Hi everyone. :D Could i pick your brains about something please?  ;-)
I got a letter from our vets this morning saying that Tyson needs to have his annual revaccination by the 7th May. I've heard a lot of different opinions on boosters and was wondering what everyone here thought about it. I have also heard of some horror stories where peoples dogs have died shortly after being given their boosters. :-(
I certainly dont want to put Tyson at any risk. So, i'm pretty confused as to what to do. 
Any advise will be greatly appreciated. :-)

For what it's worth I've had 22 dogs over the years and each and every one has had their yearly booster without a problem.

I don't do routine annual boosters - puppy vac, 3 years later next vac - after that zippo, zilch, nada unless titre tests show a need to do otherwise :)  You'll get oodles of different opinions and personal peferences- good luck!  Mine are never kennelled so not an issue for me.

regards, Teri

If you want to use the conventional vaccination routine, then it would be worth looking up the vaccine that had been used on Tyson last year and then research on the net to see when the manufacturer advises for boosters.  You can then discuss it with your Vet to see if there are any problems in your local area.

Thanks everyone. :-) I have looked up the manufacturers site and printed off some info from there. It says...

Booster vaccination

It is recommended that dogs be revaccinated with canine distemper virus, canine adenovirus and canine parvovirus every 3 years and against canine parainfluenza virus every year. 

It was not possible to produce clinical signs of kennel cough by parainfluenza challenge in adult dogs and duration of immunity could not therefore be demonstrated, but an anamnestic response was seen in dogs given a booster one year after primary vaccination.

Revaccination against parainfluenza is recommended prior to exposure to high risk environments (such as kennelling, showing or mixing with dogs of unknown vaccination history).

So...does that mean he wont need the booster? (my brain is on a go slow today :rolleyes: ) Can i just get a canine parainfluenza virus jab instead??

Well it certainly means that he doesn't need vaccinating for canine distemper virus, canine adenovirus and canine parvovirus unless there is a specific outbreak in your area!  I would definitely discuss it with your Vet before punping him full of stuff that even the manufacturer says that he doesn't need.

Also check with your dog insurers - just incase you invalidate any policy by NOT vaccinating every year.

You are NOT invalidating your insurance if you use the vax giving cover for 3/4 yrs which all in UK now give to the 3 serious canine diseases.

You will be following the manufacturers recommendations.

Intervet have it on their website ;) :D

Individual decision I think. I've boostered mine without any problems but a friend of mine lost her dog to a booster (and it was the same one she had had three years on the trot).
It's a subject worth looking into. There is no need to have boosters every year for the same thing. Your vet should be honest about this and there is of course titre testing to see if they need it. You now have homepathic vaccination. People I know have used this and never lost a dog through illness or ever had kennel cough.
I have absolute faith in my vet (also a friend). Mine are only done for what they need when they need it. The whole every 12 months thing according to my vet is nothing more than profit making.
There are so many booster injections out there. It's making sure the vet uses the best one health wise for your dog, not the one that makes them the most profit.
I think it comes down to your own personal choice. What you are comfortable with.

Never had a problem with vaccinations for the 40 years I have owned dogs.  Lost one to distemper when I was a child.

Ditto.

Lost one to aftermaths of distemper in -2000.........

lost one to a booster vaccination 10 years ago....

This is a genuine question, nothing else. How does anyone KNOW a dog that gets ill or dies just after being vaccinated was affected by the vaccine and not somehting else, and that it wasn't co-incidence? What proof is there? I had a pup once who was due to be vaccinated, then it had to be put off for a few days, and the day after she was due to have been done she had an epileptic fit. Now I am sure a lot of people would have said it was caused by the vaccine if she'd HAD the vaccine the day before as planned -and I might have been inclined to think so myself because of the timing. How does anyone find out if a vaccine caused something, for certain I mean?

That's something I've always wondered too, Marianne. Just because something happens after something else, it doesn't mean that the second thing was directly caused by the first.

Good point :)  There is a 1 in 12 chance of an illness or event occuring within a month of vaccination and youngsters in particular are quite likely to be ill or have events anyway.  Even the chance of having something the very next day is only 1 in 365, not that long odds really but human nature would make us bound to consider it unlikely to be down to chance.....and yet we think the 1 in 14 million chance of winning the lottery is quite possible ;)

Our Cavalier died from his reaction to the vaccine He became ill at the vets & his immune system went into meltdown. The injection site had a huge lump appeared & he swelled up & died of heart failure

When the PM was done on him(by an independant pathologist)the blood work up & organs showed it was the vaccine that had caused the damage & his death.

