Must Read!!!!!!!!!

[jayp]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Hi folks, just finished reading Helen Graham of Daxlore Saluki fame breed notes in Our Dogs this week. I think what it contains should concern us all and the advice passed on to puppy buyers.

The information comes from Kris Christine in the USA who is advocating legislation to require vets to provide owners sufficient information about vaccine protocols.

Some of you will be very aware already of the risks especially to whippets of boosters and of vaccinating at too young an age. Some of the information may surprise you, i cannot reproduce it all here as the article is long but please read if you can.

At present in the USA there are 16 recommended vaccines of these only 4 are considered core vaccines the others only given if geography or lifestyle make it prudent.

these are distemper parvovirus2,adenovirus2 and rabies these all have high mortality rates and all researchers insist on the necessity of initial vaccination.

All puppies should be vaccinated at least once OVER THE AGE OF 12WEEKS so as not to overlap with the presence of maternal antibodies. Single vaccinations rather than combinations are less likely to cause adverse immune related reactions.

The should be administered 3 to 4 WEEKS APART as when given only 2 weeks apart immunity is reduced.

Regarding boostersProfessor Ron SHULtz one of the worlds leading authorities on vet vaccines has conducted challenge studies and the results are that the MINIMUM

,MINIMUM immunity was as follows; Distemper 7 to15 YEARS, Adenovirus2 5 to9 YEARS, Parvovirus 2 to 7 YEARS, Rabies 3 to 7 YEARS

Therefore not only are are the annual boosters unnecessary but antibodies from the 1st vaccination neutralise the 2nd one given 12 months later.

Vaccination subjects an animal to risk of allergic reactions,anaphylaxia,immunosuppression,immune mediated anaemia,and injection site tumours.

IMO because the onset of these diseases is not always immediate they are often not attributed to vaccination.

HAS YOUR VET EVER DISCUSSED THESE ISSUES WITH YOU OR EVEN ENQUIRED AS TO THE GENERAL HEALTH OF THE DOG TO BE VACCINATED OR BOOSTED.

HAVE THEY EVER OFFERED YOU THE CHOICE OF SINGLE VACCINATION OR TITRE TESTS TO DISCOVER THE IMMUNITY STATUS OF THE DOG

If anyone would like a full copy of the article then pm me and i will email it to you.

I hope you find this of interest as i did and perhaps more of us will ask to discuss with the vet the options available and boarding kennels may revise their requirements also. Jan :cheers:

 

[Avalonia]

The new vaccination protocol, now being taught in US Vet schools, has been circulated to many breeders in Canada and the US, including here in Canada by the Ottawa Kennel Club, of which we are a member. We provide a full print out of the protocol (which also covers cats) to every puppy purchaser, and to anyone who asks us for a copy because we believe it is critical that a pet be properly vaccinated to begin with, but beyond that, that the vaccinations not be overdone.

We are following the American protocol to the letter and urging our puppy purchasers to do the same. For many vets, with dogs healthier than they have ever been in the past thanks to vaccinations against previously fatal diseases such as distemper and parvo, vaccinations are money makers, bringing in pet owners at least once a year for a cursory check of the animal's health as part of the protocol for administering the pricey shot. There are vets -- my own included -- who have begun incorporating the new protocol into their practice and limiting both the content of the shots in line with that protocol, and the frequency, but they are in the minority.

The important thing to remember is that dogs should be vaccinated at the beginning of their lives -- and this really is important -- to establish the immunity thereafter. This would prevent the bad news stories I saw in the English dog press in the past year -- about parvo outbreaks amongst unvaccinated dogs in some regions, especially if owners/breeders realized that annual vaccinations are simply not necessary, nor necessarily healthy for their dogs.

