transferrable from horse to horse or just through infected flies or mosquitoes?


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

I personally have never pulled a Coggins test on a horse. Back when we first had horses, there was no such thing as a Coggins test. We have horses again, but none of them have a current Coggins.

I don't know what the state requirements are for Coggins tests, but around here, if you want to ride your horse on trails or take them to parades or playdays, you are required to have a current Coggins test.

How do I feel about them? Pretty much the same as my vet. They are pretty much useless in most cases, unless being used for diagnosis. All they do is show that, at the time the Coggins was pulled, your horse didn't have EIA. However, five minutes after the test is pulled, your horse could be bitten by a mosquito and infected with it.


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

UWLEquestrian said:


> I agree with you on both counts.
> Stupid question: Is EIA transferrable from horse to horse or just through infected flies or mosquitoes?


From what I understand, it's a lot like HIV - it can be passed through bodily fluids - blood, milk, saliva, etc...


----------



## franknbeans (Jun 7, 2007)

Agree totally. They just test one point in time. Most "horsey" activities still require them, and proof of rabies, at least here in the East, where I am. Some places only ask that they be in the last 2 yrs. So, I do get them drawn, just so that I have it if I want to go somewhere.


----------



## Erin_And_Jasper (Jul 5, 2008)

i dont get them done bc my horses dont leave my property and dont go and visit other horses. i take them for trail ride but its mostly just dirt roads up the street


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

I only get them if I will be competing, moving my horse across state lines (both required) or if he's going to be around a lot of unfamiliar horses.


----------



## Poseidon (Oct 1, 2010)

I only have one because my BO requires it because the barn she is kept at is home to very pricey halter horses.


----------



## myhorsesonador (Jun 21, 2009)

I board so I have to have it done


----------



## Zora (Mar 18, 2010)

We don't get coggins unless we go to local show, which is not often as they usually require more vaccines then we choose to give.


----------



## jesredneck98 (Dec 11, 2009)

Coggins here in midwest and every other state that I know of requires a negative coggins to travel across statelines. I have done exensive traveling and had never not needed a coggins. There are many people out there who don't have it done and should because they travel and encounter other horses. This is were the responsibility of the owner comes in. I don't want my horse around a horse that has been known to be sick. So if you have a sick horse you shouldn't be traveling to places where there would be a risk, however I do understand that sometimes sickness sets in and no one knows or it happens in transit but I still expect then that the owners will do what they can to prevent illness to other horses. Coggins is important for this reason so that people know and can treat their horse. I guess it all comes down to personal preference. But if you are traveling and get caught without a coggins it is very expensive and I know in some places they can quaritine your horse for a length of time.


----------



## candandy49 (Jan 16, 2011)

Every State in the United States requires a negative Coggins for any travel and just a few short years ago it is even required when you leave your own premises. Some States require either a currrent 12 month Coggins and others require a current 6 month Coggins. The disease Equine Infectious Anemia(EIA) has no cure and no safe vaccine. Even if systems go in remission it can and will reoccur. Back when I travelled with my horse or horses I did always have blood pulled for a Coggins, but since I no longer take my now one horse anywhere I don't have a Coggins test done. 

The disease EIA is transmitted in the blood, saliva, urine, mare's milk, and other body secretions of infected horses. Blood sucking flies and mosquitos are commons sources of infection, too.

Boarding facilities are required by law to have a negative Coggins on all the horses in residence. Inspections of Boarding barns are done by the Agriculture Department and have to be in compliance with current Coggins tests.


----------



## MN Tigerstripes (Feb 20, 2009)

I've always done a Coggins on Sodehr and will on Lily too this spring. I do occaisionally show with them and trail ride off property. 

The Walkers never had it done when I was growing up.


----------



## luvs2ride1979 (Nov 9, 2007)

UWLEquestrian said:


> How many of you annually pull a Coggins on your horses?
> For those that do, do your horses leave the property at all?
> Does your state, province, etc. require a current Coggins for your horse to travel outside of your property?


It's the law in Arkansas, so all of my horses are tested yearly, if they leave the property or not. It's a good test IMO. If a neighbor of mine had an EIA positive horse and didn't have coggins done, I'd be po'ed. Those horses need to be put down and testing helps to stop the spread of the disease.


----------



## Tennessee (Dec 7, 2008)

We trail ride in different states all over the south, so we have to get the coggins pulled on our horses. No big deal. It's cheap and quick, and then we're good to go. Plus, I'm pretty sure my own state requires it on popular trail sites and shows.


