Like many other people, I now have strong doubts about the need for repeated vaccinations.  When many people now do not routinely booster their dogs, how come there haven't been mass outbreaks of the diseases vaccinated against?  It also doesn't seem to be widely appreciated amongst people who have their dogs routinely vaccinated that the drug companies only say the drugs are safe if given to healthy animals (and unhealthy can just mean stressed).  I have tried to read up on the views of the pros and antis (which are of course poles apart) but find it very disturbing that there appear to be no independent studies available.  If the drug companies are so sure that repeated vaccinations are necessary for dog health and are not harmful, why don't they commission a full independent study of all the options (including nosodes) and publish the results for all to read?  They have the money to do this and I feel such a review is long overdue.  I for one am inclined to wonder about their motives for not doing this.  What are other people's views?

As long as about 80% of dogs are vaccinated the diseases should be kept at bay. If it vaccination level falls below that (as we see with humans) then outbreaks occur.

It seems there is no scientific way to measure the effectiveness (or otherwise) of homoeopathic medicines in general, and nosodes are no different. Perhaps the KC or some such independent body could commission a study? I feel one commissioned by the drug companies would be no more balanced than one commissioned by the homoeopathic companies - neither side would be unbiased.

The drug companies that make the vaccines have no scientific eveidence to see if boosters are necessary, its just accepted they are needed, so why the need to have scientific research for h/pathy? Whats sauce for the goose & all that :)

Christine, Spain.

It would be fair if all methods were judged on a level playing-field. Let's have scientific evidence for both. As you say, what's sauce for the goose...
:)

Yes but at the moment its not fair is it J/G! No scientific evidence for them anywhere, yet people are afraid not to have them done yearly......come on wheres fair in that? Why have scientific studies for h/pathy? If the majority of people can accept boosters are needed without evidence surely h/pathy can be accepted without? I know I don`t need evidence, I`ve got all I need watching my dogs :)

Christine, Spain.

It's all down to a matter of belief at the moment, Christine, which is why I'd like independent evidence (judged on the same criteria) for or against both. Then I'll know I'm making my own choice through evidence and not faith. And everyone else can do the same.
:)

EXACTLY Jeangenie,  You and Christine are showing very clearly my dilemma!  You seem to be pro and Christine is obviously anti but there is no scientific work which has been done by an independent body who has no vested interest either way.  That is what I want to see happening so that people can read unbiased evidence and then make up their own minds.  I am only suggesting the drug companies finance this as they obviously have the resources and also a good motive if they truly believe these boosters benefit dogs.  If it were overseen by say the KC, that would be good.  BTW JG, I would imagine annual booster vaccination levels are already below 80% yet there has been no outbreak.  When some parents stopped giving MMR vaccinations to their children recently, there was almost immediately an increase in those illnesses.

So why question boosters now J/G, whats happened to the belief that they were needed all along without any scientific evidence whatsoever? All those people who booster aren`t questioning it.
I am still asking why should there be any for h/pathy?? I don`t need it & I`m pretty sure the people who use it don`t need any so who would it be for? The disbelievers?? So that brings me back to they don`t need any for boosters.......
Christine, Spain.

I'm not questioning them, Christine!  I have my beliefs, just as you have yours (and both are equally valid! ;) ). Many people who do booster are questioning it - you only have to read this forum! I think open independent evidence would be of benefit to everyone, so nobody has to rely on the anecdotal evidence of you, me or anyone else. But it would only be fair evidence if all methods are judged to the same criteria.
:)

Hi Christine,  Don't think JG was questioning it, just saying both sides should be judged on the same basis. I certainly am questioning it and I'm sure a good many other people are too.  As for your question, the people who need the evidence are the people like me who are undecided which way to go and aren't getting any help because there are no independent studies on the subject!!  Also, if we are ever going to get changes in the viewpoints of pet insurance companies and kennels, we need to have all the facts clearly laid out and accepted.  I could argue that people who give boosters now are doing so because such a study hasn't be done and people who have gone down the nosode route would surely be pleased if their beliefs were vindicated too.  Like JG, I would really like all the facts made clear without bias so I  and others could make up our own minds.

