> The amount of dogs having 2nd vaccines each year and you think its a few pounds!

I've just reread that. Its only the initial vaccines that are carried out twice not each year.  Do  you titre test during that initial course?

Have to agree Zajak, it does cost more to titre test and like you, I'm not penny pinching here, I prefer only to vaccinate when necessary, I see no point in pumping dangerous chemicals into our dogs needlessly (or oursleves for that matter).  We only have to look at this thread and others like it to see how many vaccines vets are suggesting our dogs are given as puppies, this thread started because one vet thought a puppy should have 3!!! 

>Yes, pups only need one vaccination after 12 weeks old for distemper and parvo

I misunderstood you.  There was no mention of titre testing made.

> I prefer only to vaccinate when necessary, I see no point in pumping dangerous chemicals into our dogs needlessly (or oursleves for that matter). 

Me too :-)

For once Isabel, I half agree with you :-).  I wouldnt say it is purely for money, however they do make more money treating the diseases suffered as a result of the overvaccinating, auto immune disorder for example make a huge profit in Atopica :-).

>However, you will risk vaccine damage?

Vaccine damage, in dogs as well as humans, is very much rarer than some people would have us believe. Yes, all cases are tragic, but the risk is very low.

>albeit starting to fade towards 12 weeks old

'Starting to fade'? It's believed to be completely gone by 12 weeks, meaning that for some weeks prior to that the immunity level has been low, possibly too low for adequate protection, leaving him at risk.

I've just reread that. Its only the initial vaccines that are carried out twice not each year. 

But boosters are not needed each year, if our dogs have immunity after their puppy jab then it has been proven that it usually lasts 7 years to life.  If we listen to some vets they recommend vaccinating yearly, some every 2nd year and some every 3rd year.  But basically, once immunity is there no matter how the immunity got there, or what manufacturers vaccine has been used, or indeed whether the dogs have built up their own immunity then it isn't going to go anywhere.  I have to say, it is a bit like people, once immune to a disease immunity is usually there to stay.

We are clearly not even half agreeing :-)

>I have to say, it is a bit like people, once immune to a disease immunity is usually there to stay.

Not even usually - unless regularly challenged, immunity wanes. Those of us who are old enough to have had the smallpox vaccine in our childhood are highly unlikely to have any immunity left ...

Oh dear Isabel :-).

Anyone ever heard of memory cells or is that asking just a bit too much?

> But boosters are not needed each year

Thats not what we are talking about here though we are discussing the initial vaccination regime and that is not repeated every year. 
I don't know if any vets vary from the regime that their chosen vaccine manufacturers recommend and we have already discussed the fact that not all dogs will maintain immunity for 7 years.

>I have to say, it is a bit like people, once immune to a disease immunity is usually there to stay

Each disease for each species has a different requirement and cannot be compared.

> Anyone ever heard of memory cells or is that asking just a bit too much?

I don't know about memory cells but I have never mastered the art of mind reading so have no idea what you are on about :-)

LOL.  We are still talking vaccinations in regard to memory cells but never mind :-).

> it has been proven that it usually lasts 7 years to life.

Not in leptospirosis. And frequency of vaccination varies in humans too depending on vaccine - rabies vaccine, if used, is triennial. It depends on which disease, which vaccine, the individual, and their state of health at the time of vaccination... immunity will obviously last longer in some individuals and for some diseases than others.

Maternal immunity may or may not still be present at 6-8 weeks in dogs but by twelve weeks is supposed to have disappeared (some vaccines of course are licensed for second at 10 weeks) - that is the point of the vaccine being at or after this date.

My understanding is that the primary use of Atopica is to treat allergic - atopic - individuals (not auto-immune disease), and to say this was caused by vaccine damage would be false - atopy is a disease known to have heritability and a genetic component in humans and dogs.

http://www.noahcompendium.co.uk/Novartis_Animal_Health_UK_Ltd/Atopica/-46113.html

In fact, that is all it is licensed for. And since vets at present are still required to provide free prescriptions, I don't see how you can make the allegation that they are vaccinating animals to cause disease in order to gain money from the use of expensive drugs... which is completely against the ethical code of a vet anyway... I am sure the drug company are making plenty out of it - they will also have invested a lot of money in testing it to prove its efficacy and getting it licensed. But then private businesses are out to make money - you wouldn't last long with a company suffering a financial loss!

Oh I see.  Well you will have to expand as I still don't know what your point is.

> LOL.  We are still talking vaccinations in regard to memory cells but never mind

Yes - immunology - humoral immunity. Memory cells will not necessarily last forever. ;-)

Lepto is the one that immunity doesn't last and this is because the disease changes, lepto vaccine is also the one that is most dangerous to our animals the one most likely to cause adverse reactions.  The lepto vaccine does not cover the strains found in the UK therefore it is not effective.  Dogs having had the lepto vaccine can and do die from the disease in the uk.  The vaccine does not protect, and that is a fact.

http://www.optometry.co.uk/articles/docs/976f2dd6af2042a7ec6326f4b524b41c_heath20020208.pdf

This is a nice article on immunology and immune responses for anyone who is feeling bored. :-D

Well first of all, my vet recommended atopica for AF which IS an autoimmune disease.

