# Connections between serious health issues and vaccination?



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

So I recently came across this website dogsnaturallymagazine.com and the front page has a bunch of stuff on the threat of vaccines and I read them and not only did they have a lot of good points but they were pulling points and studies out of reputable veterinary journals and I've probably spent about 3 hours now trying to prove them wrong but there is a lot of circumstantial and actual evidence pointing in that direction.everything from cancer to hip dysplasia to auto immune disease a lot of things and its kinda worrying me, and its sorta making some sense since my old dogs a 94 lb golden retriever and a 189 lb Tibetan mastiff lived to 16 and 18 with out a single health problem and they were only ever vaccinated once no heartworms treatment or anything. Here's a very small piece of tons of articles that made a good point and from what I've searched it seems like this isn't ********


This bears repeating. Dr. Ronald Schultz, the leading canine immunologist, publishes a study in which every single puppy is protected within hours of the very first vaccination. Thirty years prior to this, he determined that core vaccines (including distemper) last at least seven years, and most likely for the life of the dog. So it should be pretty obvious that it only takes one distemper vaccine to protect a puppy from distemper for life. Why then does the average dog get vaccinated for distemper at 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 16 weeks, one year, four years, seven years, ten years – and if he is lucky enough to have lived through this unnecessary and dangerous onslaught – thirteen and sixteen years of age? Nine shots of the same virus that is shown to be permanently effective within hours of the very first vaccine is considered a minimal vaccine schedule by most veterinarians – many other dogs receive 15 or more shots of distemper! It is no wonder that joint disease is on the rise in dogs, especially in the most aggressively vaccinated subset: purebred dogs.


My tuco has had his 8 week shots and now I'm contemplating wether getting ones at 16 weeks makes sense



Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

I know of somebody whose 8 year old dog (not a golden) just was diagnosed with lymphoma. This dog was raw fed and was titred all its life. Should I take this as an example of the owner doing harm to their dog? 

I think people like to think they are in control and can keep their dogs from becoming ill, but.... 

On the flip side, my neighbor down the street faithfully gets all vaccinations and heartworm preventatives, etc... <- They actually do the year round heartworm preventative vs just the 6-9 months that we do. This St. Bernard is 11 years old and doing well. 

My other neighbor too was just as faithful with the vaccinations and heartworm prevention, and their golden retriever was 17 when they opted to put her to sleep (she couldn't get up anymore, mentally she was still there, but her legs had completely failed her). 

And DJD is something the dogs are born with. It's not caused by vaccinations. I'm sorry, but I know plenty of people who do not vaccinate their dogs and those dogs die from cancer and are crippled from hip dysplasia. Speaking with my vet - they feel that hip dysplasia and elbow dysplasia is something the dogs are born with.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Nevertheless they do not know this, hip displasia cannot be seen before the age of 8 weeks I believe, I'm not saying all this is the cause cancers and stuff and a dog can be perfectly healthy with all the vaccines but the stats here ( plus about 50 vets talking about it after I've spent about 10 straight hours looking into this) has led me to believe that we are way over vaccinating, the problems will always be there but not over vaccinating seems like it can make a strong difference, after all of this research I have decided to do the 16 week series of vaccines and year titres to check on levels. I think it's an important thing people should consider, I've read 52 different vets talking about this issue along with calling 3 local vets and 4 veterinarians from those vets and pretty much everyone agreed that pharmaceutical companies are too involved in the education about vaccination and that there are a massive number of short and long term issues ( particularly involving allergies, immune response or inflammatory illness) most said that puppy vaccination was nessesary but most also said that regular adult vaccination doesn't make sense and can cause extremely serious issues, judging from everything I've heard I've chosen to do only 2 puppy vaccination sets followed by homeopathic detox as told by my vet in an oddly hush hushed voice, lol. And yearly titres.


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Megora said:


> I know of somebody whose 8 year old dog (not a golden) just was diagnosed with lymphoma. This dog was raw fed and was titred all its life. Should I take this as an example of the owner doing harm to their dog?
> 
> I think people like to think they are in control and can keep their dogs from becoming ill, but....
> 
> ...


in addition, i join know where you heard that djd (osteoarthritis) they are born with, but Only very few cases are from birth and other causes include wear and tear on the joints that can be caused by an assortment of things and the main "congenital" cause is a malformed hip (hip dysplatia) which aparently vets cannot tell if they have until about 8 weeks of age (not 100% sure on that one) the age where many pups get vaccinated, although to be fair this is very circumstantial and im sure if it can be caused by vaccination only a small percentage can be caused by vaccines, nevertheless there are soo many other illnesses that can be directly caused


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

They do the vaccines at 8, 12 and 16 weeks because every puppy looses its moms immunity at different times. So they space them a month apart to try to make sure as soon as immunity is worn out they are protected. So, I do one at 8 weeks about then at 16 weeks or a few days after. Then I revaccinate 1 year later and then no more.

I believe between neutering and over vaccinating (well, vaccinating my dog at all) has caused a few of his issues including his autoimmune issues.


----------



## inge (Sep 20, 2009)

Tuco said:


> in addition, i join know where you heard that djd (osteoarthritis) they are born with, but Only very few cases are from birth and other causes include wear and tear on the joints that can be caused by an assortment of things and the main "congenital" cause is a malformed hip (hip dysplatia) which aparently vets cannot tell if they have until about 8 weeks of age (not 100% sure on that one) the age where many pups get vaccinated, although to be fair this is very circumstantial and im sure if it can be caused by vaccination only a small percentage can be caused by vaccines, nevertheless there are soo many other illnesses that can be directly caused


By that last sentence you mean that there are 'soo many other illnesses that can be directly caused' by vaccinations? The whole argumentation is very difficult to follow for me, it's all very vague. Do you have links to scientific work on this? So I mean, not just your own words about what you have read and heard, but the actual sources.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Tuco said:


> and a dog can be perfectly healthy with all the vaccines but the stats here


As I said that people who want to prove a point can find and parse stats to back up their arguments. As you just did researching this topic.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Megora said:


> As I said that people who want to prove a point can find and parse stats to back up their arguments. As you just did researching this topic.


I have to agree. My golden Joplin lived to be almost 16 getting all his shots every single one of those 15 years. I worry about doing the wrong thing, but I truly fear diseases like Lepto most.