Lanny Morry

 

[jayp]

The new vaccination protocol, now being taught in US Vet schools, has been circulated to many breeders in Canada and the US, including here in Canada by the Ottawa Kennel Club, of which we are a member.  We provide a full print out of the protocol (which also covers cats) to every puppy purchaser, and to anyone who asks us for a copy because we believe it is critical that a pet be properly vaccinated to begin with, but beyond that, that the vaccinations not be overdone.
We are following the American protocol to the letter and urging our puppy purchasers to do the same.  For many vets, with dogs healthier than they have ever been in the past thanks to vaccinations against previously fatal diseases such as distemper and parvo, vaccinations are money makers, bringing in pet owners at least once a year for a cursory check of the animal's health as part of the protocol for administering the pricey shot.  There are vets -- my own included -- who have begun incorporating the new protocol into their practice and limiting both the content of the shots in line with that protocol, and the frequency, but they are in the minority.

The important thing to remember is that dogs should be vaccinated at the beginning of their lives -- and this really is important -- to establish the immunity thereafter.  This would prevent the bad news stories I saw in the English dog press in the past year -- about parvo outbreaks amongst unvaccinated dogs in some regions, especially if owners/breeders realized that annual vaccinations are simply not necessary, nor necessarily healthy for their dogs.

Lanny Morry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

hiya lanny, you all seem to be more aware over there than the majority of our vets wish to be over here.

i am trying to get the message accross to puppy owners as they seem to ignore the advice of breeders as soon as the vet opens his mouth, which is usually followed by opening hts wallet!!!!!!!! :clown: jan

 

[fable]

My vet likes to vaccinate as a puppy and first booster a year later. After that he boosts every three years, other than lepto which needs to be done annually.

These are the current guidelines of the RCVS , so should be accepted by insurance companies and boarding kennels.

Annual boosters are only necessary if a particular disease is prevalent in an area.

Worth discussing with your vet if they suggest otherwise. :unsure:

 

[Avalonia]

hiya lanny, you all seem to be more aware over there than the majority of our vets wish to be over here.

i am trying to get the message accross to puppy owners as they seem to ignore the advice of breeders as soon as the vet opens his mouth, which is usually followed by opening hts wallet!!!!!!!! :clown: jan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree it will be difficult for a lot of vets to follow this protocol because shots are easy money for them. You have to remember, they have a clinic to run, they have staff, including a receptionist, and probably a couple of vet techicians whose salaries need to be paid and so their overhead costs are high. This said, they might get more people reguarly bringing their dogs in for the shots they actually need, if prices weren't in the nosebleed territory.

I don't know what the cost to a vet in the UK is for a single vial of a typical puppy shot, but I can tell you, because I buy them from the same US-based supplier as my vet does, and the cost to me as a buyer of of 50 shots, for instance, is approximately $2 US per dose. I can only believe that a bulk purchase of the shots is even less expensive than we pay.

We always have our vet do the first shots on pups, along with a full health, heart and eye check, tattoos etc. and I consider this to be money well spent as we can offer puppy purchasers the vt's certification of health, his comments about each dog, etc. as evidence of the health of the dog. But after that we do the remaining shots (except rabies which we cannot buy and give as we are not vets) ourselves. Those shots have a refrigerated life of several years and we always buy our shots, usually just 25 at a time, with a long expiry date.

Some vets are already seeing the writing on the wall and are moving on to the new money making venture over here - teeth cleaning with the dog put under so they can clean the teeth to a whiteness level equivalent to that seen on models in toothpast ads.

Around where I live there are vets charging as much as $500 to $1000 Cdn. for a cleaning and they are laying on the guilt on owners whose dogs have excessive build up on back teeth to get the teeth done. Heck, I don't pay that sort of money to have my own teeth done, but now some of these guys are cheeky enough to be advocating annual cleanings of dogs teeth. And people are buying the guilt and having it done, when there are so many other ways we as owners can ensure our dog's teeth well maintained.

Lanny

 

[midlanderkeith]

hiya lanny, you all seem to be more aware over there than the majority of our vets wish to be over here.

i am trying to get the message accross to puppy owners as they seem to ignore the advice of breeders as soon as the vet opens his mouth, which is usually followed by opening hts wallet!!!!!!!! :clown: jan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree it will be difficult for a lot of vets to follow this protocol because shots are easy money for them. You have to remember, they have a clinic to run, they have staff, including a receptionist, and probably a couple of vet techicians whose salaries need to be paid and so their overhead costs are high. This said, they might get more people reguarly bringing their dogs in for the shots they actually need, if prices weren't in the nosebleed territory.

