I didn't really know what board to put this on but as it is a health issue i decided here would probably be the best place.
Today I took Sassy for her annual booster and was shocked to be told that distemper and parvo are rampant in my area, it is that bad, an animal charity ( i dont know if i can name them here ) is offering free health check and vacination course to anyone who is on low income.  I know that some vets are more expensive than others and in some rural locations people are limited to what vet they can use, but surely it is far better to put aside a little money over the year to make sure your pet is protected than see them fall ill to these terrible diseases which unless caught early can be fatal.

My dog are all titre teated at least once a year & if my friend(who is a very experienced vet BTW)notifies me of any local occurances they are retested. To date none of them has lost any immunity & hence don't need their immune systems "boosting"by vaccines

Hiya Moonmaiden, thank you for your response. I have to admit that it is only recently that i've heard of titre and have found what i've read about it very interesting, have you always used this method with your dogs? I chose for sassy to have her booster this year until i know more about alternative methods. You like everyone else on this forum treasure your animals but sadly there are so many that dont

The trouble is how often do you titre test?  It can only tell you the status at that point.  Once you have gone beyond the assured 3 years cover you are just guessing that yours will be an individual that will maintain immunity until you test again at 4 years and not everybody will have a vet that will call them in to have a test because of an outbreak and what do they do if the outbreak is an on going thing.  It would not do for me, better safe than sorry, particularly if these diseases are on the increase.  I wonder why they are? :rolleyes:

Isabel you will know from my previous replies that I titre test every year as a minimum not every three years & have done so for over 20 years. The first time was at the suggestion of my then vet who was concerned way back in the 1980's about bad reactions to vaccinations & the need for yearly boosters

If there is a local problem they are tested again & my dogs have never needed to be revaccinated

I had my BC titre tested before he was vaccinated & the titre levels showed he needed boosting so he had his puppy vaccs. subsequently he has been tested again & the levels show he has full protection

You always query my posts with the same question how often do I test, the answer is always the same  more frequently that the vaccine companies suggest you boost your dogs. Except for the Lepto vaccine which does not give full protection so my dogs do not have it especially as it is the lepto vacc that causes the most & worst reactions

I don't think you have understood my point :)  I'm not suggesting that you don't titre test shorter than 3 year intervals, although I don't remember ever asking you how often you did it, I believe it was someone else who would not answer that query ;)  What I am saying is, as the bulk of evidence does not support any lasting immunity beyond 3 years, the levels could fall anytime within the next year so is even annually good enough?  Not for me, better safe than sorry.

So my dogs titre level tests that are checked every 12 months are not as good as vaccinating every year ??? How do you know even with yearly vaccinations your dogs are safe ? Remember my friends dog that died of parvo Vaccinated yearly(not 3 yearly)PM showed his immunity was nil  So what value vaccinating if the immunity is nil ?

A dogs immune system that is regularly activated by vaccinations can & have be overwhelmed/damaged beyond healing(just as my own is & mine is also because of overvaccination)leaving it non existant & in some cases it will be damaged & fail to recognize the body's own tissues & start to destroy the body itself

It is a personal choice. You wish to risk your dog's life by over vaccination whilst I monitor my dogs immune system & I repeat todate my dog's titre levels(except as puppies)have always shown them to be as fully covered as your dog may be(if you don't titre test you don't actually know if your dog has any imunity)that is vaccinated yearly. They are our choices

>How do you know even with yearly vaccinations your dogs are safe ?

Because the bulk of the evidence demonstrates that it will be the case for the vast majority.

>You wish to risk your dog's life by over vaccination

Again the bulk of the evidence is that is a far lower risk that not.
I can only repeat, titre testing only tells you what the status is at that given moment.  It is the research that tells us that cover can be effectly assured for 1 year or 3 years, depending on the vaccination, once you go beyond that the titre test cannot predict that cover will last until you test again in a year or whenever.  I could understand if you were going for the belt and braces method of distrusting the research by vaccinating and titre testing to ensure it had been effective :)

Thats a question for the scientists, only they can answer it & they have already by recommending once a year :)

Who recommends once a year?  The BVA?  They recommend regular boosters don't they?

Dr Dodds  http://www.canine-epilepsy-guardian-angels.com/titer_test.htm

Dr Schultz  http://www.news.wisc.edu/story.php?get=8413

>>>The BVA?  They recommend regular boosters don't they?<<<

Don`t know, do they?