----------



## Delfina (Feb 12, 2010)

I have a current one on both of my horses. It's cheap and this way I can transport my horse anytime I want. I have no idea if my BO requires it, I keep it up to date and provide her with copies.


----------



## Brookside Stables (Jan 16, 2011)

In Iowa, Coggins is required by LAW to enter the state, and to exhibit at FFA and 4-H shows. 

I have never been to an organized trail ride in Iowa that required proof of Coggins. Our local Saddle Club does not require proof of Coggins. Most stables in Iowa do not require proof of Coggins for you to ride there. You do not need a Coggins to ride at any State or County Park in Iowa.

We only pull Coggins on horses if we plan on taking them across State lines or if we plan on competing where Coggins is required to compete.


----------



## luvs2ride1979 (Nov 9, 2007)

Many states (most? all?) require yearly coggins no matter what you do with your horse. You do have to show the papers at shows or organized trail rides, but you are still required to have it even if you don't show or trail ride off property. If you don't have a coggins test in Arkansas yearly, there is a hefty fine per-horse. A vet can report you for not having your horse tested, or any concerned neighbor or aquaintence. Reporting people doesn't happen often, unless you **** of your neighbor lol, but it does happen and definitely not worth the risk IMO.


----------



## Cowgirl140ty (Jan 7, 2010)

I get them done every year. Because I to, like many others need them to compete. Whether cutting, sorting, barrels, team penning.... they all require them. So They are done faithfully. 
I do agree that they are good and bad for the same reasons as well. 
And I have to take them with me when I ride. The Fish and Wildlife people in this area patrol everywhere... and they will write you a ticket if you do not have your coggins ON you.


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

It's the law in Texas too.

My thoughts on the test itself is that it doesn't hurt. Sure a blood test is just a snapshot in time in the overall health of the horse but if making it the law means that you do that once a year, rather than never, then great! Because if it wasn't necessary then hardly anyone would do it, and how on earth would the disease be monitored? It's not just the health of YOUR horse that means anything, it is also the health of the horse population on the whole continent. Blood tests (and the unfortunate positive ones) allow for the study of the etiology and epidemiology of the disease and the development of more effecient prevention and control measures for the future.

EIA is a difficult thing as it is not only a virus (more difficult to treat than bacterial infections) but a type of virus known as lentivirus (retroviral). Same family as HIV/AIDS in humans. Very difficult to treat and makes it hard to design a vaccine as these viruses are prone to mutation and integration into the host genome.

There IS a vaccine directed against EIA, it is a live attenuated virus vaccine and has shown to be effective. Even if it was more widely used and could be shown to be effective long term, the coggins test would probably still be needed intermittently for vaccinated horse to ensure that the horse has not been infected with a different variant of EIA.

So, my horse will have a coggins test each year!


----------



## natisha (Jan 11, 2011)

jesredneck98 said:


> Coggins here in midwest and every other state that I know of requires a negative coggins to travel across statelines. I have done exensive traveling and had never not needed a coggins. There are many people out there who don't have it done and should because they travel and encounter other horses. This is were the responsibility of the owner comes in. I don't want my horse around a horse that has been known to be sick. So if you have a sick horse you shouldn't be traveling to places where there would be a risk, however I do understand that sometimes sickness sets in and no one knows or it happens in transit but I still expect then that the owners will do what they can to prevent illness to other horses. Coggins is important for this reason so that people know and can treat their horse. I guess it all comes down to personal preference. But if you are traveling and get caught without a coggins it is very expensive and I know in some places they can quaritine your horse for a length of time.


The treatment for a positive horse is death, whether they appear sick or not


----------



## natisha (Jan 11, 2011)

sarahver said:


> It's the law in Texas too.
> 
> My thoughts on the test itself is that it doesn't hurt. Sure a blood test is just a snapshot in time in the overall health of the horse but if making it the law means that you do that once a year, rather than never, then great! Because if it wasn't necessary then hardly anyone would do it, and how on earth would the disease be monitored? It's not just the health of YOUR horse that means anything, it is also the health of the horse population on the whole continent. Blood tests (and the unfortunate positive ones) allow for the study of the etiology and epidemiology of the disease and the development of more effecient prevention and control measures for the future.
> 
> ...


If a horse is vaccinated it will come up with a positive test as they will have antibodies in their blood against the disease & that is what the test tests for. Antibodies indicate exposure, either natural or induced. So you're right, a different strain would need a different test. I don't know if there are any different tests.


----------



## DubyaS6 (Aug 30, 2010)

Sarah-

I was JUST about to post exactly what you did. 

I am actually surprised at how many people do NOT get the test done...

