The vets fault surely for vaxing an unhealthy dog. Manu`s clearly state *only healthy dogs to be vaxed*

Did I say it was the manu`s fault?

If a reaction causes death or is life threatening then the diease may be preferable.

Did the owner/s tell the vet/s about the adverse reactions? If so, why did they allow the vet to vax again? You're right, the waters are indeed very muddy, especially when it seems impossible to get all the facts, because the details are all second- or third-hand. :(

Surely the vet should tell the owners of the risks? Our dog Spangler reacted the day after his vaccine, how could we tell the vet that was going to happen to him? The vet accepts the vaccine was the cause and so does the drug company who have offered to pay for the treatment! I'm sure if it was their dog or yours that suffered the chest splitting open (sorry  have to be so graffic but you are out of your depth) you'd feel differently!  The disease is easier to cure than the reaction. Muddy/woolly or foggy - no plain and simple CLEAR

MariaC, nobody's doubting that some individuals, such as yours, Moonmaiden's, and Christine's, tragically suffer reactions from medicines, and it's devastating for all concerned. Each of these situations must undoubtedly be investigated, reported officially and recorded.

However for millions of other individuals there will be no such reaction, and for them prevention remains better than cure.

Jeangenie - I was in the same mindset as you, naively thinking vaccine is the best, the vet knows best!!   Sometimes we are brought down to earth with a huge thump.  As I  said, you are fortunate this hasn't happened to one of your dogs.  But surely, reading what has happened to just the 3 people you mention on this website should prove to you that reactions are more commonplace that people want to believe - and yes it is wanting to believe in a false sense of security, nanny state call it what you like.    I've had one beautiful dog, he died from a vaccine, if I was thinking the same way as you I'd have evidence that vaccines are 100% dangerous. My argument is over vaccinating, and making people aware of the dangers for and against and offering the choice - hope you understand this?  I'll go onto say that I know lots of people with healthy old dogs - all none vaccinated - I should have taken my lead from them, instead of outdated science!
Maria

My family had a dog die of distemper when I was young. That's not nice either, for dog or owner. Apparently he'd had puppy jabs but not boosters. My adult experience is of dogs living well into their teens, being boostered every year. I accept that there are risks, but they're risks I'm prepared to take - that's my choice having seen one of the alternatives which has affected my judgment. The alternative you've seen has equally affected yours. Neither of us is right or wrong.

This website has about 7,000 members, many of whom have had multiple dogs over many years. For three members to have had bad experiences is a tragedy for each individual, but a very small proportion taken as a whole.

I've had a dog die of distemper.  Those that survive often suffer severe long term, life shortening effects. I don't think curing the disease is as easy as you think.

I had a litter of pups go down with parvo after their first vax, one of them also contracted an horrendous disease caused by the vax.

The pups with parvo made a full recovery except the pup who had the autoimmune disease, he died & if I`d have known beforehand what was going to happen I`d not have had them vaxed. Believe me, the disease caused by the vax was horrendous & if he`d lived it wouldn`t have been a good life :(

Yes I agree with Christine, Spangler's immune system was attacked by the vaccine!

"had a litter of pups go down with parvo after their first vax, one of them also contracted an horrendous disease caused by the vax.

The pups with parvo made a full recovery except the pup who had the autoimmune disease, he died & if I`d have known beforehand what was going to happen I`d not have had them vaxed. Believe me, the disease caused by the vax was horrendous & if he`d lived it wouldn`t have been a good life :-("

While I sympathise with how awful a time that must have been for you and the pups I just wanted to say this:  If you hadn't had the pups vaccinated and all of them had still come down with parvo then the liklihood is that more than one of them (if not all) would have died.  To lose one pup to a reaction to the vaccine was awful but to lose all in such a horrendous way would have been a tragedy :(

Most responsable peeps go the vets if their animal shows illness after being vaxed (or anytime) surely?

And as you know J/G, if the vet says *poochy* needs his vax most people take him along for it without question.

Why did my vet booster all my adults the day he vaxed my litter with their first puppy vax????? I knew no better at the time. Even tho 2 were on steroids for allergies??????????