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

there is very little data regarding vaccines. They are just now conducting a rabies challenge which will give us more information about how long the rabies vaccine actually lasts. This is the big issue to me... we know the diseases exist, we know that vaccine decreases disease and that our dogs are overall healthier with vaccines... what has not been studied is how long a vaccine lasts and thus how often you have to do it. There is a question about whether titers really give the whole picture and whether a low titer means low protection or not and whether one vaccine is enough... the problem is a lack of data... everone has these tails of well my dog lived to be 15 with vaccines every year or my dog died at 5 despite vaccination... 

What we need is data and someone to undertake these studies so we know what we are dealing with. 

I personally do minimal vaccines typically only doing distemper parvo and rabies by law but when natalie the wolfhound came home there was a bad influenza going around and my breeder and I knew of two wolfhound breeders whose younger dogs had all died when this influenza went around their kennels (houses) the older dogs who had been vaccinated every year their entire life survived... it was the younger dogs the young health dogs that died... some of them lost every one of their hounds.... Natalie got a vaccine with influenza in it (wolfhounds are prone to heart and lung issues) 

In my opinion there is not enough information out there... this is not an area for black and white thinking. I have a "friend" who is so wedded to her ideology that she has opted to totally stop vaccinating, i don't want her dogs anywhere near mine. Does that mean I vaccinate for everything of course not... I don't do lyme, or giardia, or bordatella (typically), or lepto but these are vaccines that don't impact anyone else with diseases that aren't contagious (bordatella but my dogs don't board) What vaccines we give has to be balanced and re-evaluated constantly as we get more information


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

^ And Shalva, that is absolutely reasonable. 

Personally I do not overvaccinate and I'd be very happy to follow along if the veterinary community goes from 3 years to 6 years between vaccinations, as I had when they went from 1 year to 3 years... 

But I'm not going to go it alone without my vet. 

Titres are a reasonable option - but my gosh they are expensive compared to the shot.  I think my concern is that if you are somebody who initially jumps into cutting vaxs because you do not care to spend all that money at the vet... are you really going to spend the money on the titres? 

And heartworm - is an existing problem. Probably less of an issue if you have a thickly coated and mostly indoor dog like our collie (who really only gets heartworm coverage for 3 or 4 months of the year), but dogs DO test positive for heartworm all the time. Treatment is expensive and sometimes dangerous for the dogs.


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

well i am not even addressing heartworm because that is NOT a vaccination in the same sense as rabies, distemper etc .... I do not use heartguard or interceptor or any of those ... to expensive to pay for a chewy treat when i can buy ivermectin and dose all of my dogs for 40 bucks every 5 years. 

here is the thing not vaccinating because you want to save money is penny wise pound foolish not vaccinating because you are concerned about the health of your dog and alternately running titres is a different situation. With all the low cost vaccination options for someone who just doesn't want to spend the 20 bucks then I question their commitment to their dog anyway. Titers are expensive and there have been times that it would have been significantly cheaper to just vaccinate I am lucky that I am not in a position to make that choice due to finances. 

I honestly don't see people having the conversation about vaccines because of money... I see people having the conversations because they legitimately want to do what is best for their dogs and have heard that vaccines can be harmful... the problem then becomes that they get it set in their minds that they will do titers and when they go to the vet they realize that titers are to expensive and then they are left in a quandary.... 

I think most will vaccinate at that point .... I know that I would but it is a quandary


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Shalva said:


> well i am not even addressing heartworm


But the OP did in his initial post. That's why I brought it up. 




> I honestly don't see people having the conversation about vaccines because of money... I see people having the conversations because they legitimately want to do what is best for their dogs and have heard that vaccines can be harmful... the problem then becomes that they get it set in their minds that they will do titers


I'm probably showing my cynical side here, but when people never vaccinate or purchase heartworm prevention for their dogs, I believe it comes down to them not wanting to spend the money and seeing where they can cut back as far as annual expenses. 

This isn't so much directed at the OP.... 

But in general, it seems like the reason why people do not vaccinate their dogs is because they do not want to spend the money or do not have the money. :uhoh:


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

see that is not my experience in talking to dog people but that having been said I am surrounded by "dog" people because of what we do... I don't typically run into the average pet owner where we discuss these things. Perhaps that is because how we deal with dogs here at my house seems crazy to the average pet person and we just don't discuss it unless I am directly asked. 

heartworm is different... it is not a vaccination... they say that the average radius for a mosquito is about 2 miles... but even here in northern new england heartworm preventative is important.. I do not do it year round although that my change as the climate changes... and I do not do it every month, as I said previously I use cattle and swine ivermectin and I do recommend that to people who I feel are trustworthy and can manage it and are having financial issues with the heartguard. I started using it about 12 years ago as the numbers of dogs here started to go up and up, the cost of heartguard was getting prohibitive. Ivermectin is very safe... now of course this will not take care of other worms but it will take care of heartworms. There are ways around the expense at the vet (not bashing vets and I know they have to make money too ) but I don't typically get RX's at the vet unless I have to in an emergency etc etc....

the fact is that these diseases exist like polio it has been mostly eradicated here due to vaccination. you have to balance the risk of the vaccine or preventative with the risk of disease based on where you live ... If I lived in louisiana I would probably have a very different attitude toward various vaccines than I currently do living in Northern New England... 

I had a couple old dogs years ago ... lab/golden mixes lived to be 17 eating garbage food and getting every vaccine under the sun for many many years.... and I have Cuinn who started seizing at a very young age, and there is data out there to support that early onset epilepsy between 2 and 4 is a vaccine reaction... what does this tell us... absolutely nothing... there is no data... those are anectdotal... but do I want to take a risk with something that I do have control of then no... and someday when the data changes and we have more information I will re evaluate.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I do agree that ongoing research is a good idea, but there is an extraordinary amount of research already out there about vaccines, and most of it gets ignored when people start blaming anything and everything on vaccines or this hypothetical condition of "overvaccination."

First of all, if it were a significant contributor to cancer rates, that link would have been easy to demonstrate, as it was in cats with vaccination site sarcomas. The link was found and delineated between VAS and aluminum adjuvants, and vaccine protocols were adjusted accordingly. That's how good science works. If the rabies vaccine, the Lyme vaccine, or any other of the commonly discussed vaccines created such an increase in risk or rate of disease, it would be easy to see. 