The vaccine company refused to accept the PM results because the pathologist wasn't a veterinary surgeon. No she isn't, but she is one of the top forsenic pathologists in Europe & probably  the world. She does both human & non human work for the government in this country & abroad, but she isn't qualified enough for the Vaccine company. She has taken this up on a personal level with the vaccine company as they wrote a very disparaging remarks about her "lack"of qualifications to carry out the PM. BTW in the past she had done work for the same vaccine company !

Thanks MM -that's what I wanted to know about, any cases where a PM etc had been done -also from what you describe it sounded pretty obvious to be related to the vaccine. All I've ever heard up until now is stories like "my dog got ill the day after" but never any further explanation.

It seems to me then it certainly DOES happen -but not necessarily in as many cases as people think.

So even though you're now convinced by MM's case, you're still willing to state "It seems to me then it certainly DOES happen -but not necessarily in as many cases as people think."

If you hadn't previously heard of MM's case which you now accept, who is to say just how many other genuine cases there are that you haven't heard about or have previously dismissed?  Not picking a fight here :), just stating that you don't have enough evidence to make such a general statement.

I think a PM report would always be very good evidence! ;) Without that it can only be supposition. :)

And who is to say there haven't been PM reports JG?  Some people are still very hard to convince!  Let's face it, some people will always be pro booster vaccination and others anti and never the twain shall meet. :)  I don't see the point in repeating old ground here, let's just give our own experiences and let the OP make up his/her own mind.

I'm sure there have been PM reports, Annie - but Moonmaiden's one of the few people I've heard of who's had one done. Most people don't - and quite understandably too. I sincerely wish all PM reports were published. Mostly you hear tales like Marianne's would have been - the pup had a vaccination and the next day had a fit; but her's is one case where it can be proven that the fit was nothing to do with the vaccine. Statistically she's unlikely to be the only one. ;) Good science relies purely on evidence, not anecdotes. Anecdotes certainly have their value to give ideas as to what research is needed - but they can never be considered 'evidence'. :)

And who is to say there haven't been PM reports JG?

This is exactly why I ASKED! I wanted to find out if there ever WERE PMs done or other tests of dogs that survived. As so far all I'd ever heard was hearsay/opinion.

Oh just to add I should have added a few smileys because I didn't want that above to sound angry, not the intention at all, but it looked bad once it came up! Sorry! :)

If you hadn't previously heard of MM's case which you now accept, who is to say just how many other genuine cases there are that you haven't heard about or have previously dismissed?  Not picking a fight here :-), just stating that you don't have enough evidence to make such a general statement.

WHAT general statement? MM proved to me she'd HAD a proven case which is what I asked for. I don't disbelieve her at all. Hence it seems to me, like I said, it does happen, but in a lot of cases where there is no proof we can never be sure therefore many cases are quite possibly caused by something else.  I remember well the Canine Health Census survey where you had to fill in a sheet stating if any illness your dog had ever suffered from had occured either 1,2,3, etc up to 12 months since last vaccination -well there was NO proof asked for there, or even opinion if the illness was related to the vaccination (I mean if my dog got infected with kennel cough at dog club 2 weeks after being vaccinated I wouldn't think it had anyting to do with the vaccine), and so it was easily done by those wanting to make a point to say they'd been contacted by x number of people whose dogs had been taken ill within a month of being vaccinated......... And there are a LOT of people that would have said of my pup that her fit was caused by being vaccinated, HAD she had the vaccine on the day that was planned.

"It seems to me then it certainly DOES happen -but not necessarily in as many cases as people think."

The above was the general statement that I was referring to Marianne. :)

Hearsay evidence is always going to be questionable but I doubt anyone who lived in the days before the majority of dogs were vaccinated would really doubt there is less illness and incident now.  We also have things like the Pooch report to independantly confirm the low incidence of vaccinosis. 
No one doubts some individuals have suffered but the vast majority have benefited.