Annie & J/G, the conditions the dogs would have to be kept in for such trials to be accepted would be unacceptable to the majority of pet owners. The drug manu`s also wouldn`t want to spend that kind of money! Intervet, the makers of one of the vax for ditemper & parvo, nobivac, already state on their website that their vax last for 3yrs & only need to be done every 3yrs. Because of this kennel owners & insurers are being challenged because to do them yearly is going against the manus guidlines, also think the local authorities wording on pets needing boosters needs looking at because don`t think it actually states vax need doing yearly?
Annie do a search on my old posts & you`ll find links to articles I`ve put on, about what Shultz, Dodds & others have to say about how long duration is of vax :)

Christine, Spain.

There is already scientific unbiased evidence Annie that boosters aren`t needed & people don`t believe it. Done by expert virologists Like Schultz, Dodds etc, they don`t work for drug companies, good job too cos if they did I would never believe them!!!!

Christine, Spain.

Where do I find it Christine?  BTW, I've just got Catherine O'Driscoll's book 'Who Killed the Darling Buds of May?' out of the library, which will probably scare me stiff!

That's why I don't think studies commissioned or financed by any company would be accepted by 'the other side'. They would need to be seen to be completely independent, which is why I think the KC would be ideal.

My annually-boostered dogs live into their teens (over breed average age) and I'm very happy with that. Years ago our un-boostered dog died of hepatitis. I wouldn't wish that on any dog.
:)

'Years ago our un-boostered dog died of hepatitis'

...and years ago my dog died of hepatitis which he caught from the booster !

We only have our own experiences to go on, Joyce, and we make our decisions based upon them.
:)

Thank you J/G - I think I came across that little gem quite some time ago :)

What little gem?

...that 'we only have our own experiences to go on and we make our decisions based on them'

.... just thought it was a superfluous statement really.

But many people want more, Joyce. Perhaps I should have stressed the 'only'.

And mine died from parvo but was also suffering from sterile Idiopathic Nodular Panniculitis directly caused by the vaccine he`d been given a couple of wks earlier, this was less than 4yrs ago. And its still going on, animals dying after having vaccinations!
My decision not to vaccinate anymore was based not only on my own dogs terrible experiences with them, but other people I spoke to who also had horrifying results caused by them. And of course spending many hours of research into them & finding out the facts, which is, they are not harmless, they are not 100% guaranteed to give protection, that they rely purely on being able to stimulate the bodys immune system to produce antibodies & should only be given to healthy animals. I`ve come to the conclusion that there are better ways & the most important one is to keep my dogs healthy with the emphasis on a strong immune system. :)
I still don`t understand why people want scientific studies for h/pathy when they are quite prepared to accept annual boosters are needed when there is & never has been any scientific evidence for them for all these years???

Christine, Spain.

>I still don`t understand why people want scientific studies for h/pathy when they are quite prepared to accept annual boosters are needed when there is & never has been any scientific evidence for them for all these years???

But Christine, you misunderstand me. I want independent scientific studies for both (or any other method that I've not heard about yet). When I've been prescribed homoeopathic medicines before (we have a h/p GP in our practice) they haven't had any discernable effect - and nor have they when I've used them (fragaria specifically) on my dogs. So at the moment all I have to rely on is personal experience, and it seems that's all anyone has to rely on. But how can a newcomer make an informed decision when there's no independent unbiased evidence?

J/G I`ve given the links to the only research I know thats been done on boosters by Schultz etc many times. It`s independent unbiased and you still question it, what more do you want? If you are looking for a straight for straight forward answer I can tell you, there isn`t one. Any body, animal or human is so complex & individual the scientists don`t fully understand it yet, I expect they never will either.
You have not questioned boosters before & from what I`ve gathered have always been in favour of them so why do you want scientific evidence now? Tell me something, even though you know there is no evidence for them being needed, why do you still favour them & when did you first become aware there isn`t any evidence for them?
I`ve used h/pathy a few times & I can say I have seen it work :)
I think newcomers to both of these things should go into it with an open mind, read & learn about them as much as they can & then they will be able to make an informed choice :)
You know not everything can have a clear cut scientific answer, thats why when things go wrong with vaccines the makers can turn round & say to you *prove it*

Christine, Spain.

Yes, Christine, I am in favour of boosters. But I'm always prepared to change my mind if there's enough evidence that I'm wrong. From what I've read so far (including your links, thank you for them, they're interesting) there isn't. We're all entitled to our opinions.