Instead, you have inferences made by people who run with studies that simply don't prove the links, as evinced by a discussion about the Lyme vaccine on GRF a couple of months ago that involved a poster showing us a paper about inflammation in the back legs of a dozen hamsters as proof that the Lyme vaccine would give our dogs persistent rheumatoid arthritis.

Or, you have popular theories that make their way around the magazines and blogs and then won't die, even after they've been thoroughly disproven. The supposed link between organomercury compounds (thimerosal) and autism in vaccines or any link at all between any vaccine and autism was based on a now-discredited paper on a handful of kids by a man trying to sell an autism diet. The link has since been studied for literally two decades, with massive research studies finding no link whatsoever, yet it's practically gospel in some anti-vaccine circles still that vaccines cause autism.

The whole concept that you can create some kind of weird, persistent, subtle immune system disorder with vaccines is flawed from the getgo. The immune system is _constantly_ being challenged by foreign proteins and is _constantly_ making antibodies. Immune reactions like AIHA and anaphylaxis can be initiated by vaccines, but they can be initiated by _any_ unfamiliar protein, and all the persistent immune disorders are caused by flaws in the system, even those that are triggered by a protein challenge.

There's this incredible hype that springs up around vaccines, maybe because so many people don't fully understand how they work and because they're typically delivered with a needle, but every cold, every peanut, every bug bite, every mouthful of meat, and every flake of other animals' dander in the environment is a protein that the immune system has to handle. Vaccines are made of carefully targeted proteins and sometimes contain adjuvants to get the immune system to react more strongly and to make antibodies, but they don't represent a fundamentally different challenge to the immune system than getting a cold or being exposed to a sore throat virus but never getting symptoms.

Lastly, people tend to downplay threats that don't feel dangerous, even when the statistics show they are. Dogs die from parvo, lepto, rabies, and flu-associated pneumonia at much higher rates than they do from any vaccine reactions. Even if you take the scariest numbers and scenarios about vaccine reactions and assume that the vaccines brought on something (e.g., anaphylaxis, AIHA, etc.) that no other protein would at any point in a dog's life, those rates are still lower than the rates of infection, complication, and death from the diseases we vaccinate for.

But, because dogs get those diseases so rarely now (largely because of vaccines!), they don't feel so threatening. Rabies is incredibly rare because nearly all dogs are vaccinated. Can you imagine what would happen if it wasn't mandatory and 1/3 or more of dogs weren't vaccinated? Not only would those dogs be at risk, but the disease would become far more prevalent in the environment.

Just look at the way measles has flared up in communities with high concentration of vaccine avoiders. Reduced herd immunity gives the disease a foothold, and then even kids who get the vaccine are at risk because no vaccine provides 100% protection. There's no data to suggest that the unvaccinated kids are any healthier in terms of cancer or the other diseases that get blamed on vaccines, but there's plenty to suggest that their parents' views on vaccines are bringing back diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, whooping cough, and others, that used to kill a large proportion of young children before vaccines were invented.

My point? Vaccines are a popular bogeyman these days, but they have fundamentally transformed health outcomes in this country for people and for dogs. Some things that used to be deadly health concerns are now a memory, so now we have time to obsess over very rare scenarios or to draw scary conclusions from small scale research. The facts themselves support a regular regimen of vaccines against the most dangerous diseases. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do your homework; that doesn't mean it's unreasonable to vaccinate a little less than the current AVMA guidelines suggest. There's plenty of very reasonable disagreement and discussion to be had.

But it's nonsensical and not supported by the facts to blame anything and everything on vaccines. Pinning hip dysplasia on them is a perfect example of how stupid the process can get when taken to its extreme.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

First of all the issue here isn't wether
Or not to vaccinate, it's wether OVER vaccinating causes serious health issues, I have chosen to vaccinate at 16 weeks and then do yearly titres to make sure I get the levels right. Also although lots of the info is circumstantial it seems there is too much evidence to ignore. I have spent lots of time the past few days reading veteranry journals and articles online both pro and anti vaccine and I read an article where they sent dozens of vets this questionare and most said that they over vaccinate, also from looking on these sites I don't seem to see any alterior motive to making these claims, they are not trying to sell anything and they seem to take outside opinions into account. I decided to recreate this quiz with local vets located in my province and I have sent it to 45 vets, I have gotten 6 responses so far and here is a summarization. 5 said they feel we over vaccinate, 4 said titres are a better alternative, all said they believe puppies should be vaccinated. 4 said they believe bad diets play a larger role in these health issues than vaccines. All said they feel the pharma companies have too much influence in the veterinary profession and education, 5 felt they were not sufficiently educated about vaccines. Once I get all the replies back I will post them all on this thread


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

If 5 out of 6 say they aren't educated enough to respond, then you have to throw their opinions out then. Right?

Did they know the purpose of the survey?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

"Overvaccinate" is a fuzzy term. If it means "vaccinate too much" then nobody should overvaccinate. If it means to err on the side of vaccinating when you're not sure that immunity is persisting, then it sounds quite reasonable, and most vets probably do that.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

For me, yearly vaccines definitely falls in the category of over vaccinating, especially when so many vets have moved to three years. All the vets here still follow yearly vaccine protocol, even on rabies. Most people just go with what their vet says to do but I make my own decisions for my dogs' care.


----------



## cubbysan (Mar 13, 2007)

A lot of vets are willing to go with the titer testing or send you to a vet that will do the testing. I was shocked at the price. I believe it was something like $75 per vaccine that you were testing for. That adds up quite fast, especially if you have more than one pet.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Those are their oppinions based on years of experience, I informed them of what the survey is for


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## BajaOklahoma (Sep 27, 2009)

Shalva said:


> I do not use heartguard or interceptor or any of those ... to expensive to pay for a chewy treat when i can buy ivermectin and dose all of my dogs for 40 bucks every 5 years.


Not to get off subject, but ivermectin can be fatal to herding dogs with the mutated gene MDR1. It allows too much of the ivermectin into the cells. There is no antidote for ivermectin. 80% of all of the Collies in the US have this mutated gene, according to the last study I read.
Either get your hearding dog tested or never use it in them.

This concludes the Public Service announcement for today.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Yea the risks of it far outweigh the benefits of it


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Nyahsmommy (Jul 23, 2011)

I am also against vaccinations. None of my cats have been vaccinated(other than kitten shots and my older one who I got at 6) and Nyah will not be vaccinated from here on out. I am also against spay/neutering now after all the complications Nyah has because of her stupid spay.