I don't know what the cost to a vet in the UK is for a single vial of a typical puppy shot, but I can tell you, because I buy them from the same US-based supplier as my vet does, and the cost to me as a buyer of of 50 shots, for instance, is approximately $2 US per dose. I can only believe that a bulk purchase of the shots is even less expensive than we pay.

We always have our vet do the first shots on pups, along with a full health, heart and eye check, tattoos etc. and I consider this to be money well spent as we can offer puppy purchasers the vt's certification of health, his comments about each dog, etc. as evidence of the health of the dog. But after that we do the remaining shots (except rabies which we cannot buy and give as we are not vets) ourselves. Those shots have a refrigerated life of several years and we always buy our shots, usually just 25 at a time, with a long expiry date.

Some vets are already seeing the writing on the wall and are moving on to the new money making venture over here - teeth cleaning with the dog put under so they can clean the teeth to a whiteness level equivalent to that seen on models in toothpast ads.

Around where I live there are vets charging as much as $500 to $1000 Cdn. for a cleaning and they are laying on the guilt on owners whose dogs have excessive build up on back teeth to get the teeth done. Heck, I don't pay that sort of money to have my own teeth done, but now some of these guys are cheeky enough to be advocating annual cleanings of dogs teeth. And people are buying the guilt and having it done, when there are so many other ways we as owners can ensure our dog's teeth well maintained.

Lanny

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I clean my 2 doggies teeth daily when i had her on complete jill my whippy got a build up tartar, so in i went with a scotch brite larraped with logic toothepaste from the vet, i got it all off, she will even let me dremmel the buggers if need be, tomoz is grooming day, from glands to teeth, will put up a pic if i think on

keith

 

[jayp]

hi folks As i have had such a lot of requests for this article i will put on here,excuse typing errors!!!!

Ive received some very interesting information from Kris Christine in the USA who is advocating legislation to require vets to provide pet owners withsufficient information about vaccine protocols to enable them to give informede concent to recommended vaccines. This would require vets to discuss with clients the benefits and risks of vaccines on a pet by pet basis. The proposed act is based on research which challenges the need for annual vaccination and is the latest effort by concerned parties to prevent the overvaccination of animals. The aim is to provide pet owners with scientifically based information on which to make decisions about routinely given vaccinations.

At the present time in the USA there are some 16 vaccines recommended including those against Coronavirus,Leptospirosis and Lyme disease.Of these only 4 are considered by veterinary experts to be core vaccines, that is those which all dogs should receive regardless of geographical location or lifestyle. They are Canine Distemper, Canine Parvovirus 2, Canine Adenovirus2, and where required by law Rabies.These vaccines protect against diseases distributed over a wide area with a high mortality rate and are absolutely necessary and a safer way to protect amimals than natural immunity or exposure.

The necessity for core vaccines is not disputed. The focus of the currently proposed legislation is those vets who fail to inform clients that most core vaccines protect for 7 years or more and that annual boosters are not only useless but also can have extremely serious and even potentially fatal consequences.

Current vaccination protocols for vaccines other than Rabies are determined arbitrarily by the manufacturers on only very limited scientific data and do not contain information on the vaccines maximum duration of immunity. Until recently the recommendations as regards vaccines other than Rabies have not been scietifically established. Vets have been routinely administering booster vaccinations because they assumed that they are needed and recommended by the US Dept of Agriculture. Wheras in fact there has never been any data to suggest that vaccines must be given yearly. Indeed the available evidence data points in a different direction entirely, strongly suggesting that annual vaccination is inadvisable.

