>But if a dog is on long medication...or indeed any medication.... then it would suggest that the animal is unwell....

In truth the animal would be unwell if it wasn't on the medication. When on the correct medication to make it function normally then it can be considered healthy.

I never stopped vaccinating mine on long term medication.

Me neither. Rufus was vaccinated all his 15 years and lived 8 years longer than the vet predicted!

It's a pity that they cannot exclude animals that have been recorded as unsuitable for vaccination but I suspect that it just beyond the sophistication of their systems

Yes. I find certain of my cats cannot cope with one brand of vaccine (it's a live one) so even though I know some of the others (it's genetic I'm sure as it runs in lines) can cope with it, we now request ALL our cats are given a killed vaccine. I asked if they couldn't put on all our records to only use the killed brand in case there ever was a locum vet or new one, they said their system couldn't do that.

> I asked if they couldn't put on all our records to only use the killed brand in case there ever was a locum vet or new one, they said their system couldn't do that.

We can put that sort of thing on the history but the system can't automatically flag it up; it's up to the owner to remind us each time.

After all, the owner always has the final say in the animal's treatment; a vet won't vaccinate an animal without the owner's permission! Annual vaccination reminders serve to remind the woner that a whole year has gone by and it would be sensible to have the animal's health checked, even if no vaccination is to be given.

> Annual vaccination reminders serve to remind the woner that a whole year has gone by and it would be sensible to have the animal's health checked, even if >no vaccination is to be given

And that is sometimes more important than doing the vaccination :) :) Some owners are just not very aware of problems in their dog and need that trip to the vets to get a problem spotted.

We can put that sort of thing on the history but the system can't automatically flag it up; it's up to the owner to remind us each time.

Yes I don't have a problem with it, it was just that once a foreign vet used the wrong vaccine despite being told by us -she didn't understand what I'd said when I said I wanted a killed vaccine. That's when we asked about this. The practice owner's suggestion was instead to always request the brand of vaccine we want, by name, and since doing that we haven't had any problems.

Bit OT but I do find many of the foreign young vets that have just come to this country (usually from one particular country) find it hard to understand -doesn't help me being a foreigner as well I suppose. When it's just routine vaccinations we will happily see any available vet -for actual illnesses etc we always request one of the more senior vets. Recently, as an example, we brought a cat in for a booster and the vet said "I see its his first vaccination". I said "No, it's a booster. " Vet: "But it's his first time." Me: "No, look at his vaccination card, he's been vaccinated for many years, this is a booster." Vet:"But he's never been here before, there is no history!" Me: "That's because we had a different vet before." Vet: "So it's like I said, it's his first vaccination. " Me: "NO, please look at his card, he's been done before!" Vet: "It's his first vaccination HERE".  Talk about not understanding each other LOL.

FOs if you quetion re what does the vet do was to me. Yep if you miss the booster by more than 2 months its the whole series again. As I said I think he was in the nicest possible way fishing for suitable answers for the difficult client ie me who was asking these questions.  The deffinitely expect you to vaccinate every year
I shall be making my own desions re boosters at the next booster date from my research and comments from here.
Very reluctant to booster willy nilly always have been and on the advice the vet  at the same practice  who we had previously who also was a homeopath ceased vaccinating my senior cat when he was 10 ish 

"In truth the animal would be unwell if it wasn't on the medication. When on the correct medication to make it function normally then it can be considered healthy."
Thats an interesting statement is that what the drug companiues mean then by a healthy animal?

> Thats an interesting statement is that what the drug companiues mean then by a healthy animal?

Ah, takes me back to my old student days :) 
Whatever drug companies may say the oft quoted World Health Organisation definition is "a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." 
Even in it's more simple definition of being free of illness, injury or pain if you could say your dog, on medication, is achieving this then it is probably fair to say it is healthy.  It is the state achieved not what gets it there.

Yes well know phrase the amount of pieces of coursework for gcse health and social care I have seen that quote in :)
MM thats really interesting stooge time to ponder I think !

> My vets haven't vaccinated for the whole lot annually for several years now.  I don't think many do.

One of the vet practices I used for Vaccines does, got a letter this year offering me a discount on starting a full course again as my dogs booster was late (over 12 months).

That is poppycock as a booster is a booster no matter how long since the last one.

A  course of vaccination is only appropriate where the immune system is immature, or no history of vaccination at all.

So Brainless if you miss boosters having previously had afull course are ou saying only booster need be given however long ago it was

Yes.  In fact it is according to one of the Dog papers vets who wrote this soem time ago, tatamount to sharp practise to say otherwise. 