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Nyahsmommy said:


> I am also against vaccinations. None of my cats have been vaccinated(other than kitten shots and my older one who I got at 6) and Nyah will not be vaccinated from here on out. I am also against spay/neutering now after all the complications Nyah has because of her stupid spay.


There's a real danger in working off your personal anecdotal experience. The risk of pyometra is far higher, both in incidence and severity than the risk of spay complications.

The same principle applies to the safety of vaccines. If a couple of scare stories and some bad science writing scare you away, you could end up putting your dog—and other people's dogs—at much higher risk.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Well spaying an neutering have other reasons than health. As for the vaccines it's not just Afew scares and the system we are discussing would literally leave the dog with the same level of immunity as well as the systems benefits outweighing concerns, and the more replies I'm getting from vets the more I'm being led to believe this especially since 2 of which have taken outside courses on immunology 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Tuco said:


> Well spaying an neutering have other reasons than health. As for the vaccines it's not just Afew scares and the system we are discussing would literally leave the dog with the same level of immunity as well as the systems benefits outweighing concerns, and the more replies I'm getting from vets the more I'm being led to believe this especially since 2 of which have taken outside courses on immunology


I'm all about exploring the effectiveness of less frequent boosters to vaccines, but I need to see harder evidence that immunity is maintained for each disease before I'll reduce my dogs' boosters, and I need to see research done by more than the one or two doctors the anti-vaccine crowd cites over and over and over. I think the risks are sometimes exaggerated to epic proportions in these debates.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Tuco said:


> As for the vaccines it's not just Afew scares and the system we are discussing would literally leave the dog with the same level of immunity as well as the systems benefits outweighing concerns, and the more replies I'm getting from vets the more I'm being led to believe this especially since 2 of which have taken outside courses on immunology
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


 
Well, I guess it's your dog. You have the information you want to back up your decision. Hope it goes well for you.

I do not know of any vets who would recommend not vaccinating. My concerns about surveys and I suspect it may be the case with this one is that people give honest responses to questions, but don't consider how the survey will be taken as a whole. That's why I asked if the vets knew the purpose of the survey, or your viewpoint. The questions may be phrased in such a way as to pull responses that the person giving the survey is looking for. That could be general questions vs following up with more detailed, minute, and explicet questions as far as what these vets recommend or believe. 

In the dog competition community, somebody presented a survey that was a lot more detailed than the one you did and people still refrained from responding because of their concern about their answers being taken out of context or being lumped in with a response that they do not stand behind. In that case, they felt the purpose of the survey was to push for changes in obedience that they did not want.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I was going to stay out of this highly emotional topic, but finally couldn't resist.

First, the people who are against vaccinating, for the most part, aren't old enough to remember what it was like before the vaccinations were routine. If you haven't seen the animal control come to a house to get all the pets and have them destroyed because they had distemper, you don't know how contagious and horrendous it is. If you haven't watched puppies bleed out and die a painful, horrid death from parvo, it's easy to blow off the vaccinations. (Same with measles and polio, but I digress).

Secondly, I have an autoimmune disease and have attended numerous medical conferences on autoimmunity. The thing that the "anti-vaccination" people are missing is that autoimmunity IS A GENETIC PROBLEM. You need two things to have an autoimmune reaction. First and foremost, a genetic tendency to autoimmunity. Secondly, a "trigger event". 
Yes, the trigger event can be a vaccination IN A DOG WITH A GENETIC TENDENCY TOWARD AUTOIMMUNITY. But as Tippykayak said, anything can trigger the autoimmune disease and one of the first things that they teach us mere humans with autoimmune problems is that the risk of being exposed to the disease is much more likely to trigger the autoimmune event than a killed vaccination is (live vaccines are a slightly different story). If the dog does not have a genetic predisposition to autoimmunity, you can literally vaccinate them EVERY DAY and it will NOT cause an autoimmune disease.
There is so much misunderstanding about it, and crap on the internet gets picked up and passed along as gospel truth. 
They have NEVER found any relationship between vaccinations and cancer in dogs. They have NEVER found any relationship between vaccinations and (good grief) hip dysplasia, unless you use the "mother's milk theory".
In one of my many science classes in which they were discussing experimental methods, and how careful you have to be to not report a "cause and effect" relationship when none exists, they talked about the "mother's milk experiment theories".
All drug addicts begin life on either mother's milk or formula or some sort. Therefore, we can conclude that mother's milk and/or infant formula cause drug addiction. Seriously?
To say that vaccinations cause HD because all dogs who develop HD have been vaccined is equally ludicrous.

I do agree that we shouldn't vaccinate dogs any more than is necessary, but that's where the question comes in. How long do vaccinations last? 
Well, no one really knows. And the titers are not considered "reliable" because no one really knows what the numbers mean. There are some excellent scholarly articles about titers if one wants to google and read them. 
Also, there is some evidence that the length of immunity is breed specific. Rottweilers, for example, are notorious for not developing enough or long-term immunity from vaccinations. No one knows why. 
So will we do challenge studies on every breed? I think not.
And why don't we do challenge studies in the first place? Well....because you have to kill a whole lot of dogs to do one. Yep, like the rabies challenge that's going on right now, they plan to "sacrifice" about 125 beagles. By definition, the only way to do a challenge study is to keep exposing the dog to the virus until it contracts it. And since the big 3 diseases are pretty much universally fatal, you have to "sacrifice" the experimental animals. Animal testing anyone??
So what are we left with? It's a personal decision that everyone has to make after they discuss it with their vet (of which most are pretty clueless, sorry to say) regarding their dog's age, risk factors, general health, and so on.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

hotel4dogs said:


> First, the people who are against vaccinating, for the most part, aren't old enough to remember what it was like before the vaccinations were routine.


Thank you for pointing that out. It's a much more visceral way of expressing what I was trying to say about the way we overestimate or underestimate risk. I have a tendency to get cerebral about it, but you expressed it much more clearly and convincingly.



hotel4dogs said:


> But as Tippykayak said, anything can trigger the autoimmune disease and one of the first things that they teach us mere humans with autoimmune problems is that the risk of being exposed to the disease is much more likely to trigger the autoimmune event than a killed vaccination is (live vaccines are a slightly different story). If the dog does not have a genetic predisposition to autoimmunity, you can literally vaccinate them EVERY DAY and it will NOT cause an autoimmune disease.