Professor Ron Shultz, one of the worlds leading authorities on veterinary vaccines and Chair of the Dept of Pathalogical Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madisons School of Veterinary Medicine has conducted challenge studies and established that the MINIMUM duration of immunity for canine vaccines is as follows; Canine Distemper Virus 7-15 years Canine Adenovirus 2 5-9years, Canine Parvovirus " 2-7 years, and Canine Rabies 3-7 years. Therefore not only are the annual booster vaccinations not necessary they are also innefective because if a vaccine is given after one year antibodies from the initial vaccine neutralise the secound. This not only means that owners are wasting their money but they could also be incurring much greater expenditure because of the known side effects and consequences both short and long term of the vaccines.Indeed while owners pay with their cash for unnecessary vaccines their pets may pay with their lives.

Vaccination subjects an animal to potential risk of allergic reactions, anaphalaxia(shock) immunosuppresion,immunemediated haemolytic anaemia, a potentially fatal disease that generally hs unknown causes, and injection site tumours.

Evidence about overvaccination is provided by many distinguished scientists, notable amongst them is Jean Dodds DVM, the world renowned vaccine research scientist based in Santa Monica California whose work is wellknown in the UK. She has researched vaccination guidelines for 30 years and argues that Parvovirus and Distemper vaccines are responsible for many of the diseases of the immune system in dogs and conditions such as anaemia,arthritis,diabetes,epilepsy,thyroid disease,liver failure,allergies,transient infections,and long term infected carrier states. She claims that approx. 10% of all dogs and 20% of all pure bred dogs will develop such problems.Moreover all breeds are at risk(and some breeds,especially Irish Setters,Great Danes, German Shepherds,Weimeranas and Akitas are at particularly high risk) of developing Hypertrophic Osteodystrophy, a bone disease that causes fever, pain, and inability to walk as a result of vaccines.Dodds therefore argues that booster vaccines are only justified for Rabies and should be avoided along with non core vaccines for coronovirus Leptospirosis and Lyme disease.She suggests owners concerned about their animals immunity ask their vets to perform antibody titre tests. In association with Kris Christine she has set up the Rabies challenge fund to raise funds to finance concurrent 5and 7 year Canine Rabies Challenge studies at the University of Winsconcin School of Veterinary Medicine with a view to establishing the minimum period of immunity conferred by Rabies vaccine.

The claims of Shultz and Dodds are supported by many veterinary authorities in the USA and also in the UK. In 2004 an open letter was to the Veterinary Times undersigned by many eminent vets stated that there is "a growing body of veterinary information as wellas well developed epidemiological viligance in human medicine that indicates immunity induced by vaccination is extremely longlasting and in most cases lifelong.

It has to be emphasised however that all the researchers insist onthe necessity of initial vaccinations with the core vaccines. Canine Distemper hs high rates of morbidity and mortality from respiratory,gastrointestinal and neurological abnormalities and can affect dogs of any ages but especially under 6 months It is found not only in the canine population but in foxes and other wildlife which is a greater resevoir of the disease than dogs perse. Canine Parvovirus also has high rates of morbidity and mortality resulting primarily from gstrointestinal disease.

Canine Adenovirus likewise has high morbidity and mortality resulting from Liver dysfunction. Rabies affects a very wide range of animals including man,is invariably universally fatal resulting in what is generally thought of to be one of the most dreadful deaths imaginable. It has no cure because infected animals are a potential cause of infection in humans canine vaccinaton against the disease is Mandated by law in many countries and states of the USA

Professor Shultz recommends that all pups receive core vaccines at least once at or over 12 weeks of age.The timing is significant because prior to that many animals still have passive maternal antibodies that block immunization which means that the animal may not respond to the vaccine and is unprotected against the disease. Optimal immune responces are obtained by vaccinations administered singly 3-4 weeks apart rather than combination. Single vaccine administration also reduces the likelihood of adverse events as well as increasing the aniamals immune response,whereas vaccinations spaced only 2 weeks apart reduce immunity.

The 2004 open letter to the Veterinary Times stated that Misunderstanding,Misinformation and the conservative nature of our profession have largely slowed adoption of protocols advocating decreased frequency of vaccinations" A cynic might suggest add loss of annual revenue. In fairness however the hands of vets are tied currently by the demands of boarding kennel proprieters for whom annual vaccination is a condition of obtaining public liability of insurance. Therefore until insurance companies accept revised veterinary recommendations regarding vaccination protocols little can be expected to change.