You've seen homoeopathy work. I haven't. As you say, all organisms react differently. If h/p works for some, great. If convential vaccines work for others, equally great. The important thing is that our dogs shouldn't get these illnesses, not the method by which they avoid them.
:)

But J/G, leaving h/pathy aside for now & talk about boosters, what more scientific evidence is needed? Theres more than one expert saying & publishing their unbiased scientific trials they probably last a lifetime & one of the major manufacturers of vax telling you that their vax are guaranteed for 3yrs. Yet you say you would like to see more trials, but you still believe in boostering even though that is & always has been done without ANY scientific trials at all?? I don`t understand why at all, because you are believing in something thats got no proof its ever been needed yet you want proof its not needed....

I wholeheartedly agree, our dogs shouldn`t get those diseases but imagine how or what you`d think if they got any of those diseases from the very thing that was supposed to protect them from it......

Christine, Spain.

Christine, my personal view is that, as I have never had any personal experience that boosters do any harm, and my dogs, when boostered, have never caught any of the diseases boostered against, the only reason to change their regime would be to save a few pounds. Which seems a bit pennypinching, though a perfectly valid reason. As in so many things, if it ain't broke (and I've not personally met any dogs who've had adverse reactions, though I don't disbelieve people who tell me they have) I don't see any need to fix it.

For me, experimenting with my dogs' health would be like playing Russian roulette. I can quite appreciate others will feel differently, and I respect their views, as I expect them to respect mine.
:)

Whether or not you`ve had personal experience of adverse reactions J/G is immaterial, whether you like it or not you are experimenting with your dogs as its a practice thats happening without any scientific evidence or proof that boosters are or were ever needed. That is a fact & I would have thought that with someone like yourself who likes to have proof or evidence/facts etc for most things, you would also need the same for boosters.
Now lets see, penny pinching? how much do they cost? £15/20/25/30 are prices I`ve seen quoted here on this board, per dog, multiply that by 2/3/4 dogs. I can tell you I was charged nearly 4yrs ago for 9 pupppy first vaccs £15 per pup, add to that £20 each for my 7 adult dogs, hardly cheap is it? Well not in my books it isn`t.
*and I've not personally met any dogs who've had adverse reactions, though I don't disbelieve people who tell me they have)* 
I would surely hope you do believe me J/G :) Just as surely as I hope you`re not casting aspersions by making that comment :) But anyone who has any doubts about what happened to my pups can have a copy of what I wrote of that time & what has been posted all over the internet & also sent to the firm, Merial, the makers of the vaccine that was used on my pups. I also name the vets who treated my pups, their opinions & they have copies also. :) Tell the truth & you can`t go wrong is one of my mottos :)

Christine, Spain.

ps. I respect everyones views, choices, opinions but please don`t ask for scientific evidence for something when the practice of boostering yearly that you are using doesn`t have any itself. That is definately one sided.

>Tell the truth & you can`t go wrong is one of my mottos

I couldn't agree more. Why do you think I might be lying when I say I believe what you say? And why won't you, in turn, believe me?

>Whether or not you`ve had personal experience of adverse reactions J/G is immaterial,

But I thought it was your personal experiences that stopped you vaccinating, or have I misunderstood?  So are you saying that your experiences are valid and mine are immaterial? If so, then there's absolutely no point in continuing this debate.

*Why do you think I might be lying when I say I believe what you say? *
Because of this comment you made
* though I don't disbelieve people who tell me they have*
I don`t see the need for you to have said that, unless you had any doubts about what happened to my pups.

*And why won't you, in turn, believe me?*
I don`t know what you`ve told me that I`ve said I don`t believe???

Christine, Spain.

>I don`t see the need for you to have said that, unless you had any doubts about what happened to my pups.

Oh for heaven's sake! That was supposed to be reassurance that I wasn't being snide and doubting you!!! If I hadn't read your posts before over the years I'd get the impression that you were paranoid.

Look. I believe you. Why on earth would I not? Why are you calling me a liar?

OK OK ok don`t shout at me, I surrender(under protest)! I hear you. Put it down to me reading it wrong alright??? Hmmm paranoid....me... always reminds me of Frankie Howard or was it the other feller, infamy infamy they`ve all got it informe lol :D :D

Now I put a lot of other stuff in mt post but I see you`ve only picked up one or 2 things & ignored the rest J/G......

Christine, Spain.

I apologise, Christine. Which bits have I ignored, and I'll reply (as long as you promise to believe me! ;) )

Ohhhh J/G I surrender I really do every time I post you`ve gone & posted another 2 posts to my 1!!!!! or edited the previous one!!!!!
I gotta go to bed now & you`ve made me miss all the tele since 9 ish!!!!
My only consolation is I`ll be up bright eyed n bushy tailed before most of you tho(have the advantage of hour early here ;) ) & I`ll have the board to myself in peace & quite, be able to hear meself think!! ;) :) :D

Christine, Spain.