Seriously! To pick one of the less serious diseases we vaccinate for, Kennel Cough itself is much more likely to trigger an underlying autoimmune disorder than the KC vaccine. The challenge to the system is greater and more sustained, and thus more likely to get it to react inappropriately.



hotel4dogs said:


> I do agree that we shouldn't vaccinate dogs any more than is necessary, but that's where the question comes in. How long do vaccinations last?
> Well, no one really knows. And the titers are not considered "reliable" because no one really knows what the numbers mean. There are some excellent scholarly articles about titers if one wants to google and read them.


Again, so well said. Titers are excellent sources of information for certain things, but they only measure antibody levels, antibodies are only one small part of the immune system's defenses.



hotel4dogs said:


> And why don't we do challenge studies in the first place? Well....because you have to kill a whole lot of dogs to do one. Yep, like the rabies challenge that's going on right now, they plan to "sacrifice" about 125 beagles. By definition, the only way to do a challenge study is to keep exposing the dog to the virus until it contracts it. And since the big 3 diseases are pretty much universally fatal, you have to "sacrifice" the experimental animals. Animal testing anyone??


I hadn't even thought of that, but you're right. They don't just titer the dogs, because that won't tell you the real rate at which they'd survive exposure. 



hotel4dogs said:


> So what are we left with? It's a personal decision that everyone has to make after they discuss it with their vet (of which most are pretty clueless, sorry to say) regarding their dog's age, risk factors, general health, and so on.


This is the only thing I disagree with you on. Maybe this is a regional thing? Southern CT is crawling with hyper-qualified vets. I have more Tufts or Cornell educated, professional development seeking, research reading, kick-butt vets around here than I can shake a stick at. Hell, I actually interviewed my last vet to see if he was as good as my experienced ER surgeon doc at the big animal hospital (20 minutes away) to a local practice close to my house for my own convenience (2 minutes away).

Both are incredibly well read on vaccines, diets, and all the hot-button issues that clients come in and ask them about.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I agree, it may be a regional thing. There are a few vets around here who are still insisting on ANNUAL rabies, distemper and parvo vaccinations!



tippykayak said:


> This is the only thing I disagree with you on. Maybe this is a regional thing? Southern CT is crawling with hyper-qualified vets. I have more Tufts or Cornell educated, professional development seeking, research reading, kick-butt vets around here than I can shake a stick at. Hell, I actually interviewed my last vet to see if he was as good as my experienced ER surgeon doc at the big animal hospital (20 minutes away) to a local practice close to my house for my own convenience (2 minutes away).
> 
> Both are incredibly well read on vaccines, diets, and all the hot-button issues that clients come in and ask them about.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

you guys have to understand, im NOT AGAINST VACCINATING, im against OVER VACCINATING. Ive seen parvo and distemper in dogs, and they are completely horrible, hence why I am vaccinating Tuco, but over vaccinating him as an adult doesnt make sense, especially considering how much less adults are prone to those diseases

here are a few sources that i got my info from, a lot of them fairly reputable
understand I think that there needs to be a lot more research done, but there have been a few studies done, not only by anti vaccine fanatics, and mostly with the rabies and distemper vaccines, and they seem to be pointing at immunity lasting 6+ years, and it is also known that the vaccines cause long term, mild inflammatory effects that increase as the vaccines do, which in other animals and humans have been linked to decrease auto immune function and increased mitotic defects, leading to tumors. 

Cohen AD, Shoenfeld Y. Vaccine-induced autoimmunity. Journals of Autoimmunity 1996; 9: 699-703.

Vascellari M, Melchiotti E, Bozza MA et al. Fibrosarcomas at presumed sites of injection in dogs: characteristics and comparison with non-vaccination site fibrosarcomas and feline post-vaccinal firosarcomas. Journal of Veterinary Medicine 50 (6): 286-291, 2003.

Dodds WJ. Immune-mediated diseases of the blood. Advances in Veterinary Science and Comparative Medicine 1983; 27:163-196.

Tizard I. Risks associated with use of live vaccines. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 1990; 196:1851-1858.

Moore et al, Adverse events diagnosed within three days of vaccine administration in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 227:1102–1108, 2005.

Schultz RD, Ford RB, Olsen J, Scott F. Titer testing and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices. Vet Med, 97: 1-13, 2002 

Dodds WJ. More bumps on the vaccine road. Advances in Veterinary Medicine 1999; 41: 715-732.

Phillips TR, Jensen JL, Rubino MJ, Yang WC, Schultz RD. Effects on vaccines on the canine immune system. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 1989; 53: 154-160.

HogenEsch H, Azcona-Olivera J, Scott-Moncrieff C, Snyder PW, Glickman LT. Vaccine-induced autoimmunity in the dog. Advances in Veterinary Medicine 1999; 41:733-744.

Dodds WJ. Vaccination protocols for dogs predisposed to vaccine reactions. Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association 2001; 38: 1-4.

Scott-Moncrieff JC, Azcona-Olivera J, Glickman NW, Glickman LT, HogenEsch H. Evaluation of antithyroglobulin antibodies after routine vaccination in pet and research dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2002; 221: 515-521.

Wilbur LA, Evermann JF, Levings RL, Stoll LR, Starling DE, Spillers CA, Gustafson GA, McKeirnan AJ. Abortion and death in pregnant bitches associated with a canine vaccine contaminated with blue tongue virus. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 1994; 204:1762-1765.

Dougherty SA, Center SA. Juvenile onset polyarthritis in Akitas. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 1991; 198: 849-855.

Twark L, Dodds WJ. Clinical use of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody titers for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2000; 217:1021-1024.

Flemming DD, Scott JF. The informed consent doctrine: what veterinarians should tell their clients. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 224: 1436-1439, 2004.