You may think that Isabel and are entitled to your opinion. :)   I'm not sure I would agree that the Pooch report was independent when it says 'The study was funded by members of the National Office of Animal Health (NOAH), the trade association for the manufacturers of licensed animal medicines'.  

>NOAH submitted a proposal for a scientifically valid study, but AHT stressed that they were prepared to undertake the project only on the clear contractual understanding that the work would be completely independent and that NOAH could not influence either the outcome or the eventual publication of the results.

And to take it a stage further, if it's proven that an event was due to vaccine reaction, how does one know if it's a fault in the vaccine or a fault in the animal? After all, some people die from reactions to eating peanuts, but for the huge majority they do no harm and are a useful food source. I suppose it's a question of numbers, like the old LD50 test. If 50% have a bad reaction it can be considered dangerous.

Or resulting from the practicalities of the giving the vaccine.  Hairy animals do not lend themselves to offering a clean area to administer the injection and avoid bacteria being introduced into the blood stream.  Some of the events described sound rather like infection/septicaemia to me.

Some of the events described sound rather like infection/ to me.

Sorry Isabel but you are wrong in our dogs case. The blood results & other tests done showed the reaction was caused by the vaccine, I'm no scientific expert but the results were explained to me in layman's terms & the vaccine company couldn't fault the way the tests were carried out so they fell back on the fact that the pathologist wasn't a qualified veterinary surgeon & had no qualification for carrying out the tests(load of b*ll**ks of course few of their employees who develop the vaccines are qualified vets(if any) & she had done work for them before on animals !!)

Isabel did say 'some', and not 'all' - or even 'most'. ;)

I couldn't really comment MM I'm not a vet either :)
I think we really need to keep an eye on the language that is creeping into the forum though, we know this is read by several young people and I don't think asterisks really disguise it :)

Oh ok then it was a load of ********

Isabel is also very wrong in our dogs case too!
Maria

One of the first things a vet does with an ill dog is blood tests, scepticaemia would show up. In my pups case the illness he had came back confirmed sterile panniculitis.

Many cases mentioned on the internet and elsewhere are not PMed or investigated in any depth.

Quite a few are now tho Isabel. Many people are more clued up & things can be proved a lot more now, lot more even than when my pup had his reaction & that was only 5 yrs ago.

ps my pup had blood tests done after a couple of days with going ill & when they came back sterile more we`re taken to retest & some sent to UK. Blood tests are very routinely done nowadays

I'm sure if it happened to one of your dogs Isabel, you'd investigate thouroughly, PM and the drug companies and vets would be hung, drawn and quartered!

Yes, I would investigate but I would not be looking to blame the drug company or the vet as I vaccinate on the understanding that all drugs have a risk but I have a much greater benefit to be reaped.  Nor would I stop vaccinating my dogs.

I don't believe you wouldn't blame the drug companies or the vets Isabel - you are quite intelligent and even more verbose!  Pity you have 'tunnel vision'!
Maria 

>Pity you have 'tunnel vision'

If I wasn't mindfull of the TOS as regards personal comments I might say the same about you ;) 
The benefits of vaccine has revolutionised human and animal health but I understand that no drug can be given without any risk.  No effect on the body, no point.  Understanding that, how can I blame someone else if I am the unlucky one.

I had an allergic reaction to penicillin -but I don't blame the drug company. Others benefit from the same drugs that could kill me.

So you don`t continue to take it knowing that. Quite a number of dogs are still vaxed even tho they`ve already had a reaction to it.

What level of reaction do you mean though Christine.  I have had dogs "off colour" following a vaccination but haven't been any worse on subsequent occasions. 

Off Colour, how very fortunate for you! not having one that has suffered horrific pain and death!  Do not try to preach to those that have experienced so much more!

I think you need to consider the nature of your personal comments.  I am not preaching I am giving my opinion.  Of course I am lucky never to have seen a severe reaction but then the odds are stacked in my favour :)

Argh well there are varying degrees of *reactions* ;)  from mild to mortal.

Any that endangers life or damages the immune system.

So you don`t continue to take it knowing that. Quite a number of dogs are still vaxed even tho they`ve already had a reaction to it.

And how is that the drug company's fault and not the owner's? And what is worse, the reaction which they clearly did not die from, or getting distemper or parvo? The answer would surely have to depend on that.