Hi J/G, firstly I do respect yours & everybody elses right to decide fro themselves whats best for their own dogs :)
But there are a couple of things I`d like to ask you, one of them is do you or don`t you believe/accept any of the few, published independant studies that has been done on duration of immunity of vaccines? And why do you believe boosters are necessary & if not why not? And if your vet uses Intervet vaccines would you still insist he boosters your animals every year, even tho they state they are only needed every 3yrs?
By the way, this isn`t only directed at you, its just that it was us ended up disussing it, so I`d like to hear answers from anybody else who boosters. :)

Christine, Spain.

Hi Christine. Yes I have read several studies about duration of vaccines, and I must admit I find it very hard to find out if they're truly independent or commissioned by a particular group or affiliation who would like the results weighted in their favour. :( (Yes, I'm cynical like that.)

To make a true comparison I'd like to read similar independent studies into h/p nosodes, herbal treatments etc, and the results of the trials. In an ideal world there would be definitive studies done and all published in layman's language and in one place! I'm not a scientist and very technical papers baffle me!

Just as an example: if I had two pieces of rock, and I wanted to know whether they were both chalk, I wouldn't subject one to chemical analysis to see if it contained calcium carbonate, and accept the other as being chalk because it was white! Extreme I know, but for the results to be valid, both pieces of rock would have to undergo the same tests. That's all I want for vaccine judgement - parity of evaluation.

From what I've read I now have my dogs boostered every year for lepto and my 12 year-old this year was the first to be only boostered for that - she'll have the full range next year. The others will follow the same regime when the time comes for their boosters; lepto every year and the rest every two years - unless disaster strikes and they become ill, when they immediately go back to the full whack every year, despite the additional price.

Hope this helps.
:)

J/G, why do you think they are not independent? You could always email Scultz, Dodds etc. themselves to find out :D  but I really do believe if they were anything other than independent & had some hidden agenda it would have come out by now. They are not for or against any group, they are individuals doing studies that the drug companies should be doing. And after all, its good enough to be accepted by the AAHA & at least 27 teaching Vet Unis in USA :) There is also a published trial done by a N.Z virologist on duration of immunity, I`ve put that link on in the past but I suppose you`ll be cynical about that as well?
You say you are vaccinating every 2yrs now, is that because you don`t (or your vet doesn`t) use Nobivac or because you don`t believe the manu`s?
Yes there should be more trials, I`ve been saying this for a long time now but I`ve stopped hoping now :( I think they`ll be a long time coming. The only good thing thats come about recently is Nobivac guaranteeing theirs for 3yrs, but I`m not sure you take even their word & they are biased for themselves :D
I`ve put a couple links on about Shultz/Dodds one or 2 are pretty new

http://www.vetmed.wisc.edu/people/ronald%20d%20schultz
http://www.dogs4sale.com.au/AAHA_Special_Report.htm
http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=46546
http://www.itsfortheanimals.com/DODDS-VAC-LEGISL.HTM

Christine, Spain.

*>Whether or not you`ve had personal experience of adverse reactions J/G is immaterial,*

My exact words J/G were :-

*My decision not to vaccinate anymore was based not only on my own dogs terrible experiences with them, but other people I spoke to who also had horrifying results caused by them. And of course spending many hours of research into them & finding out the facts, which is, they are not harmless, they are not 100% guaranteed to give protection, that they rely purely on being able to stimulate the bodys immune system to produce antibodies & should only be given to healthy animals.*

Christine, Spain.

Christine, as I keep repeating, I accept you've had bad experiences with vaccines and that has turned you off them. That's your right, and I'm not challenging that.

All I ask is that you accept that I haven't had any bad experiences, and I haven't been turned off them. What's so wrong with that?

I'm not implying you're wrong, so please do me the same honour.

Many people are asking what is the right thing to do for their dogs. For that they can either rely on anecdotal or scientific evidence. To be able to make an informed decision between all the options each alternative must logically be subjected to the same analysis. Then everyone can make their choice based on facts.

>My decision not to vaccinate anymore was based not only on my own dogs terrible experiences with them, but other people I spoke to who also had horrifying results caused by them.

Are you not equally influenced by people who've had no ill effects from them?