Archie Bryden Our dogs 16/5/08 wrote: "I am appalled to encounter some vets who would insist on a full course of vaccination, as given to puppies, if an owner were even a month or two over teh annual date for boosting..........  Frankly I consider this to be proffessional malpractive which ought to be reported to teh Royal college".

Intervet rep at a  seminar told us the same thing when questioned from the floor.

Thank you very useful. Just a thought would it be against vet protocol for aclient to go to one vet who agreed with client on vaccine potocol and then back to orginal vet for all other things.The reason I say this as icCan see a difference of opinion between me and current practice on vaccines but I do like they way they care for my animals over many years.

Vets provide a service for which you pay, like any other and your as free to use different vet5s as you are to sue different plumbers or electricians, or supermarkets.

They can require you to register but can't hold you to exclusivity.

mmm may have a think about that too. Hopefully when our next boosters come along we can come to a sensible agreement. May make an appointment with the senior vet she owns the practice think that could be the way forward very sensible lady. Its some of the newer vets that seem a little more the client needs our advice not that the client could have knowledge and different view too.
Thinking particularly discussion with new vet on raw feeding he wasnt happy with me

No...You're TOTALLY RIGHT... they WON'T be happy with you Raw Feeding FurrieFriends...because... it means the practice is likely to lose out on 40 percent commission from the bag of proplan/hills science diet/choose their poison....that they would rather sell you....!

haha yep I did get told once that my little pomx was abit tubby and the offered fro me to join the weight loss class and put her on  diet food prescribed. I politely declined and now she is a happy not too tubby little grl who is still raw fed 

I've never had a vet try to sell me dog food -or question my feeding regime.

Same here Marianne :-)

maybe its just me then

Nope your not alone, until the Vets around here realise your an expereinced multidog owner they tend to assume your not very knowledgeable and push food, neutering etc.

All the vets round here insist on a full course if the booster's 'overdue' - at least in theory anyway.

I took River in to be boosted back in march, after about 3 years without (was planning to attend an agility club who required annual boosters at the time) - they insisted on the full course, I paid for it, took her for the first one and left it at that.

I've since had a letter telling me that her next booster is due next march :-P I need to get her card updated though (always forget to take them with me, always) and when I do, I'll be taking a printout of the 2010 vaccination guidelines from the WSAVA - they clearly state that any adult dog that has had a full course as a puppy does not need to be 'restarted', only a booster is required.  I'm undecided whether I'll then start working on getting everyone up to date - we don't kennel so it's not needed from that POV but I am aware that the current recommendations suggest lepto needs to be boostered annually and most of mine haven't had anything since July 2008.

Re. the food, I've never had anything pushed on me either - but then almost from the word go with having my own dogs, any vet I've seen has realised I'm neither a pushover nor lacking in knowledge ;-)

It was a vet nurse who had never met me before, I think a little keen  to have people to join the weight loss clinic after I weighed my gsd who was fine and took little one in while I was there. Pointless really she can easily be done at home. The new vet also didnt ask if I had had dogs before and went for the new owner talk until we got to the food bit.
I then decided if I was to see this man again being the most recent to join the practise we needed to have a  chat I think in the end although he didnt really agree with raw feeding mainly due to risk of tears and choking or tooth damage he was surprised when I also told him consti[ation was noy an expected side effect of raw feeding the food needed balancing and that my dogs didnt live on mince and little else he accepted that I had some idea what I was doing and we came to happy compromise 
Mind you he got so far off the subjet he forgot to ask me about neutering just as well as if we show she wont be neutered and anyway no way would that happen for a season or too if not

In truth...by The very definition of "Health"...an animal or person cannot be made "more healthy" by the introduction of a foreign/alien/unnatural to the body substance...

In truth...any animal receiving medication...is receiving it because there is a disfunction of its natural state of well-being...and it is ludicrous to suggest otherwise....

Has anyone read the Genetic Impact of vaccination here....??? And does anyone have any comments to make about it...???

http://www.thedogplace.org/VACCINES/Genetic-Impact-10073_Jordan.asp

> leptospirosis and kennel cough, with the other core vaccines (DHP) being boosted every 3 years

That is interesting JG.  My friend's dog has just died because he developed something with an awfully long name that I can't remember - just after he was vaccinated.  Apparently there is evidence of some link between annual vaccinations and the condition he developed.  Now I asked about vaccinations when I put Meg into kennels and was told that the council required an annual dose but they as a kennels didn't require kennel cough. ( I don't do the kennel cough now because I think having it masks the symptoms.  Meg came out of the last kennels - who insisted on the kennel cough vaccine - and developed the disease - although mildly - it kept her out of training for weeks).  I have never stopped to ask what diseases my dog gets vaccinated for!  I just go along and do it.  The only thing I do is try to defer for an extra month.  I think it is time I did so more research into this.