We were talking about the bulk of the evidence as accepted by the profession.  We have discussed the accademic process before I think :) but you can refresh your memory as to how it works here.

So its not evidence we are allowed to see?

In US and other countries Dr Schultzs work has been published for all to see, it was his scientific evidence that caused the change of protocol to what we have now :)

Yes I'm afraid that is how peer evaluation works :)  The idea is only a professional is qualified to judge the work of another in the same profession, which makes sense to me and did do to everyone else prior to the internet ;)
Maybe it was Dr Schultz's work :), although last time we discussed him there seemed very little published, but as we said above, you have not seen all the evidence that was considered before protocols were changed so I don't think we can possibly know, I suspect the drug companies did a fair bit of their own :)

Don`t know why you keep insisiting on explaining the process:rolleyes:

>>Based on his findings, a community of canine vaccine experts has developed new veterinary recommendations that could eliminate a dog's need for annual shots. The guidelines appear in the March/April issue of Trends, the journal of the American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA)....<<

No maybe about it :)

Oh & forgot to say in last post Glasgow Uni Diagnostics also recommend titres yearly, seeings tho you repeatedly question this maybe you should ask the relevant scientists why :)

>Don`t know why you keep insisiting on explaining the process

Because you asked in your last post :D
Not sure who you are quoting there, you haven't referenced it but not sure why, if the guidelines have been published that proves that it was based on his work.  But anyway that's hardly important if he wants all the credit that's fine by me ;)
Who are Glasgow Uni Diagnostics and are they recommending titres instead of boosters or maybe as well as?

No I didn`t ask:rolleyes:

Quote was taken from the link below, which was posted in my previous post.

http://www.news.wisc.edu/story.php?get=8413

>>>Once a year, Ronald Schultz checks the antibody levels in his dogs' blood. Why? He says for proof that most annual vaccines are unnecessary.

Schultz, professor and chair of pathobiological sciences at School of Veterinary Medicine, has been studying the effectiveness of canine vaccines since the 1970s; he's learned that immunity can last as long as a dog's lifetime, which suggests that our "best friends" are being over-vaccinated.<<<

Thats also taken from the link above.

You know full well who Glasgow Diagnostics are, if you don`t you have a very short memory ;)

http://www.gla.ac.uk/companion/prevax.htm

>No I didn`t ask
>So its not evidence we are allowed to see?

That looked like a question to me :) so I answered it.
I can't see where this Diagnositics groups are saying at what frequency you should titre they just give the analysis from the possible current readings.  "No need for booster at present" is all they are saying.

*This diagnostic group* as you`re calling them, happens to be one of only 2 vet universities in Europe whos students don`t have to sit another exam before going to work in USA :rolleyes:

I was told personally by Hal Thompson to have titres done yearly, as have others I know who have had them done there. Anyone interested can ring them up & ask themselves. So going on about how often to have them done is just you assuming things, these scientists must know what they`re talking about, a lot more than you ;) they say yearly, then thats good enough for the folk that use titre testing :)

By the way, heres what they say about adno

>>modified live vaccines can give lifelong protection from a single dose. <<<

I'm not assuming anything I would just like to know how using a diagnostic tool can predict the future.  They do not say testing is better than boostering but just acknowledge that some people will choose to do that.  Suggesting a reasonable interval is one thing but giving an assured one is another.
There has been evidence to suggest vaccines can give life long protection but as you cannot know that yours is that individual the evidence that shows the minimum cover for all dogs is far more relevent.

You are assuming & questioning the scientists. If you don`t accept what they recommend I suggest you ask them for an explanation how it works :)

>>There has been evidence to suggest vaccines can give life long protection but as you cannot know that yours is that individual the evidence that shows the minimum cover for all dogs is far more relevent<<

That is your opinion only, I & others disagree

Doesn't matter that you disagree it is the professions opinion that dictates the protocols.

And the *accepted protocol* for titre testing is yearly!

Its you who doesn`t accept that & keep on questioning it!

What accepted protocol?  Can't find anything about that one on the BVA site only theirs on vaccination.