If you cared to read mine and Isabel's other posts, you will see, that I was actually agreeing with her on the point of vets not vaccinating to make money, you have completely misread my post.  I thought smiley faces were supposed to help readers to read expressions such as toungue in cheek, etc?

Does anyone have any papers they can provide a link to regarding who have carried out the research into vaccine protocol?  I am only interested in papers written by "Independent" companies. I am not interested in papers written by biased parties (for or against).

> The lepto vaccine does not cover the strains found in the UK

Yes, it does. Have you forgotten this recent thread already, Perry. 

Not even usually - unless regularly challenged, immunity wanes. Those of us who are old enough to have had the smallpox vaccine in our childhood are highly unlikely to have any immunity left ...

measles, chickenpox, mumps .....?
for the diseases that change, and I don't know whether smallpox does, but for the ones that do, like the flu virus then yes, immunity does wane, but for parvo & distemper like measles and chickenpoxl it doesn't wane, immunity usually stays.  That is not to say everyone that has had measles once cannot have it again, they can, but it is rare.  

> that I was actually agreeing with her on the point of vets not vaccinating to make money

I've read it again and it does not read like that to me.

That's definitely "glass of wine" reading!  I am sure you will correct me but is this article relating to humans?  I thought someone said human and dogs are different in this way?

Its called sarcasm Isabel and Munrogirl.  What is the emoticon for sarcasm to make things clearer in future?

Yes, it does. Have you forgotten this recent thread already, Perry.

no, not forgotten that thread, and I can only reiterate, the stains found in the uk are not covered by the lepto vaccine in the uk.

I also reiterate that everyone has to make their own decision, it's an emotive subject, most of us only want what is best for our dogs, and we can argue til the cows come home or that black is white, but we won't change the fact that everyone thinks they know best.  But we do have to keep an open mind..............

> the stains found in the uk are not covered by the lepto vaccine in the uk.

Do you mean not all of them?  It certainly covers some of them.

> Its called sarcasm Isabel and Munrogirl.  What is the emoticon for sarcasm to make things clearer in future?

How about just letting us know which comments are actual and which are sarcasm up to press?

Thank you Perry, only what I was trying to say on an earlier post.  As I said earlier, it is something that will cause discussion for many years to come.

Ok here goes, the only sarcastic one was the one to follow your sarcastic one regarding the money and vets (or have I misread yours)?  I really don't think we are getting anywhere do you?

Does anyone have any papers they can provide a link to regarding who have carried out the research into vaccine protocol?  I am only interested in papers written by "Independent" companies. I am not interested in papers written by biased parties (for or against

I know Dr R Schulz has done some independent research, but not sure where to find the papers, you might find it from Catherine O'Driscoll's website: http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk/ a very clever lady who has also done loads of research into the subject since losing I think 2 or maybe 3 dogs after vaccinations.

> or have I misread yours

Clearly.  My post was not in the least sarcastic it said exactly what I meant.

>a very clever lady who has also done loads of research into the subject since losing I think 2 or maybe 3 dogs after vaccinations.

So can hardly be described as 'independent and unbiased' ...

It seems we are all misreading each others posts then doesn't it?  I will try to speak plainer in future. I will say, yet again, that we all have our opinions because we all care about our dogs.  As I said previously, I, for one, will have to agree to disagree with you.  I will be online again late tonight. Unfortunately I have to go to work now, or could that be fortunately? Sorry my sense of humour there, hope you get that one and that doesn't offend you :-)

I am not sure how you come to that conclusion Jeangenie, if someone loses a dog to a disease then surely that would make them read up and learn as much as possible about it to hopefully prevent it in the future?  Likewise if an adverse reaction to a booster caused illness or death people would want to know why.

This lady, has spent the time doing scientific research and her her findings make interesting reading.
Her new dvd is interesting, and you will find vets talking about their fears and dangers of over vaccination , don't just pooh pooh it because her dogs suffered through vaccination and adverse reactions.  Otherwise we could say that a scientists and vaccine manufacturers are hardly unbiased if their pet hasn't suffered an adverse reaction, your statement makes about that much sense which is unusual for you.

> if someone loses a dog to a disease then surely that would make them read up and learn as much as possible about it to hopefully prevent it in the future?

It's human nature to look for only the evidence in support of your beliefs.  Science is conducted much more effectively by those that have a very dispassionate view over the outcome of any research or experiment.  Even then it would not matter if evidence is produced by someone involved.  If it is a strong enough result it will be replicated again and again by others wishing to validate it.  This does not seem to have happened with this ladies findings.  I know it is my favourite :-) but have you ever had a look at this site, Perry?

>if someone loses a dog to a disease then surely that would make them read up and learn as much as possible about it to hopefully prevent it in the future?

The best people to do research into dog vaccines would be people who don't have dogs and have never had dogs. That way they'll look at any evidence from a totally unbiased viewpoint. Anyone else will have personal experience and preconceived ideas which will tend to skew their approach.