> In truth...any animal receiving medication...is receiving it because there is a disfunction of its natural state of well-being...and it is ludicrous to suggest otherwise....

I don't think anyone has.  I would hope none of us use medication unecessarily.

My ex husband was very much into the history of animal fancies, and as such often bought very old copies of Fur & Feather, for instance. It made frightening reading to see that years ago, people who showed cats knew they took at least a 50/50 risk (sometimes much higher, I saw quotes of up to 80 % mentioned) of losing the cat after a show because of feline enteritis and similar, and many catteries had breeding cats and show cats kept totally separate due to the high risk of the show cats being infected with disease and dying. I'm sure there must have been similar problems with dogs, except I never read old copies of Our Dogs etc. Then when the introduction if vaccines suddenly people could show their cats and know they'd LIVE! There must have been similar problems for anyone living in cities etc that let their cats go outside and mix with others. The vaccines saved so many lives.

It is also why breeders in dogs in days gone by woulds breed from them on the second or third season and run on several pups, not just to see which was the best but which might survive long enough to be bred from and shown.

I remember when we first had dogs it was normal to have to buy in several pups one after another before one got one to live to adulthood, it was accepted as were childhood disease and the sad results from that. No one who had seen such things would ever suggest that one should not vaccinate and the MMR episode has led me to believe that people will make up anything to suit their theories.

> But do boarding kennels still insist on yearly vax?
> Only of the vaccines that are required annually; leptospirosis and kennel cough. <IMG class=qButton title="Quote selected text" alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" width=20 height=10>

I have been following up on this - I have looked at 2 authorities to see what the requirements of the license for boarding kennels says.  I can find no reference to what vaccinations are required - only that appropriate steps are taken to prevent and control the spread of any disease.  Do the kennels take this as meaning annual vaccinations are required?  Or maybe it is the insurance that requires it?  Still one can't put a dog into kennels without annual vaccinations - but not all kennels insist on kennel cough.  

The point is though...that 30/40 years ago Vets were not vaccinating with the sheer number of virus and carcinogenic nasties.... that they are today...we now have 5 way and 7 way vaccines..(My vet didn't even KNOW what was in the needle when I asked..!)

If I as a concerned pet owner am able to keep abreast of latest research...why is it that many vets are still apparently oblivious to it...???

The Following was written in 2010...LAST YEAR...not 10 years ago...not 20 years ago...this is the LATEST RESEARCH.....

"There is NO scientific evidence of a proven need for either 'annual' or 'triennial' MLV core revaccination of adult dogs.

A recent paper, (published in the Journal of Comparative Pathology in January 2010), coauthored by Ronald Schultz, Professor and Chair of the Department of Pathobiological Sciences University of Wisconsin-Madison, and a member of the WSAVA VGG and AAHA Canine Vaccine Task Force, reiterates what has been well-known within the veterinary industry for years, i.e.: "In general, adaptive immunity following vaccination with modified live virus (MLV) vaccines develops earliest and most effectively in that it is often complete (e.g. sterile immunity is induced) and duration of immunity (DOI) is often lifelong."

Even vaccinating every 3 years is an unneccessary assault on a dog's immune system...! But of course the drug companies also manufacture the drugs needed to attempt to rectify the damage their vaccines have done in the first place...so the kidney failure...the diabetes...the thyroid problems....the auto-immune disorders..(Where the body has turned against itself) the early onset arthritis...the itching/pruritis...colitis...digestive disorders...heart disease...genetic faults...convulsions...are ALL big business to them too....

But then what happens is that organistions like the KC...like the rspca...like the insurance companies...like the agility clubs ...like boarding kennels....make their recommendations...based on what amounts to the false assumptions that vaccines are safe...

Like I say...if I as a concerned pet owner am able to keep up with the latest research....why can't our vets....???

Our dogs and cats do NOT need vaccinating EVERY YEAR...They do not even need vaccinating Every 3 years....

It is also worthy of consideration that adverse reaction (and I don't just mean immediate adverse reaction) is notably higher in the pure-bred dog.....