In my experience many people take their animal to the vet as a last resort, having done the equivalent of 'take two aspirin and see me in the morning', by which time many cases of being 'off-colour' have passed.

Well I didn`t know that J/G, I thought most go trotting off or at the least have a phone consult, but thats just going by dogs board :(

I used to think so too. :( But even on here there have been posts asking for advice because the dog's had diarrhoea and vomiting for a week - should they go to the vet?! I also came across a woman who took her dog to the vet 5 days after it got a thorn in its eyeball, and it hadn't come out yet ...

The majority of dog owners are not dog experts like most of you on here - and they do go to the vets for every little ailment, not as a last resort!

>>>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.<<<

Thats very worrying, you`d continue to vax even if your dog had an adverse reaction to it :(

Thats very worrying, you`d continue to vax even if your dog had an adverse reaction to it eek :-(


She said dogS, plural, not THE dog. Just like I wouldn't stop my children from taking penicillin because I can't.

Oh my, splitting hairs:rolleyes: does it matter, plural or in the singular

I`m pretty sure my meaning was clear, if Isabels dog or dogs have a reaction to a vax I`d be worried if she still continued to vax it or them

No, I meant my other dogs.

Thanks for the clearing that up :) so you wouldn`t continue vaxing the dog that had an advrese reaction?

Not a severe reaction that left the dog damaged, no.  But my other dogs, I would not hesitate :).

A friend has a collie that had a severe reaction to jabs when young - he suffers from auto-immune disease now. BUT she still vaccinates all her other dogs (she has a lot) and recommends it to others. She has many, many years experience with dogs and sees the results of not vacinnating come through her pet crem :( Her belief is that the advantages more than outweigh the disadvantages :)

Daisy

Her belief is that the advantages more than outweigh the disadvantages :-) so what was the advantage for my dog that died ? The disadvantage was he is dead !

What's the advantage for dogs who die who do NOT get vaccinated ?? :)

I swore that I would NOT become involved in any more threads on vaccination :( Very disappointed in myself :(

Daisy

They don't have their immune systems compromised by over stimulation the same way mine was when I had a cocktail of vaccinations which has left me with autoimmune disease. the only difference being I knew what could happen & chose to make the decision, my dogs don't

Well anyone who is worried about making decisions on behalf of their dogs (children even) shouldn't own them :(

Daisy

Definitely my last post on this subject :D

Well anyone who is worried about making decisions on behalf of their dogs (children even) shouldn't own them :-( 

Oh so I should do what the vet wants & vaccinate dogs whose titre levels(done annually BTW before you ask unless there is a local outbreak of a disease)show they don't need them because the vets know better ?? As far as I am aware there are few GP vets that are canine immunologists so why should they be more knowledgeable about titre tests than the canine immunologist who does them for me ?

I only make informed decisions about my dogs & myself now after making one wrong decision about myself that left me on the verge of death & one wrong decision about a dog that cost the dog it's life

I`ve made my decision & am very happy with it Daisy, no worries at all :D

Daisy, That's ridiculous - if you don't worry you don't care, surely the ones that don't care shouldn't have the children or dogs?

Theres no advantage to anyone, least of all the dogs :(

I had a litter of 10 pups, I didn`t vax them & they never got ill nor died. I stopped boosting my older dogs & they stopped getting allergies & they are still alive.

Not vaccinating does not mean an automatic death sentence.

Of course it's no advantage to an individual the advantage is to the population that might otherwise suffer many more losses.

I would not be looking to blame the drug company or the vet

So it's ok for them not offer full information or offer titre tests to their clients knowing that dogs have died as a direct result of being vaccinated ? If that happened in human beings & not pet dogs the vaccine would be withdrawn from use use as some drugs have been withdrawn

BTW it is very routine in the USA for pets to have PM's done, this is why certain drug/vaccine companies have settled out of court & why vaccine proctols in the USA changed before they did in the UK & why here the old protocols are still being kept to by some vets

Maybe they should explain better :) but I understand the risks and benefits so I would not blame the drug company or vet.

But most of the rest of pet owning population don`t Isabel & for that vets & vax manufacturers must take the blame.