On the other hand if vets dont press for acceptance of the new protocols insurance companies and boarding kennels are unlikely to alter the status quo and as it stands vets have nothing at all to gain from doing so (other than a clear consience)

as any change will affect their income substantially. So once again economics is likely to be the overriding issue.

In an even broader sense economics may well be the basis for the unexplained dramatic increase in the incidence of certain canine diseases such as Auto-immune conditions. The incidence of these has increased appreciably in recent years and probably no-one has considered that the greater affluence of the populace at large could be a major factor. More people are taking holidays and especially foreign holidays than ever before and so more people than ever are boarding their dogs, which means vaccinating them more regularly than they have tended to do in the past It all makes interesting food for thought.

Phewwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!! Jan

 

[JAX]

Thanks for that Jan . well written :cheers:

Ive printed off the information that Lanny has mentioned , and will be giving a copy to my vets , but as you've mentioned in your `piece ` . To not booster would certainly be taking a chunk of income from my little practice Vet , Not so much the specialist that is sorting Buffee out , he drives a Ferrari (w00t)

 

[*Lesley*]

When my dogs are boostered they get a full check up ect I also know that my vet will actually lose out in boostering my 4 dogs because I pay £50 each for them at their first vaccine and get boosters and check up for life so at 2 and 3 years old mine have already spent their £50 so to speak.

But if vets fees did cost me a lot its because I choose to have 4 dogs, I would love prices to be cheaper but as I've said before I wouldn't want to do it so I am thankful we have people who do, also I think they deserve to make a decent living when they have to study for 5/6 years, and have 3 high grade A levels in Chemistry, biology and maths before they can even train to be a vet (w00t)

I have a fabulous vet so maybe I'm a little biased but I don't think you can put a price on trust and the fact that my vet knows that my dogs mean the world to me and treats them as such

 

[JAX]

When my dogs are boostered they get a full check up ect I also know that my vet will actually lose out in boostering my 4 dogs because I pay £50 each for them at their first vaccine and get boosters and check up for life so at 2 and 3 years old mine have already spent their £50 so to speak.
But if vets fees did cost me a lot its because I choose to have 4 dogs, I would love prices to be cheaper but as I've said before I wouldn't want to do it so I am thankful we have people who do, also I think they deserve to make a decent living when they have to study for 5/6 years, and have 3 high grade A levels in Chemistry, biology and maths before they can even train to be a vet (w00t)

I have a fabulous vet so maybe I'm a little biased but I don't think you can put a price on trust and the fact that my vet knows that my dogs mean the world to me and treats them as such

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have you not read what has been written , ?

We are not concerned about the money , but the fact that our dogs are being given drugs that they DO NOT NEED , and that could, in fact, do major harm (w00t)

re read the thread again Lesley , and ask Lanny ( avaolonia ) for her piece about not needing all the jabs every year :huggles: makes very good reading :cheers:

 

[Smiffy@VeronnaV]

To be pedantic, a vaccine is not a drug, it is a modified pathogen of the disease! :- "

But I will show my vet the article, and see what she has to say. I can guess, ... (w00t) !

Perhaps all we can do is put pressure on our vets to provide single dose vaccines, using protocols developed across the pond, and change to an insurance company which will insure your animal without the necessity of annual boosters. (The NFU will do that, but you have to accept that it is your responsibility to pay for any illness or associated illness resulting from non-vaccination of your pet). Which is fair enough. And then not take any holiday which means the dogs have to board in kennels, in order to protect the dogs from over-vaccination. Now there's a thought, if we could get EVERY dog owner in the country to NOT use kennels for one whole year because of the above, kennel owners would soon change their criteria! But then knowing our dearly loved government, instead of doing something sensible, they would prosecute us all under the Animal Welfare Bill for failing to take proper care of the animals in our care!!!!