Is this because as pure bred Dog Owners we are statistically more inclined to go along with our vets recommendations...or is it because after years of unneccessary annual boosters...the DNA and genetic make-up of the pure-bred dog is being altered to its physical detriment...???

It is documented that black and tan dogs such as the rottweiller and the doberman...are more inclined to show adverse reaction to parvo vaccine... So during a question and answer session with my vet.... whilst discussing My dog's NATURAL immunity gained through the use of nosodes.... and titer tested by them....I asked why this might be the case ...I was informed that as these breeds often come from "less than savoury housing estates"...they have probably already come across parvo..and therefore probably have higher maternal antibodies at time of vaccination...!!

Excuse Me...come again..??? I didn't realise there was also a "snob value".... based on what post code you happen to live in... That had any relevance to discussing at what age...or in my case (in light of what happened to my first litter at 8 weeks old).... if at all... to vaccinate any future puppies or not..!

The vaccine companies know full well that their vaccines do NOT need to be administered annually or even every 3 years...why do our vets not know this too...???

Perhaps the article you quote did not peer review very well. 
Perhaps the view that some animals achieve longer immunity is held in context that other don't. 
Perhaps the level of incidence of serious reaction to vaccines does not support the need to challenge the prevailing regime.

>Perhaps the level of incidence of serious reaction to vaccines does not support the need to challenge the prevailing regime.

I think that's it in a nutshell. Nobody denies that adverse reactions can and do occur; that's why there's a system for reporting them, for heaven's sake! But, tragic though they undoubtedly are, they're too rare to warrant a wholesale change of regime. We all know of instances where a driver's life was saved because he wasn't wearing his seatbelt - but does that mean that seatbelt-wearing is intrinsically dangerous? No; more lives are saved by wearing a seatbelt then not, just as more lives are saved by vaccinations than not.

>No; more lives are saved by wearing a seatbelt then not, just as more lives are saved by vaccinations than not.

There is that JG although I was thinking more along the lines of how scientific thoery works.
One article is published but that does not mean it is wholly correct it may be just not worth challenging. 
Unfortunately some claims are so damaging, such as those against the MMR, that millions are required to be spent to rectify the damage.  Not good for anyone :(

>Unfortunately some claims are so damaging, such as those against the MMR, that millions are required to be spent to rectify the damage.

A fair point; and many children have become ill as a direct result of that now thoroughly debunked and totally spurious claim.

It should never be forgotten that absolutely anyone can set up a website and publish whatever they want; just because things are on the net it doesn't mean they're true! Anything of more than the most banal and trivial nature be viewed with extreme caution.

Stooge...even if all of those "perhapses" were true....it doesn't alter the fact that the passage I quoted was written last year...and is amongst the Latest Research...

One would hope that the implications WILL very soon filter through and that the prevailing regime WILL be altered to safeguard our dogs from what is essentially a systematic annual/triennial assault...

I find it really quite sad that it is taking so long....and also that there is even a need to have to lobby government just in order to attempt to STOP some vets from boostering annually....!

From a personal point of view...I might possibly have even considered vaccinating Leo and Gem at 16 weeks with parvo only....but in order to do that.... I would have to buy a WHOLE BOX of single parvo vaccines...

Why should I...??? I don't want My Dogs to have a combined Lepto/Parvo shot because of prior experiences...and My subsequent research.....but thats all that is available to them....

Why shouldn't you ? Because it is your decision not too increasing the chances of not being covered.

> in order to do that.... I would have to buy a WHOLE BOX of single parvo vaccines...
>
> Why should I

So you would like to vaccinate your dogs but don't want to pay too much for it?

> One would hope that the implications WILL very soon filter through

The passage you quote regarding some dogs having longer immunity is something that has filtered through to me a very long time ago so I doubt it has escaped wider attention.

No not at all...there are 5 adult Collies here who are protected by Homeopathic Nosodes only...and have never been vaccinated..I had 4 of these Titer Tested at a year old...and they all have a natural immunity to Parvovirus...as proven by the Titer Results...

I am also protecting Gem and Leo (pups of almost 6 months) with Homeopathic Nosodes

The puppy deaths (and further health problems in survivors) have only been in My Collies that all received the same vaccine..on the same day...and for this reason I would never risk a combined vaccine again....

But should I ever have pups in the future....then My personal recommendation to Puppy Buyers would be to hold off vaccination until 12 to 16 weeks...and to use single vaccines....(And not to booster) however this is at odds with Insurance Requirements and also when trying to obtain a single vaccine locally.....my experience is that it isn't possible unless you buy the whole box...