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

Tuco said:


> First of all the issue here isn't wether
> Or not to vaccinate, it's wether OVER vaccinating causes serious health issues, I have chosen to vaccinate at 16 weeks and then do yearly titres to make sure I get the levels right. Also although lots of the info is circumstantial it seems there is too much evidence to ignore. I have spent lots of time the past few days reading veteranry journals and articles online both pro and anti vaccine and I read an article where they sent dozens of vets this questionare and most said that they over vaccinate, also from looking on these sites I don't seem to see any alterior motive to making these claims, they are not trying to sell anything and they seem to take outside opinions into account. I decided to recreate this quiz with local vets located in my province and I have sent it to 45 vets, I have gotten 6 responses so far and here is a summarization. 5 said they feel we over vaccinate, 4 said titres are a better alternative, all said they believe puppies should be vaccinated. 4 said they believe bad diets play a larger role in these health issues than vaccines. All said they feel the pharma companies have too much influence in the veterinary profession and education, 5 felt they were not sufficiently educated about vaccines. Once I get all the replies back I will post them all on this thread
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


I need to clear something up before people in Ontario get the wrong information:

Firstly, a number of vets in Ontario are using vaccines labelled as 3 year but only granting the certificate for 2 years. According to the Veterinarian working at the Ministry of Health and Long term care Ontario, its considered Professional Misconduct if your veterinarian does not document and acquire your consent to "Off lable use"

Quote from the Veterinarian herself via email (I can screen shot for those who do not believe me if requested via PM) When she said "this case" shes refering to me as my vet was requesting me to update his rabies vaccine when a 3 year was used but failed to ask permission to only grant it for 2 years. So I emailed this Veterinarian and inquired about it. 
""Requiring re-vaccination of an animal for rabies in two years when the manufacturer’s label recommendation is three years constitutes what is called “off-label” use of the rabies vaccine, which is usually within the prerogative of veterinarians; however, in this case, off-label use actually contradicts the legal requirements of the Regulation. 
I placed a call to the College of Veterinarians of Ontario (the regulatory and licensing body for veterinarians in Ontario) to have them clarify this apparent conflict for me, and they provided the following material, which I think you will find very helpful. The attached article was published in the September 2009 CVO Update, which was circulated to all licensed veterinarians in the province of Ontario (for the full version of the CVO Update issue, please see http://www.cvo.org/uploadattachments/UpdateSeptember2009.pdf ) 

The article basically states that your veterinarian CANNOT impose a 2 year revaccination requirement for your animal when using a 3 year vaccine WITHOUT your explicit, informed consent for this off-label use of rabies vaccine. This would need to include explaining to you why he/she has set the earlier reimmunization date, explaining any risks associated with so doing, answering any questions you might have in relation to that information, and documenting your consent. Failure to do this would constitute professional misconduct, and if reported to the College of Veterinarians of Ontario (CVO) could result in disciplinary action against the veterinarian. In the opinion of the CVO, this also begs the question of why a veterinarian would administer a three-year vaccine and then set an earlier reimmunization date, when shorter duration vaccines are available. If your veterinarian is licensed in Ontario, he/she must be aware of this."


So basically this means they cannot vaccinate your pet with a vaccine labelled for 3 year without your explicit consent and noted in your file with a signature of some sort from you. In my vets case, I brought him in "I asked for a 3 year vaccines" they said they gave him a 3 year and the paper said hes due in 2 years because they only grant it for 2. 



Secondly, the above issue brought on another problem. My vet told me that if I choose to not vaccinate titres are an option and they will issue a certificate of vaccination for 2 years. Thats way illegal. In Ontario, a titre is not an acceptable form of vaccination so if your dog bites, and you produce a titre test to the City Officials, they will not accept it. 



"There are a number of issues with respect to titres as an acceptable proof of immunity, particularly in animal species. 
The legislation is very clear and veterinarians are aware of the *legislated* requirement for either a vaccination certificate *OR* a certificate of exemption. "

So if your vet is saying a titre is the equivalent of vaccination I would find another vet. This is why I will not titre for rabies and why I have aquired a Medical Exemption from my vet. If I titred and my vet issues me a certificate for rabies when no vaccine was actually given my vet can lose their license. 

The above is why I think my OLD vet refused to give me a copy of my dogs medical records which I eventually got. 

So, these are Ontario's laws, some people think a rabies titre is an acceptable form of vaccination which it is not. I dont want anyone to think their titre test is an acceptable form of vaccination in Ontario and be screwed over If there an issue with their dog biting. 

To sum it all up short form
1. If your dog was issued a 3 year vaccination after the yearly booster was given and they only grant it for 2 years without your noted permission= Misconduct
2. If your vet tells you a rabies titre is an acceptable form of vaccine the city will accept= Illegal


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Yea, from my past experience only one vet has ever broken that rule and they also were completely inexperienced and took forever to figure out that he was just dehydrated


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

> 2. If your vet tells you a rabies titre is an acceptable form of vaccine the city will accept= Illegal


Yea, but if your dog is not well enough to be vaccinated with the rabies vaccine, they are allowed to give you a certificate to hold it off for a couple years i believe


----------



## BajaOklahoma (Sep 27, 2009)

A medical exemption is not available everywhere.


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

Tuco said:


> Yea, but if your dog is not well enough to be vaccinated with the rabies vaccine, they are allowed to give you a certificate to hold it off for a couple years i believe


They can give you a medical exemption for 2 weeks, 2 years or life. But they cannot titre and say "Ok, his rabies titre came back good so heres another 2 year certificate"



BajaOklahoma said:


> A medical exemption is not available everywhere.


I was specifying just for the Province of Ontario


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Tuco, you have certainly done your research and I applaud that. Unfortunately, most of your references are too dated to put much value in. I agree with you, OVER vaccinating is the problem, but we can't yet define what over vaccinating means.

Regarding rabies titres....even in places that accept them....that's only if the dog hasn't bitten or scratched anyone. If they do, you face a whole gamut of legal issues. Scratches with their nails are considered the same as a bite for rabies exposure.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

hotel4dogs said:


> Tuco, you have certainly done your research and I applaud that. Unfortunately, most of your references are too dated to put much value in. I agree with you, OVER vaccinating is the problem, but we can't yet define what over vaccinating means.


Not only are they dated, but they're cherrypicked, and most don't have anything to do with measuring the actual risk of vaccines.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom (Oct 4, 2007)

Dr. Dodds and Dr. Schulz have ongoing research with their rabies challenge fund. Duration of Immunity Study for Rabies Vaccine - Rabies Challenge Fund The co-founder Kris Christine posts here occassionally on related issues.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

tippykayak said:


> Not only are they dated, but they're cherrypicked, and most don't have anything to do with measuring the actual risk of vaccines.