I agree that its just a snapshot in time, however if you NEVER test your horse for EIA, then they could have been carrying it for months and infecting other horses before you would ever know about it...

Just seems logical to pay the $35 every year and find out if your horse has it. In my opinion its part of being a responsible horse owner, not only for your horse, but for every other horse.


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

I truly think coggins test is a BS to get money out of people's pockets, but I still do it to take my horse to outside barns for lessons and clinics (it's a requirement).


----------



## DubyaS6 (Aug 30, 2010)

kitten_Val said:


> I truly think coggins test is a BS to get money out of people's pockets, but I still do it to take my horse to outside barns for lessons and clinics (it's a requirement).


Really? Why?

I guess I just dont understand why you wouldn't want your horse (or other's horses) tested for a fatal disease...


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

candandy49 said:


> Some States require either a currrent 12 month Coggins and others require a current 6 month Coggins.


NY state a negative coggins is good for the calendar year it is taken and the following calendar year. (This is for horses that are traveling within the state, not horses entering the state.)

This is a link to the laws for the various states. (Though the site has not been updated since 2001.)

I do not believe Washington state requires a Negative coggins test for horses with in the state, only horses entering the state.


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

natisha said:


> If a horse is vaccinated it will come up with a positive test as they will have antibodies in their blood against the disease & that is what the test tests for. Antibodies indicate exposure, either natural or induced.


True this althought it depends some on _how_ the virus was attenuated. I.e. If it was attenuated by removing some of the virulence factors (usually some a surface/receptor type protein) then the antibodies that are produced and directed against the vaccine are slightly different in their morphology to those produced in response to a true infection.

ETA: I am not sure if there are different tests either but I would assume that the test is done by ELISA which means that it should be possible to differentiate between different epitopes.


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

DubyaS6 said:


> Sarah-
> 
> I was JUST about to post exactly what you did.


Great minds think alike....!!


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

kitten_Val said:


> I truly think coggins test is a BS to get money out of people's pockets, but I still do it to take my horse to outside barns for lessons and clinics (it's a requirement).


I think that you are not alone in thinking this KV, it’s just that you are the only one that had the balls to say it! :wink:

As much as I LOVE conspiracy theories, I don’t think this is just a grab for money by vets or anyone else. Epidemiologists don’t really care if you pay $35 to have a blood test, or $30, or however much it costs to have the test done. In fact, they don’t really care if your horse is negative either. To them, your beautiful companion that you love with all your heart is probably just a data point labeled KI3629NEG-MD or something like that. In fact, they don’t even care if your horse, heaven forbid, should be bitten by a mosquito and infected tomorrow *knocks furiously on wood* because then it will just be KI3629EUTH-MD, or it will be asymptomatic for a year and on the next coggins test it will be KI3629POS-MD, all relevant data for the study of the disease itself and bears great relevance to the health of the horse population as a whole.

On the other hand, if your local feed store starts selling ‘do it yourself at home coggins tests’ that they say you must purchase every month, then yes, that is probably a grab for cash and has no significance.

Hope this makes you feel a little better about forking out for a blood test every year?


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

I do not think it is a scam.

I think it gives them (whoever them is) the ability to track the incidence of EIA. A test once per year allows them to know what is going on in that area. Which leads to them deciding if other steps need to be taken, etc.

And it totally makes sense that a horse has to have a negative to enter other states, etc. Kind of like some countries will not allow you (humans) in if you have certain diseases or you do not have certain vaccines.


----------



## MIEventer (Feb 15, 2009)

kitten_Val said:


> I truly think coggins test is a BS to get money out of people's pockets, but I still do it to take my horse to outside barns for lessons and clinics (it's a requirement).


You're not alone Kitten, MANY feel the same way as you do.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Nov 4, 2009)

I never thought much about Coggins because I don't usually take my horses out of state. I asked my vet about it the other day as we drew blood on 24 outfitter horses going to Arizona, curious if he had ever even seen a case of EIA.
Not in Wyoming, but there was a case last year in Montana. Too close to home for me, they get a Coggins test done every year now


----------



## MN Tigerstripes (Feb 20, 2009)

I guess I'd rather know if my horse is infected so I can prevent somebody else's horse from getting infected. It'd be terrible to lose one of my horses but I'd feel a lot worse if my negligence was responsible for the death of someone else's animal. 

If it was a money grab they'd try and push it for more than once a year. Heck my vet even told me NOT to test Flame. 

Yeah it's only a snapshot in time, but a snapshot's better than nothing. Alot like an HIV test.