For a life "to be saved by vaccination"...there has to be adequte proof that a dog/cat/person was about to die if the vaccine wasn't administered.....the crux of the matter is...that we take perfectly healthy little beings...and inject them with virus and carcinogenic substances...

And of course Every man and his dog...knows about the nature of the internet... But just out of interest...do you know who Ronald Shultz is...before dismissing his words as untrustworthy...???

> do you know who Ronald Shultz is...before dismissing his words as untrustworthy...???

I think anyone who has taken even a passing interest in this debate over the years will have heard of the oft quoted Dr Shultz.

there has to be adequte proof that a dog/cat/person was about to die if the vaccine wasn't administered.....

How ridiculous -I've never heard anything so silly! Vaccines don't cure animals already ill, they prevent them from becoming ill -are you seriously saying people should invest in crystal balls? (If so please tell me where I can buy one that works as I rather fancy winning just enough money on the lottery to pay the mortgage off.)  It's like saying if the person who wasn't wearing a seatbelt (because seatbelts have caused accidents) gets injured in an accident, then putting the seatbelt on after the accident will help.

LOL Marianne.. :) No...it wasn't Me.....I've not even mentioned crystal balls...! :)

Nor did I make any reference to seat belts or accidents.... :)

Its just that oft quoted phrase..that "vaccines save lives"....I find questionable...

Anyway...back on topic....Ronald Schultz....
 

>Its just that oft quoted phrase..that "vaccines save lives"....I find questionable...

It's easily proven by looking at the figures for the number of dogs which died of distemper, parvovirus et al before the vaccines were available, and the number of deaths afterwards.

Likewise the deaths from smallpox, polio, measles etc prior to vaccination as after.

Its just that oft quoted phrase..that "vaccines save lives"....I find questionable...

Once upon a time I had a new puppy, 12 weeks old. My next door neighbour also had a new puppy, same age. Mine was vaccinated, hers was not -which I didn't know until later. Our kids were small and the neighbour's son had his birthday and a party in the garden. My daughter went and I brought my puppy over, who spent all day playing with the neighbour's puppy.

A week or so later my neighbour's puppy was dead from distemper. My puppy was fine and lived until old age.

That's just one example, I have several more.

Its just that oft quoted phrase..that "vaccines save lives"....I find questionable...


I actually find it difficult to understand how anyone with their eyes and ears open could write a statement like that, the truth of the statement 'vaccines save lives' is blatantly obvious.

I am not trying to be rude to anyone in particular as I am unaware who said it in the first place.

It is entirely possible that the unvaccinated puppy was infected with virus... shedding from the vaccinated puppy...a problem that still persists today...

Following a parvo vaccine...a puppy will show as positive for parvo on an Elisa Test...so should the puppy become ill...or die following a parvo vaccine...then it is difficult to ascertain whether the disease is parvo proper...or parvo introduced by the vaccine....

Currently the first puppy shot recommended to be given at 8 weeks is Parvo/Lepto combined... Leptospirosis is the vaccination that is currently causing more adverse reactions than any other vaccine...and as the body can only deal with one disease at a time...and parvo vaccine is known to surpress the immune system...then it is easy to see how a developing and immature immune system can easily become overwhelmed....especially as the shots continue in some vets up to 16 weeks...! (Thats a period of 8 weeks where the puppy's immune system is battling parvo/Lepto.... and then all the other viruses that are in a 5way and sometimes even a 7 way shot....)

It is entirely possible that the unvaccinated puppy was infected with virus... shedding from the vaccinated puppy...a problem that still persists today...

Still doesn't change the fact that it would have lived had it been vaccinated!! Which the owner didn't do because of cost. To be honest I don't really believe the anti vaccine people -I think it is just an excuse to save money....... Good way to get round it, saying they believe it is better for the dog, and save some money in the process -until the dog dies, that is. Like the trainers using nasty equipment who try to say it's actually kinder.

If you study the vaccination data from the US and Great Britain....it shows that the Measles Death Rate declined by more than 95 per cent BEFORE the vaccine was introduced...

Likewise death from whooping cough had declined 75 per cent BEFORE the vaccine was introduced

The Polio death rate had declined 50 per cent BEFORE the introduction of the vaccine....

But although vaccine damaged children and their parents fight for justice.... hold an equally important place in My Heart...the discussion is about over vaccinating our Dogs...who are subjected year after year to unneccessary Boosters (something that Thank Goodness...we DON'T inflict on our children)