People whose dog was ill will tend to try to prove that the vaccine was to blame; people whose dog lived a long, healthy life with annual boosters will tend to take the opposite view. Neither can be said to be totally unbiased.

The best people to do research into dog vaccines would be people who don't have dogs and have never had dogs. That way they'll look at any evidence from a totally unbiased viewpoint. Anyone else will have personal experience and preconceived ideas which will tend to skew their approach.

I understand where you are coming from but in reality it would be difficult to insist that all scientists doing research into animal health should be pet free!

> all scientists doing research into animal health should be pet free

I don't think that would necessary.   It would quite sufficient to find ones that have had no experience of either disease nor vaccination reaction and there should be plenty of those but on the other hand I think there probably are lots of scientists that don't have pets.

> my vet recommended atopica for AF which IS an autoimmune disease.

As far as I was aware AF stood for atrial fibrillation - oh I see, you mean anal furunculosis. Well that is not a breed exclusive disease but it is certainly more of a breed specific issue in certain breeds - but I have never heard it implied that it is caused by vaccination! Cyclosporine certainly does get used to treat it - but is not licensed for it - and it is not its primary use and application.

> If you cared to read mine and Isabel's other posts, you will see, that I was actually agreeing with her on the point of vets not vaccinating to make money

I have read your posts... and I responded politely. Your post that I was replying to certainly implied that was what you felt. Or is it just that you mean whichever suits you at the time?

> That's definitely "glass of wine" reading!

I am not sure what you mean by that - or exactly what you are referring to - I can only assume the immunology article. It is the basics of functioning of the immune system. Since you don't seem quite clear.

> Its called sarcasm Isabel and Munrogirl

Can you clarify what exactly was sarcastic? Maybe you can make things clearer by not being.

Good evening everyone, back from work now, hope I'm not going to regret logging back on :-)

Unfortunately, several of us, myself included have been guilty today of posting sarcastic and less than helpful posts.  Maybe we can stick to the subject and not get personal?

> Unfortunately, several of us, myself included have been guilty today of posting sarcastic and less than helpful posts.

Who were the others?

>Maybe we can stick to the subject and not get personal?

By all means.

Great, so glad we agree finally.

Guide Dog pups have their first vaccine at 6 weeks old.
This has been the policy for many years.
I would be very interested to know what magazine stated that GD pups are not vaccinated until 12 weeks old.

all my dogs the pass 10 years have been done at 8 and 10 week,

i think before that it was longer

the reason to vacc early is to get them out to socalizie and traning them,most puppies leave their mum bye 8 weeks to.

i have not had a problem with than vacc over the years.

I havnt read every post,so hopefully i wont repeat any links.But for anyone that is interested,there's a whole heap of links regarding vaccinations on this site. Scroll down to "vaccination information"

http://www.b-naturals.com/newsletter/links-lists/

>It certainly covers some of them

Two serovars, L. Icterohaemorrhagiae and L. Canicola

L. Icterohaemorrhagiae is found in the UK however, L. Canicola is very rare in the UK, and dominate in the US. 

L.Hardjo is another dominant serovar in the UK associated with cattle but it's not included in the vaccine for dogs.

The canine lepto vac is reported to give immunity from 4 to 8 months, sometimes less, sometimes more.  The vac protocol is one vac every 12 months.

So if we couple that with believed protection against one predominant strain with as many as 8 serovars believed to be out there, maybe more, although being very, very rare as a risk and we then look at the survivability rate of Lepto in the environment, the odds are that it's more likely to get a vac reaction although that is rare too than an unvaccinated dog catching Lepto. 

However, that said, it's important to look at risk for a particular dog too, dogs swimming in stagnant water such as canals or rivers, drinking from puddles beside rivers, ponds etc, may benefit from the vac for cover against L. Icterohaemorrhagiae.

OTOH of course, exposure can build natural immunity.  It's a catch 22...

Like I have said before on one of these threads, the immune system can only be stretched so far at any given point in time before the tears start to show.  The same applies to every aspect of the body, which makes plain old common sense.  Nothing wrong with vaccination, kept in moderation and like all medications handled with caution and in balance against the environment we live in.

> the odds are that it's more likely to get a vac reaction although that is rare too than an unvaccinated dog catching Lepto. 
>

I don't know how you are calculating those odds.  There are so many more variables than the number of serovars which are covered such as which are more readily transmitted, which are the most debilitating and which may be difficult to treat medically.
All I know is I have vaccinated my dogs for over 25 years now with never a problem.  I don't know if my dogs would never have an adverse reaction but already the odds in gaining benefit look pretty good to me.

I've based my assumption on the balance of probabilities Isabel, based on the information I have.

Lepto can be nasty and difficult to treat but not necessarily and not always.  Some dogs can just be off colour, others may have debilitating disease.

L. Canicola is believed to be the most risky to the dog and where the dog acts as the host and that one is believed to be rare in the UK. 

I spoke with Prof Hal Thompson at Glasgow Uni about this years ago; he said he'll give me £1000.00 if my dogs ever caught Lepto, lol, without vac BTW.

> I've based my assumption on the balance of probabilities Isabel, based on the information I have.

So am I :-)