As I have said repeated there is vet little research on the subject over over vaccination those resources not only have to do with over vaccination but with vaccine reactions. As for the dating, I failed to find any current studies that relate to the subject, nevertheless I read over them and most aren't dated enough to make a significant difference on what the study was of. 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

A1Malinois said:


> They can give you a medical exemption for 2 weeks, 2 years or life. But they cannot titre and say "Ok, his rabies titre came back good so heres another 2 year certificate"
> 
> 
> 
> I was specifying just for the Province of Ontario


Yea, and it's pretty easy. All you have to do is find a reasonable vet and explain why he can't be reimmunized, valid reasons could even be acute inflammation and they can give you papers for exemption under the immunization laws. A titre can help convince your vet to give you an exemption. I hope Shultz can manage to finish the research on what titre levels constitute being immune to rabies, and eventually other diseases

(2) An owner or person referred to in subsection (1) continues to be exempt from the requirements of this Regulation so long as the animal cannot be immunized or reimmunized due to health or public safety concerns. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 567, s. 8 (2).





Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Tuco said:


> As I have said repeated there is vet little research on the subject over over vaccination those resources not only have to do with over vaccination but with vaccine reactions. As for the dating, I failed to find any current studies that relate to the subject, nevertheless I read over them and most aren't dated enough to make a significant difference on what the study was of.


There's a lot of research on vaccines. Since the term "overvaccination" isn't a medical or scientific term (and, indeed, we haven't even defined it in this discussion), you're not going to see it in papers. However, there is a mountain of veterinary research on individual vaccines.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Yep, that's the study killing the 125 beagles.



Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> Dr. Dodds and Dr. Schulz have ongoing research with their rabies challenge fund. Duration of Immunity Study for Rabies Vaccine - Rabies Challenge Fund The co-founder Kris Christine posts here occassionally on related issues.


----------



## cubbysan (Mar 13, 2007)

hotel4dogs said:


> yep, that's the study killing the 125 beagles.


omg!!!!!!!


----------



## cubbysan (Mar 13, 2007)

BajaOklahoma said:


> A medical exemption is not available everywhere.


It is not available in Massachusetts, at least it wasn't 4 years ago.


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

hotel4dogs said:


> I was going to stay out of this highly emotional topic, but finally couldn't resist.
> 
> First, the people who are against vaccinating, for the most part, aren't old enough to remember what it was like before the vaccinations were routine. If you haven't seen the animal control come to a house to get all the pets and have them destroyed because they had distemper, you don't know how contagious and horrendous it is. If you haven't watched puppies bleed out and die a painful, horrid death from parvo, it's easy to blow off the vaccinations. (Same with measles and polio, but I digress).
> 
> ...



I was going to comment on this yesterday but I just couldn't ... this is probably the best post I have read in a long time and I truly appreciate the time that went into this. 

This post really does summarize the issue and the lack of really good data ... Tuco gives a list of citations and I want to ask if they have indeed pulled all those citations... my experience when I start pulling journal articles is that people pull out small pieces of data that appears to support their position but then when you actually pull the citation and read the article you find that there is a whole lot more to it than the person citing the article has told you... there is very little that is cut and dry when it comes to these issues. 

I also agree that as a society we don't really have the stomach to really research these vaccination issues. I am not old enough to remember the times before vaccines but I remember my mother clearly talking about a boxer she had as a kid in NYC that had gotten sick and she remembered her father taking the dog to the vet and she was looking out the window of her apt and watched him walk away with the dog on the way to the vet and when he came back she remembers seeing him walk back towards their apt without Midas who as it turns out had distemper. At the same time there is alot of speculation that dogs with early epilepsy have had a vaccine reaction but again I agree with Hotel that there has to be a predisposition to begin with there is something else going on that has set that dog up to have that reaction to begin with when millions of other dogs get vaccinated with no issues whatsoever. 

The problem that I see is what is "overvaccination" to even discuss that we need an operational definition because that term is so vague what is over vaccination to me may be something completely different to someone else. 

What does all this mean... who knows... do we really have a clue? I don't think anyone can say for sure that they know for sure there appears to be information on both sides of this...We all just have to take the information that we have and make the best decision that we can...


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

Be very careful to read the fine print and read the law on these medical exemptions... 

I have done some research on this as my Cuinn qualified for a medical exemption. In many states all the medical exemption does is allow you to register your dog without a rabies shot 

BUT 

It treats your dog as it does any other unvaccinated dog in the case of an incident. Thus the dog is NOT exempted from being euthanised if something happens or quarantined or any of the other repercussions that can happen if something happens. 

So if your medically exempted dogs tooth catches your neighbors hand while playing ball and the neighbor finds out that the dog is not vaccinated that can be big trouble. If your dog tangles with wildlife again that can be trouble. In my case my Cuinn fly bites due to his seizures and I was very concerned that someone could come over and accidentally get scratched or a tooth could catch and we could have a problem. 

everyone has to make their own decision but be sure to read what the law actually says


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

Shalva said:


> Be very careful to read the fine print and read the law on these medical exemptions...
> 
> I have done some research on this as my Cuinn qualified for a medical exemption. In many states all the medical exemption does is allow you to register your dog without a rabies shot
> 
> ...


I have already asked about that in Ontario. An unvaccinated dog does not get put to sleep medical exemption or not. They go into a quarantine period of 10 days. After that the owners are told to vaccinate and if they cannot then a waiver must be produced and thats how it ends


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I know this is also the case in Illinois. And it doesn't have to be a bite, a scratch with their toenail is the same problem.



Shalva said:


> Be very careful to read the fine print and read the law on these medical exemptions...
> 
> I have done some research on this as my Cuinn qualified for a medical exemption. In many states all the medical exemption does is allow you to register your dog without a rabies shot
> 
> ...


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

hotel4dogs said:


> I know this is also the case in Illinois. And it doesn't have to be a bite, a scratch with their toenail is the same problem.


exactly and it is the reason that I sucked it up and vaccinated cuinn... i didn't like doing it but I felt for his own safety I had to, we show and go away with a pet sitter coming in to care for the dogs left behind and the last thing I needed was for him to scratch her or jump up and fly bite and end up with a problem.... 

people need to make sure and know what the law actually says in their state or province,


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Yea that isn't law here quarantine period in addition travel with a medically except dog and If that happens most states will not euthanize due to its status in Canada as long as you have paperwork, Afew places that don't have this law are Texas Louisiana Kansas Georgia and Mississippi so if your going there you may want to vaccinate

As for the over vaccinating I agree it's hard to quantify my personal definition is vaccinating past the point of immunity or before a previous vaccine wears off.