No J/G, not now. When I used to do them by the book I did have misgivings(never acted on them, silly me) but relied on my vets advice & lot of people who`d never had a prob with them. After what happened to that litter I couldn`t let it go & started asking questions & more questions. So to the people who`ve never had any probs with vax I can only say, adverse reactions take many many forms & some are so insiduous & occur much later than the actual day of the vaccinethe problem doesn`t get associated with it. And as for reporting them, well hardly anybody does that & so makes the sarrs studies a joke!!!
Now I`m influenced by expert vets & I`ve spoken to a few personally & other dog owners who think like myself but most of all I have more confidence in my own judgement than anyone else over vaccine issues :)

Christine, Spain.

The only research/study I am aware of was carried out by the Canine Health Census which showed that at least 50% of the dogs with viral diseases contracted them within three months of being vaccinated........(100% in the case of leptospirosis)

Yes Joyce, thats the only one I know of too, but of course because it wasn`t done in controlled scientific studies folk disregard it :(
Of course a lot of those same people still don`t accept Shultz, Dodds etc studies that vaccines last at least 7yrs & most probably for life....

Christine, Spain.

Have to say that my dog hasn't received a booster since he was about 8 and he is now 12.1/2 and according to the vet this week in very good health for his age.  I stopped giving him boosters as he was suffering severely from wet eczema every summer and the vet wasn't prepared to vaccinate him when he had this.  At the moment, if I got another puppy I would probably have the initial jabs done but I'm not sure I would have any boosters after that.

I have decided not to booster every year, apart from lepto. This was decided after reading the 2001 survey results and lots of discussions with various people and reading where possible. General concensus seems to be that dogs over 10 shouldn't be boostered at all. According to someone that I know who runs a pet crematorium, older dogs run a high risk of problems after boosters - but she is a firm believer in boosters every 3 years for younger dogs (yearly for lepto) - this based on many things, but also seeing the results of not vaccinating/boostering coming into the crematorium :(

Daisy

Hi Daisy,  But isn't it true that it is Lepto vaccinations which causes the majority of reaction problems and also that the immunity given by the jab is very short lived?  This is another thing that could be covered by an independent study, as well as average lifespans for vaccinated and non-vaccinated dogs.

Hi everyone, when i was younger we had a dobermann.  When he was a puppy he had his first innoculations but never had any after that and he lived until he was sixteen! which is an excellent age for a dobermann.  In the end he died of crstals in the bladder from feeding dry food.

Annie you have hit a raw nerve here. It really bothers me that no one is prepared to do scientific tests unless they make money out of it and the KC is too complacent and fuddy duddy to step in to the breach. Even a study of registered show dogs would be a good start. Lord knows they must have a big enough data base of owners. Guess that would still not be acceptable to some as it would not be in lab contitions, but it would certainly be better than hearsay.

A good friend of mine who runs dog training classes has her dogs blood tested and in the 5 years to date the only thing that they have needed boosting on is Lepto. 

Me too Bluebell!  It's not fair to dog owners that they aren't given impartial and up to date advice so they can choose the best option for their dogs.  I won't be vaccinating Oscar again now anyway but would like the information so I can make an informed decision should I decide to get another dog.  Perhaps we should all start lobbying the Kennel Club!

I thought blood (titre) tests weren't effective for Lepto?  If they don't investigate any other vaccine, I think they should Lepto as it seems to have very limited effectiveness and apparently causes the worst adverse reactions.  Is the benefit worth the risk?

Trouble is Annie ns that the first thing the KC should do is insist on DNA profiling for all registered dogs that way we may be able to stop a number of inherited diseases and hopefully reduce the worst effects of puppy farming. Unfortunately the KC doesnt see itself as a campaigning organisation, infact I think it still sees itself as a bit of a 'gentlemans club'. They could certainly raise more funds quite easily, for instance I applied for a stand at Crufts, in the full knowledge that there wouldnt be one available, but in the hope of getting on a waiting list. I have written every year for the past 3 years and have yet to recieve so much as an acknowledgement!

Recently I have read that the reason there have been no studies is because the length of the study would have to be tremendous...measuring several or more years...to judge the effects of not boostering your dogs.  I have read studies by 2 veterinary schools (who's students would eventually stand to make money from yearly boosters) stating that they are not necessary.  They recommend, instead, 3 year boosters, much like rabies. 

I have fostered several dogs with Kennel Cough...the only dogs in my house that they passed it on to were those that were vaccinated.  The un-boostered dogs remained KC free.  That made my final decision.  Until I read more, my dogs will be boostered every 3 years and only for viruses/diseases prevelant in my area.