Many people aren't interested in looking into the risk/benefit ratio themselves they are perfectly happy for their vet to do that for them as his professional service.  Apportioning blame for lack of information and blame for adverse events are two different matters and seem to be getting "muddied" here.  The only thing I have said I am happy about is that the manufacturers and vets are not to blame for adverse reactions.

but most are to blame!

Is a doctor or manufacturer to blame if a person has an adverse - whether mild or fatal - reaction to a common medicine (such as penicillin)? Or is it one of those tragic things that happens?

I`ve told you about my mum being given the flu vax, about the nurse without taking her medical history. And when my mum asked her consultant the following year about should she have it again, he told he no. It took little old me hitting the roof when I found out what had happened & my mum to ask. Now 40 odd elderly people all had that flu jab without being asked what meds they were taking. Who knows what insiduous disease has been caused by that. Will anybody put 2+2 together if any of them go down with an auto-immune disease??

I call that tragic & the worst is, thats obviously happening in other places as the *norm* :(

To answer your question J/G, it depends on the individual circumstances, its not black & white. If the doctor gave it knowing the person was allergic to it, he`s responsible. If there was something wrong with the drug, lost its efficacy or been contaminated at source the manufacturers resonsible. Thats very simplistic answer, too many things have to be considered.

>If the doctor gave it knowing the person was allergic to it, he`s responsible. If there was something wrong with the drug, lost its efficacy or been contaminated at source the manufacturers resonsible.

But if none of those bad practices occur and a person/animal just reacts due to it's own make-up, nobody is to blame.

Maybe they aren`t interested & take it for granted that vax are *harmless* because the powers to be have kept the fact they are dangerous & not without risk very quiet?

Both vets & manufacturers are to blame for not making the risks clear & continuing to vax every year without the need for it, thus increasing the risk for adverse reactions. Also for vaxing unhealthy dogs. Thats what I blame them for

You obviously haven't seen a vaccination certificate for some time Christine :).  Mine informs you to contact vet if reaction is severe or prolonged, hardly hiding the fact it might happen.  My vet also has a chart up in her consulting room listing the recommended booster frequencies so again no failure to disclose there.

>Mine informs you to contact vet if reaction is severe or prolonged,

I have Clover's vaccination booklet in front of me now, issued in 1992, and it says exactly the same thing.

I have the ones from 5yrs ago, the booklets by Intervet & ones Fort Dodge but can`t find anything about contacting vet for any reaction

>>You obviously haven't seen a vaccination certificate for some time Christine<<<

Thats true :D lol

Looks like times are changing at long last. Now it just needs peeps to read the things! :D

Although just informing the vet doesnt mean the vet will report the reaction officially to the appropriate people ;)

My current card is 4 years old and JG's is much older, so not exactly new info :)
Personally, I think the main thing is that the profession read and understand the research and calculate the risk/benefits after all they spend years training to evaluate these things, few of the general public ever hone their study skills to the same level even when they launch themselves in the the wonders of the world wide web ;)

>the powers to be have kept the fact they are dangerous & not without risk very quiet?

That may have been so a decade ago, but in more recent years it's been all over the press, both the 'pet-owner's canine magazines and in the national papers.

Yes M/M, more explanation is very much needed.

That's also a VERY interesting point JG. As a comparison to your peanut scenario, there is a disease in cats (always fatal) which is caused by a virus, and for a long while it was believed to be contagious etc-in fact many vets still do tell people it IS -one vet told me when I had a case that I should prepare myself for ALL my cats to die.(That was in 1999 and several of the cats I had then are still here!) It has since been discovered there is a definite genetic link, so that certain lines are likely to develop the illness if exposed to the virus whereas others will not.

A random thought, and probably silly, but a car crash witnessed and reported by several people, is still only a single incident. That's another reason why it's difficult to get hold of accurate figures from anywhere other than official sources.

If my dog has a reaction to something, and I report it, then it's a single incident. If my friends all report that they know someone whose dog had a reaction, that doesn't create more reactions - it's still the single incident. More innocent muddying of the waters!

Also take into account very few cases are reported officially! Even tho vets are *actively encouraged* by their governing body.