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

please cite


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

And even if they are, everyone says they want to get more info studies like this


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

It's the only way to figure out levels for titres


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Bentleysmom (Aug 11, 2012)

Tuco said:


> And even if they are, everyone says they want to get more info studies like this, quite frankly most of you are probably using a shampoo that in the making cruelly tortured thousands of bunnies
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


With all due respect, do you just try to cause a stir??


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

Bentleysmom said:


> With all due respect, do you just try to cause a stir??


Any credibility that this individual had just went out the window with that last statement. 

I just learned how to block people... I think I am gonna give it a try


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

Tuco said:


> And even if they are, everyone says they want to get more info studies like this, quite frankly most of you are probably using a shampoo that in the making cruelly tortured thousands of bunnies
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


That seems uncalled for. I think there is a difference between animal testing to make medical advancements and spraying perfume in an animals eyes to justify a warning label. All of my products are animal safe, chances are many members here might be hyper vigilant to make sure they support cruelty-free consumer products. 

Edit: typos. >.<


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Sorry that was uncalled for


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I seem to have missed something, but if "please cite" was in reference to the rabies challenge study killing 125 beagles, you can contact either of the study heads (Dr. Dodds or Kris) and they will tell you, after you ask them quite a few times, that this is the case and those are the numbers.
They don't broadcast that information, and I don't blame them. It would not be very popular, and they would lose a lot of support for their study.
I was careful to make no comment on whether or not I agree with sacrificing 125 dogs for the study. I merely stated a fact as relayed to me by the organizers of the study. The reason I asked them is they were seeking funding and I wanted to know how many dogs were being killed before I decided whether or not to contribute.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Yea I looked into it more thoroughly and you were right, I wish we did have some other way 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

hotel4dogs said:


> I seem to have missed something, but if "please cite" was in reference to the rabies challenge study killing 125 beagles, you can contact either of the study heads (Dr. Dodds or Kris) and they will tell you, after you ask them quite a few times, that this is the case and those are the numbers.
> They don't broadcast that information, and I don't blame them. It would not be very popular, and they would lose a lot of support for their study.
> I was careful to make no comment on whether or not I agree with sacrificing 125 dogs for the study. I merely stated a fact as relayed to me by the organizers of the study. The reason I asked them is they were seeking funding and I wanted to know how many dogs were being killed before I decided whether or not to contribute.


Why would they kill these dogs?


----------



## Shalva (Jul 16, 2008)

A1Malinois said:


> Why would they kill these dogs?


thats how the challenges happen... they repeatedly expose the dogs until they contract the disease.... in this case they are trying to determine how long the rabies vaccine lasts which means they will have to vaccinate the dogs... and then repeatedly expose them to rabies until they get rabies ... and then at that point they will know how long the vaccine lasts but now because the dogs have to contract rabies as part of the challenge they will have to be euthanized


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Well I hope they get the results soon


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

A1Malinois said:


> Why would they kill these dogs?


A challenge study is the gold standard for vaccination effectiveness. You vaccinate the dogs and then you expose them to the disease. There's also often an unvaccinated control group in order to create a number for the infection rate (e.g., 80% of unvaccinated dogs develop the disease after being exposed; 20% of vaccinated dogs develop it after being exposed; you need that first number).

With rabies, that means killing every dog that develops the disease after exposure, both any dog in a control group and any dog whose vaccine eventually wears off. If the purpose of the study is to determine the length of effectiveness of the rabies vaccine, they'll keep challenging the dogs at preset periods until they all eventually get it. Only if the vaccine is 100% effective until the dog's death by natural causes will any dog in the study not catch rabies and be euthanized.

With something like Lyme, the dog might survive, but rabies is fatal.


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

Shalva said:


> thats how the challenges happen... they repeatedly expose the dogs until they contract the disease.... in this case they are trying to determine how long the rabies vaccine lasts which means they will have to vaccinate the dogs... and then repeatedly expose them to rabies until they get rabies ... and then at that point they will know how long the vaccine lasts but now because the dogs have to contract rabies as part of the challenge they will have to be euthanized


So essentially the lives of (I am reading 80 Beagles online) are being sacrificed to prove 5-7 year immunity to save the lives of thousands of dogs/cats in the future? I own a dog whos had severe reactions in the past, thankfully I live in an area with flexible bylaws and enforcements with medical exemptions. If it means that I dont have to vaccinate (for any new dogs) every 5-7 years I would be thrilled. 

They are in year 6, what were the results the vaccinated/unvaccinated Beagles that were injected with Rabies in year 5?


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

They are in year 5 not 6 they are raising funds for six, my assumption is they have already vaccinated the dogs and at this point they are exposing the group to the rabies virus regularly along with doing titres very regularly, and will keep going until they find the titre level that indicates immunity along with the length of time the vaccine usually lasts, I believe that If they are still going now, the dogs still haven't contracted the virus yet. They would post results until the study is complete and the results are released


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

Tuco said:


> They are in year 5 not 6 they are raising funds for six, my assumption is they have already vaccinated the dogs and at this point they are exposing the group to the rabies virus regularly along with doing titres very regularly, and will keep going until they find the titre level that indicates immunity along with the length of time the vaccine usually lasts, I believe that If they are still going now, the dogs still haven't contracted the virus yet. They would post results until the study is complete and the results are released
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


Oh k, thats what I saw on the site so I assumed they were in year 6


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

Yea Im not sure but I think they just started year 5


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

The study, while worthwhile, will end before they can resolve whether or not the vaccination provides "lifetime" immunity. They can only show 5 year immunity. Well, maybe 6. Unless they get additional funding. 
And it does not address the question of breed specific issues. 
I would be the first to agree that we need more information about vaccination duration. But there are no easy ways to get that information.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

They are going for 7 years and considering the amount they have already raised for year 6 i think they should get it by their January deadline, plus, they should be able to get the typical titre level to show immunity do they may be able to push for a titre option so maybe every 6 months after you pass the 5 year mark you need to titre for rabies that would be good. 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

As horrid as it is, I hope they will find an answer. Unfortunately it looks like they are quite behind in their donation mark. For what is worth I just added a Ben Franklin in there.


----------



## Tuco (Jan 3, 2013)

I wish I wasn't so broke right now, all the money I have is going into tucos vet visit next week


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## A1Malinois (Oct 28, 2011)

When I get some extra cash I will likely donate some as well. Wont be a large amount but any amount helps.


----------