----------



## MIEventer (Feb 15, 2009)

MN Tigerstripes said:


> I guess I'd rather know if my horse is infected so I can prevent somebody else's horse from getting infected. It'd be terrible to lose one of my horses but I'd feel a lot worse if my negligence was responsible for the death of someone else's animal.


You can still infect the whole barn, with or without the test. Even after the test has been taken, your horse can still get bit, and you can still go around infecting all those you encounter - barn, shows, etc, etc.


----------



## MN Tigerstripes (Feb 20, 2009)

I'm aware of that. 

BUT if you your horse tested and it's positive you can put your horse down before infecting any more people. If you never got your horse tested you could be all over the place infecting horses without even knowing it. At least by testing you are minimizing the possible impact of an infected horse.

I know I would be completely ***** off if I found out a friend never tested her horse, had it out in public around other horses, and found out it was infected after years of exposing other horses. 

It's just like HIV. I get tested. Ok great negative. But immediately go out and have unprotected sex and get infected. Sure that negative test no longer means anything for my future. But it sure as heck means something for my past and the people I'd slept with before. 

Or we could put it like this. The second partner I have infects me with HIV. I never get tested for whatever reason, but sleep with 15 other people. I've more than likely infected all of those people and if they never got tested they probably infected many more. Now if I'd gotten tested after every partner, I'd know right away and wouldn't have infected anymore people. 

Granted EIA isn't transmitted exactly like HIV but it's the same concept. It's better to know (even for a short while) and to minimize the possible spread of a disease than to never find out it's spreading until it's endemic and you have an entire population of sick INCURABLE animals. 

I'm sorry but to me $30 once a year is well worth the expense.


----------



## MIEventer (Feb 15, 2009)

I don't know. I'm still on the fence. One foot is on the against it, thinking it is rediculous, and the other foot is on the yeah, do it side. 

Aren't the symptoms pretty apparent? Pretty loud and clear? The horse doesn't live long once infected do they?


----------



## MN Tigerstripes (Feb 20, 2009)

I can't remember right now, but I believe some infected horses can live for awhile... Sorry it was a really long night last night (first time out since newly single) otherwise I'd probably remember! 

I understand the ridiculous side of the fence too, but the other side wins out for me.

$30 really isn't that much in the run of things and if I can prevent my horse from infecting any other horses but putting him down I'd rather know than not.


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

MIEventer said:


> Aren't the symptoms pretty apparent? Pretty loud and clear? The horse doesn't live long once infected do they?


Ummmm, no.

Symptoms are not always 'apparent' and may go undiagnosed. Some horses experience severe symptoms whilst others may just exhibit mild flu like symptoms. Not something every horse owner would necessarily call the vet out for.

Death rate when untreated is approximately 30%, most horses will recover and go on to be asymptomatic carriers _for the rest of their lives_ if left untested. Asymptomatic carriers still shed virus particles and will infect other horses, possibly for years after initial infection.

But don't just take my word for it:

Equine Infectious Anemia


----------



## qtrhrsecrazy (Aug 2, 2009)

Some do show signs of being sick.. some are carriers, can spread the disease and never ever appear sick, but it will show up on the test if they are


----------



## luvs2ride1979 (Nov 9, 2007)

DubyaS6 said:


> I agree that its just a snapshot in time, however if you NEVER test your horse for EIA, then they could have been carrying it for months and infecting other horses before you would ever know about it...
> 
> Just seems logical to pay the $35 every year and find out if your horse has it. In my opinion its part of being a responsible horse owner, not only for your horse, but for every other horse.


I agree, well said.


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

DubyaS6 said:


> Really? Why?
> 
> I guess I just dont understand why you wouldn't want your horse (or other's horses) tested for a fatal disease...


Dubya, because of 2 reasons:

1) Even my horse is negative today she'll get it tomorrow on trail ride parked next to infected horse there (as it's not required to have a coggins to ride in parks). And then during the whole year my horse will spread it to everyone else at the clinics, lessons, and shows. (knock on wood of course!)

2) Here is the official statistics (sorry, it's from 2001, I was too lazy to do deeper search): http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/pub_aheia04.pdf page 13: out of 179000 tests only 3 were positive (which is 0.0017%!).


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Yes Kitten, but after a year when you tested again you would know and you would then stop infecting the entire world with your sick horse.

I think it is something that has minimal numbers now because people took the time to take note and do something about it.


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

Alwaysbehind said:


> I think it is something that has minimal numbers now because people took the time to take note and do something about it.


Actually that's a very interesting question. I really wonder what's the possibility of getting it and distance dependence. Like in people there is much lighter chances to get TB because the conditions you have to be in to get it are very specific.