 

[Strike Whippets]

Kennels can't change the vaccine rules as like most, their insurance companies won't insure them and they need to be covered for obvious reasons ...........I must have one of the only vets who says a pup needs its first puppy jab no earlier than 12 weeks old, followed by its second as stated in this report 3-4 weeks afterwards .....and then thats it .....a possible booster at 6-7 years old ....sorted

 

[masta]

Once immunised there should be sufficient immunological response to carry your dog through its adult life, so boosters would seem a waste of money and blood testing would also not be cost effective ( I was once asked by the vet after injecting a pup if I would like a blood test to see if the vaccine “had worked†I asked if they would then vaccinate for free if it was a non responder you can guess the answer) what is incorrect is “single vaccines are safer†and over vaccinating is dangerous, there is no evidence to prove that human or animal

 

[masta]

To be pedantic, a vaccine is not a drug, it is a modified pathogen of the disease!  :- "
But I will show my vet the article, and see what she has to say.  I can guess, ... (w00t) ! 

Perhaps all we can do is put pressure on our vets to provide single dose vaccines, using protocols developed across the pond, and change to an insurance company which will insure your animal without the necessity of annual boosters.  (The NFU will do that, but you have to accept that it is your responsibility to pay for any illness or associated illness resulting from non-vaccination of your pet).  Which is fair enough.  And then not take any holiday which means the dogs have to board in kennels, in order to protect the dogs from over-vaccination.  Now there's a thought, if we could get EVERY dog owner in the country to NOT use kennels for one whole year because of the above, kennel owners would soon change their criteria!  But then knowing our dearly loved government, instead of doing something sensible,  they would prosecute us all under the Animal Welfare Bill for failing to take proper care of the animals in our care!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

To be pedantic, a vaccine is not a drug, it is a modified pathogen of the disease! :- "

To be really pedantic its a killed or weakened pathogen/virus/antigen of the disease causing organism

 

[Macha]

If the RCVS has a new protocol, more needs to be done to promote it and to lobby regulating bodies

The insurance companies, as far as I know, are free to change their requirements (but how many have so far?). The boarding kennels in the UK and in Ireland - the states I have experience with - are subject to licensing and at present must demand annual vaccinations. As I sometimes need to board my dogs I am bound to comply with these requirements so I would like to see them modified.

 

[jayp]

Once immunised there should be sufficient immunological response to carry your dog through its adult life, so boosters would seem a waste of money and blood testing would also not be cost effective ( I was once asked by the vet after injecting a pup if I would like a blood test to see if the vaccine “had worked†I asked if they would then vaccinate for free if it was a non responder you can guess the answer) what is incorrect is “single vaccines are safer†and over vaccinating is dangerous, there is no evidence to prove that human or animal

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

If this is so then why the MMR debate on childhood vaccination where single dose vaccinations are now provided on request as the likelyhood of adverse reaction is lessened.

Quite agree that vaccine is not a drug as such but is a massive challenge to an immature immune system and if as seems to be the case not necessary then why risk it? If vaccines and boosters are so benign then the dog need not be healthy before vaccination and vets will all say if challenged the dog must be otherwise healthy before vaccination.

I am still of the opinion that many immune mediated problems do not occur immediately after vaccination and are therefore never associated with these unnecessary boosters This i am wellaware is difficult to prove but why take the risk?

Flu jabs for instance are never given to anyone who is allergic to eggs

All this article is trying to say is that vets should be more aware of this research and should be discussing the options with clients and not just BOOSTING AS A MATTER OF COURSE. Jan

 

[kris]

years ago when parvo first came out there wasnt a vaccine for the disease and vets used a cat vaccine.then gradually the drug companies produced dog vaccines against it.but i remember when nobivac first hit the shelves and it was advertised as a vaccine that cut through maternal antibodies when they were present at vaccination time.i had dobermanns and they have a peculiarity of keeping their maternal antibodies (along with rottweillers)longer than any other breed.these two germanic breeds were known to do this and so a lot of them died from the disease even after being vaccinated.the nobivac company did tests at michael quinneys adoram kennels on his rottweillers using nobivac and other vaccines.they found that when nobivac was used the dogs titre levels went into the hundreds on dogs that previously vaccinated only had titre level scores of 20 or 30.after reading all the research and the results of field studies we always used nobivac afterwards :thumbsup:

 

[masta]

Once immunised there should be sufficient immunological response to carry your dog through its adult life, so boosters would seem a waste of money and blood testing would also not be cost effective ( I was once asked by the vet after injecting a pup if I would like a blood test to see if the vaccine “had worked†I asked if they would then vaccinate for free if it was a non responder you can guess the answer) what is incorrect is “single vaccines are safer†and over vaccinating is dangerous, there is no evidence to prove that human or animal

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

If this is so then why the MMR debate on childhood vaccination where single dose vaccinations are now provided on request as the likelyhood of adverse reaction is lessened.