Stop this Isabel :rolleyes:

I`ve no idea what the bva site says, but if its recommending yearly vax its clearly out of date & in direct conflict with what the manufacturers recommend:rolleyes:

Vaccination is global, so are the manu`s who make them, it doesn`t start & stop with the bva :rolleyes:

No the BVA recommends using the manufacturers protocols.  The manufacturers protocols clearly state some yearly vaccination is still necessary.
Intervet:

>Major studies have already been carried out to determine whether this minimum period can be extended. As each of these studies have satisfied the authorities, so the manufacturer's recommendations have been amended. As a result, some vaccines are now licensed to protect pets for up to three years against some diseases.

>However, it is vital to realise that for some diseases, protection is much shorter. Especially for leptospirosis in dogs - no vaccine will protect your pet for more than a year. This is real data, rather than the result of the licensing authorities taking time to catch up: studies have shown that even with one of the best leptospirosis vaccines, protection starts to decline after about 12 months.

I could understand if you were going for the belt and braces method of distrusting the research by vaccinating and titre testing to ensure it had been effective
So I give my dogs boosters & then titre test to see if it has been effective then thats your way is it ?

But if the titre levels show there is already immunity vaccinating puts more pressure on the immune system & that is went the reactions occur(this is what happened to me BTW)My immune system was completely thrown out & started attacking my own cells & the result is I now have NO effective immune system at all

Sorry you are writing through your hat & believing everything the vaccine companies put out. These people deny our dog died because of a reaction to their vaccine despite evidence to the contrary, yet months later after action against the company in the USA they change their protocol. Just a total co-incidence of course.

Sorry but I will not risk another of our dog's life by following what the profit driven vaccine companies want pet owners to do

>then thats your way is it ?

No, I take the recommended route of regular vaccinations, just trying to see a point to titre testing when all it does is confirm the present status.
I don't have a veterinary hat to talk through nor do I believe, or disbelieve, everything the vaccination manufacturers say, I don't have any qualifications to judge it.  I rely on the veterinary professional to evaluate it all and decide on best policy.

I rely on the veterinary professional to evaluate it all and decide on best policy.

How comfortable for you that you have such a trusting nature Isabel - hope you never find it to be misplaced. :)

Well we don't have any groups better qualified to advise us on matters veterinary :)  The odds are very much higher in putting your trust in professionals, who after all by their definition are capable of  evaluating and judging their peers, and do so, than someone totally unregulated and never examined as to the quality of their knowledge.

I don't have blind faith in any experts Isabel - just because they may have been right in the past doesn't mean they are right now or will be in the future.  I feel I owe it to myself and my dogs to do my own investigations and make my own decisions.

No it doesn't mean they are right now or in the future but within all scientific professions there is a continuing process of examination of protocols, beliefs etc, errors will be exposed. 
No matter how confident you are that you can "do your own investigations" I'm afraid you have very little chance of making a better job of it than those who have passed a rigourous selection process, spent several years training and, most important of all, have been examined on their subject.  I think the internet is a marvelous resource but the fact that it has led people to believe that they can "do their own investigations" has, in my opinion, not really been it's best aspect.
I feel I owe it to my dogs to seek the strongest opinion within the people best able to decide it.

That was a very condescending reply Isabel and I don't remember saying my investigations were internet based.  I think there have been a number of discredited experts in many fields and to assume that people in authority cannot possible have got their facts wrong is I think an unhealthy viewpoint.  However, you do it your way and I'll do it mine!

>to assume that people in authority cannot possible have got their facts wrong

I don't think you have read my post :)  Yes, mistakes are made but they are rare thanks to the accademic process that ensures evidence is thoroughly peer reviewed before becoming accepted belief.  When you think about it the worst mistakes have been made when people have bypassed that process and jumped to conclusions such as the MMR debacle.
I'm sorry if you find my comments condescending about people without the relevent training, knowledge and examination not be in the position of being able to better the professionals at establishing best practice. I suppose it's rather hard to word it without bruising peoples feelings :) but I really think it's not something that can go unsaid when discussing scientific subjects.

I assure you I did read your post and I stick by what I said - goodnight Isabel :).

>No it doesn't mean they are right now or in the future

That is unequivacable and most definately does not say I "assume that people in authority cannot possible have got their facts wrong"

there is a continuing process of examination of protocols, beliefs etc, errors will be exposed.

I agree but it was 40 years ago that the Vets I worked for told me that boosters were Vets' pocket money and it's only recently that annual boosters have been exposed as being unnecessary. :(

There are also a growing number of qualified Vets who are how becoming qualified in homoeopathy too and using drugs as a last resort and not the first method of treatment.
http://www.bahvs.com/vetmfhom.htm

I'm sure vaccination does provide a fair bit of income for vets.  For many of us that is the only visit we pay to the vets :) but I don't see the connection with that and the new protocols.  There are still annual boosters to be given under the recommendations.
There may be a few vets selling homoeopathy products now but I am sure the vast majority will continue to practice using the benefits of science and pharmaceutical products.  I'll stick with the majority view thanks :)

Bravo Moonmaiden! The proof is in the pudding. I do not believe in boosters ad lib and yes we are told to overdo it IMO. We certainly wouldn't do it to our children without question, so tell me why vax again, when a simple test will tell you if it's neededor not? I have never lost a dog to Parvo or the like, nor from organ failure, only cancer plus old age. If it aint broke, why fix it??

Is that someone else me by any chance

What bulk of evidence are you referring to?

>Is that someone else me by any chance

Yes.  Did I miss the answer :)

The bulk that the BVA and manufacturers set their protocols by.

>>>Yes.  Did I miss the answer <<<      I never saw the question  but if its being asked now, the answer is I`ve stopped doing it this yr :)

>>>The bulk that the BVA and manufacturers set their protocols by<<<

But where is this bulk of evidence, I`ve not seen it were can I find it?

I also titre test, the last time they were tested which wasn't a year ago yet, the levels were way above the recommended levels. 

Sassysmam, would you be so kind to let me know the name of this charity by PM?

have you always used this method with your dogs?

I have had my dogs titre tested since 1981 The first time was at the suggestion of a forward thinking conventional vet who had seen way too many bad reactions to vaccinations in his practice

My parents had a cavalier who they insisted on boosting yearly, when he was 7 he had his vaccinations & became ill in vets within in minutes & died three hours later. Subsequent independant PM showed that the vaccination had caused his immune system to go into meltdown & ergo caused his death. The forensic PM was not accepted by the vaccine company because the forensic pathologist was not a vet, but she had done work & PM's for the vaccine company in the past ! She is one of the top FP in the UK if not the world but the vaccine company used her not being a vet as an excuse not to admit their product was at fault, interestingly since then they have gone over to the three year protocol for vaccinations

I agree with Moonmaiden, ask for the titre test each year, I recently lost my 3 year old GR to over vaccination (yearly booster) . Insist the vet do this test for you!
Maria

My dogs are titre tested as well, have been for a good many years.  

This, however, will not pick up on the immunity conferred by 'memory cells'.    I know that the titre results can go up and down like a yo-yo, even pretty soon after a normal booster, but the dog is still adaquately protected.

I can't find the references at the moment (in a rush...) but will look later.

Just know that from personal experience we tested one of our dogs , and he was a bit low one of the  titres.    About a  month or so later we re-tested out of curiosity, and it was well up , without a booster, and has maintained a high level of immunity.

To me this means that he was probably exposed to an insult, and his immune system was very well able to cope with it thank you very much.

Jo and the Casblaidd Flatcoats

I didn't know about titre testing until I came on this site.  After losing many pomeranian's 15 years ago I stopped having the annual vaccinations to my dogs.

When I say many I mean many, two even died at my vets as he didn't believe my mum until he saw the evidence himself.  One minute they were fit, mad, healthy youngsters the next they were dead, the day after being vaccinated.

>particularly if these diseases are on the increase.  I wonder why they are?<

Why dont you tell us why? :rolleyes: I know youre dying to ;)

I also titre test, my dogs havnt been vaccinated for a little over 8 years,their levels have always been good.It makes me sick to think of injecting them each and every year when they had ample levels of immunity to the diseases they were being vacced against,i cant even begin to imagine the damage vaccinating an already immune dog would be doing to their system.I dont understand why people are continuing to vaccinate when a simple blood test will tell them if they need to or not

A simple blood test will only tell you if your pets immunitity is adequate there and then it will not tell you if it will remain adequate for the coming year if you have not boostered for the recommended period.  The research evidence demonstrates the very low risks involved in vaccination so there is no need to let your imagination run riot :)

>>>it will not tell you if it will remain adequate for the coming year if you have not boostered for the recommended period. <<<<

Can you back up your theory with evidence Isabel?

Scientists recommend yearly titre testing, I`m going with the body of evidence on this one ;) :D