I do agree though very likely it diminished because people keep closer eye on it. Still I'd rather make other stuff (like flu, rihno, etc.) mandatory at the shows.


----------



## Strange (Jan 11, 2009)

My horse gets his coggins yearly with all of his other vaccinations and when he has his teeth checked. He competes and travels a lot, so it's required. Even if it wasn't I would still get it. Yes, it only looks at a snapshot in time, but seriously it's not /that/ expensive. Perhaps if my horse was never competed and was never going to leave the same piece of property in the foreseeable future I might not get one done, otherwise it's just a routine yearly addition to my vet bill.


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

kitten_Val said:


> Actually that's a very interesting question. I really wonder what's the possibility of getting it and distance dependence. Like in people there is much lighter chances to get TB because the conditions you have to be in to get it are very specific.


I don't want to get overly technical and boring here but did want to point out that viruses are great targets for eradication programs, think smallpox in the 70's and 80's. The world has been declared free of the Variola virus and as such the only place you will find it is in high barrier research labs in some parts of the world. 

Unlike bacteria which can survive in many different environments or may lie dormant in spores before flourishing upon the right conditions, viruses need a host. Most viruses have a host and a carrier stage and don't last long outside the host. In EIA the host is of course the horse (can survive lengthy periods replicating in host cells) and the carriers are flying insects that suck blood. Vampish for sure.

The reason that viruses are great targets for eradication programs is because of this susceptibility outside of the host - probably only surviving about 6-8 hours. I haven't checked EIA specifically but 6 hours is average for most viruses.

So if it could be eliminated from the equine population, the virus would be considered as a candidate to be declared 'eradicated.'

Hopefully one day in the future!


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

That's very interesting, Sarah!

I wonder if EIA can live in other species than just horses....


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

kitten_Val said:


> That's very interesting, Sarah!
> 
> I wonder if EIA can live in other species than just horses....


You're very sweet KV but after reading over a few of my posts I think I really did a bit of TMI on this one and most of it probably isn't really interesting to anyone but me ha ha.

Sorry guys, hopping off my high horse now 

*steps off mountainous soap box and hands thread back*


----------



## UWLEquestrian (Jan 17, 2011)

sarahver said:


> You're very sweet KV but after reading over a few of my posts I think I really did a bit of TMI on this one and most of it probably isn't really interesting to anyone but me ha ha.
> 
> Sorry guys, hopping off my high horse now
> 
> *steps off mountainous soap box and hands thread back*


 No, it was absolutely interesting to me!


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

sarahver said:


> You're very sweet KV but after reading over a few of my posts I think I really did a bit of TMI on this one and most of it probably isn't really interesting to anyone but me ha ha.
> 
> Sorry guys, hopping off my high horse now
> 
> *steps off mountainous soap box and hands thread back*


Actually I very much prefer scientific approach (and research facts) to just statements. :wink: So you did a great job on that one IMHO!


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

Ha ha, thanks guys. Disease is kinda...my thing. Although infectious diseases aren't my specialty.

I sometimes forget that not everyone shares my passion he he.


----------



## DubyaS6 (Aug 30, 2010)

kitten_Val said:


> Dubya, because of 2 reasons:
> 
> 1) Even my horse is negative today she'll get it tomorrow on trail ride *parked next to infected horse there *(as it's not required to have a coggins to ride in parks). And then during the whole year my horse will spread it to everyone else at the clinics, lessons, and shows. (knock on wood of course!)
> 
> 2) Here is the official statistics (sorry, it's from 2001, I was too lazy to do deeper search): http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/pub_aheia04.pdf page 13: out of 179000 tests only 3 were positive (which is 0.0017%!).


Thanks for the answer KV, its nice to be able to see someone else's point of view.

I want to address your first comment which I have bolded.

This is EXACTLY the point I am trying to make. What if that horse your horse was parked next to was tested the week prior to the trail ride?  That horse would no longer have the opportunity to infect your horse.

I get everyone's comments on how there are so little horses carrying it, but what if EVERYONE thought like this?? No horses would be tested and then the disease would be out of control.

Again, I just think its the responsible thing to do. And we are talking about a blood test. No negative effect on your horse and not really on your pocket either.

Whew, off of my soapbox too!


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

DubyaS6 said:


> This is EXACTLY the point I am trying to make. What if that horse your horse was parked next to was tested the week prior to the trail ride? That horse would no longer have the opportunity to infect your horse.


Unless 2 days before that that horse was parked next to the sick one and got bitten by the same mosquito... :wink: Lol!


----------



## MIEventer (Feb 15, 2009)

I appreciate everyone's posts on here, I am learning more and more each day  Thanks for the information!


----------