Quite agree that vaccine is not a drug as such but is a massive challenge to an immature immune system and if as seems to be the case not necessary then why risk it? If vaccines and boosters are so benign then the dog need not be healthy before vaccination and vets will all say if challenged the dog must be otherwise healthy before vaccination.

I am still of the opinion that many immune mediated problems do not occur immediately after vaccination and are therefore never associated with these unnecessary boosters This i am wellaware is difficult to prove but why take the risk?

Flu jabs for instance are never given to anyone who is allergic to eggs

All this article is trying to say is that vets should be more aware of this research and should be discussing the options with clients and not just BOOSTING AS A MATTER OF COURSE. Jan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

MMR is not given on demand it is available in private clinics at a cost (several hundred pounds) the vaccine is brought in from Eastern europe the MMR debate was not based on any firm clinical evidence at all it was opinion from Dr Andrew Wakefield.

Flu jabs are not given to patients with serious egg allergys as the antigen is grown in eggs and could cause anaphylactic reaction, the vaccine is a killed virus and 11 million doses given per annum safely

i agree with the booster argument

 

[HopeRosie]

Unfortunately as puppy owners you have to try and trust someone regarding the health of your pup - and thats normally the vet. You try and do the best for your puppy and if the vet says you need a booster every year or your beloved dog could catch an awful disease and die a horrible death - I would find it very difficult to live with myself if she got ill with one of those diseases. Im not sure I could take that risk. I understand the article however, but as my insurance company wont insure me at all if I dont have her vaccinated - and when I go on (infrequent) holidays my dog sitter wont have my pup to stay at her house (not a kennel) unless shes got a current certificate and she wont be insured with N.A.R.P.S.- what choice do I really have.

 

[*Lesley*]

When my dogs are boostered they get a full check up ect I also know that my vet will actually lose out in boostering my 4 dogs because I pay £50 each for them at their first vaccine and get boosters and check up for life so at 2 and 3 years old mine have already spent their £50 so to speak.
But if vets fees did cost me a lot its because I choose to have 4 dogs, I would love prices to be cheaper but as I've said before I wouldn't want to do it so I am thankful we have people who do, also I think they deserve to make a decent living when they have to study for 5/6 years, and have 3 high grade A levels in Chemistry, biology and maths before they can even train to be a vet (w00t)

I have a fabulous vet so maybe I'm a little biased but I don't think you can put a price on trust and the fact that my vet knows that my dogs mean the world to me and treats them as such

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have you not read what has been written , ?

We are not concerned about the money , but the fact that our dogs are being given drugs that they DO NOT NEED , and that could, in fact, do major harm (w00t)

re read the thread again Lesley , and ask Lanny ( avaolonia ) for her piece about not needing all the jabs every year :huggles: makes very good reading :cheers:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yeah I read it, I was trying to point out that a lot of vets booster every year for the animals welfare not because it's easy money I personally don't think that my vet would booster my dogs if he thought for a minute that he was harming them in any way, it would be easier for him now not to booster because he isn't making any money out of it.

Dogs have been boostered every year for donkeys years, every dog I've every owned has, and they have all been fine and lived long happy lifes.

It's like HopeRosie says there are a lot of limitations if she doesn't booster, and like she says i could not live with my self if my dogs caught anything because they were unprotected, 5+ years is a long time wondering if you dog is still immune to these deadly diseases,also when you are racing ect its only right IMO that your dogs boostered up to date because of the welfare of other dogs as well as your own.

I'm not saying it's right, it's just my oppinion :thumbsup: