Exactly! :)

Well puppies don't need 2 jabs of parvo/distemper if vaccinating is left until after 12 weeks, so I think we can say the same for adult dogs?  It'd be interesting to find out what Intervet say on this.  I know the professor I spoke to is adamant that only one jab is necessary for live vaccines.

So the conclusion has to be that they double the shots to make double the money - which is very naughty :D :D

So the conclusion has to be that they double the shots to make double the money

Far from all vets charge the same for the first and the second. In fact I've not had any vet that does so it isn't double. My normal vet charges one fee for the first and a lower for the second. The vet I use for almost all vaccinations charges £15 for the full course. A dog booster is £12 so only a difference of £3 if starting again as opposed to having a single booster.

So you have just said it, if you only had one jab you pay for one, with two (at the vets around here) you pay for two!!

Our old vet charged the same price for the first and then again for the second.  As we only had one jab for Jasper our new vet charged for one jab rather than the two :)  Had we have had the second jab it would have cost the same again!

The prices you quote are much lower than the prices at the local vets around here so obviously you've got quite a good deal :)

Is amazing how much the prices seem to vary - I suppose it is down to individual vet's overheads and how they choose to apportion charges.

You're probably right Annie :P

I and many others shop around for routine treatment like vaccinations, and have one vet for that and one vet for everything else. Anyone can do that if cost is an actual concern. If the vet, like my vaccination vet, does not charge twice as much for double vacc when recommended, then presumably you can feel safe that he or she isn't recommending two injections just to make money. :)

I think cost is a concern to most people, no matter how much we love our dogs we don't want to pay out for things they don't need.

However,I do think your vet sounds pretty fair with prices!  Pays to shop around I guess :)

I wouldn't want things they didn't need even if they were free. :)

I've only ever known vets vaccinate according to manufacturers guidelines, not all vets are money grabbing, most are just doing what they have been told (by a company that has spent a lot of money on testing) is in the best interests of your pet.

Our old vets STILL vaccinate yearly - against manu guidelines, which clearly state 3 years

Some vaccination is annual.  As the regime is on the documentation these days presumably his currect clients are happy to carry on if this is the case, they certainly won't be unaware.  Perhaps his other virtues compensate for overzelous vaccinations :)  Have you actually spoken to them or is this hearsay?

Not the ones we are discussing on this thread - Lepto is annual, parvo/distemper every 3 years!

Our old vet still does parvo/distemper every year !

Not hearsay - I know this for a fact!  I guess the clients that are ignorant (as I was) are happy to vaccinate every year the ones that are now aware refuse and quite a few have challenged this procedure - once challenged they do back down but still continue to vaccinate yearly if they can get away with it

>Not hearsay - I know this for a fact!

Can you tell us how? 

>I guess the clients that are ignorant

The regimes are very clearly laid out on the documentation these days.  If it is happening I think it would be not so much a case of ignorance as not bothered :)

I don't think there are many people out there who vaccinate that we can say 'is not bothered' the reason the majority of people vaccinate is because they are actually bothered about their pets surely?

I have to admit I went back yearly because the vet sent a letter every year advising that a booster 'for everything' was necessary every year - I guess I had 'blind faith' in a professional body, which I think lots of people have :rolleyes:

I meant not bothered about their vet choosing to vaccinate more frequently than the ususal recommendation.

> advising that a booster 'for everything' was necessary every year -

What a strange thing to say when it was only necessary to remind you to come every year and then give what he thought appropriate.  Strange to warn you so to speak
Have you kept the letter and the documentation to show he gave the vaccines yearly once the policy had changed?  The BVA's policy does permit a vet to vary the regime but he does have to discuss it with the client, perhaps that is what the letter was about ;)

>>Not hearsay - I know this for a fact!
>Can you tell us how? 

I meant can you tell us how you know for a fact he is still doing it that is not hearsay.  Have you spoken to him recently?

The regimes are very clearly laid out on the documentation these days

What documentation do you mean Isabel?  If you're talking about the stuff that comes with the vaccine, I doubt the majority of people ever see that.  As for the individual pet's vaccination documentation, most people would just follow the date for the next booster suggested by the vet or else respond to a reminder notice.  This doesn't necessarily mean the vet is following the vaccine manufacturer's dosing instructions or that the owners are aware of what those protocols are.

You beat me to it Annie :) the majority of people follow the date of the next booster or respond to the reminder notice.

Yes the documentation not the data sheet.  In addition to this my vet has a chart on prominent display in the consultation room obviously produced by the manufacturers to help inform everyone. 

>This doesn't necessarily mean the vet is following the vaccine manufacturer's dosing instructions

No it doesn't but this is not the explanation regarding whether it is just hearsay that I was looking for to say it is actually happening so :)

Not quite sure what the second half of your answer means Isabel :) but yes, I have checked with the vet concerned and they are definitely giving a double of dose of everything. :(

It means I have asked Maria a couple of times ;)
Actually, I think you may be getting a little muddled here :)  Maria's comments and this little branch of the thread is about annually boostering components that are recommended 3 yearly.

Oh OK, well I can assure you in my case it is not hearsay.

I'm not confused Isabel - the dog the vet is recommending full boosters for isn't 2 yet.  :(

Edited to say:  Now I am confused - your reply above is nothing like the reply you sent which was emailed to me!

No, and I don't think I questioned that it was.  I can well imagine a vet not being too informed, or perhaps even concerned, about what is, hopefully, a not too common event, as I suggested to Spender regarding their encounter with this 9 years ago.

You may choose to believe that Isabel, I couldn't possible comment. :D

You think it is a common event?   Surely not many people let their cover lapse.

> Now I am confused - your reply above is nothing like the reply you sent which was emailed to me!  

Appologies, I altered it when I realised which part of the thread your post was in.

Ah I see.

y you, my so called cheap vaccnation clinic now chages £37.80 for a full vaccination for a puppy, and other vets in the area charge over £50

OK, Intervet have said

"The datasheets for both Nobivac DHPPi and Nobivac DHP both state that for a primary course: " A single injection should establish active immunity in Dogs of 10 weeks of age or older". Therefore we would fully expect a single dose of our Distemper, Hepatitis and Parvovirus antigens to be sufficient in establishing active immunity in a normal, healthy Dog over 10 weeks of age."

So it would seem that anyone with an adult dog on this vaccine being told that a double dose for parvo, distemper and hepatitis is required due to late boostering or unknown vaccination history is being given incorrect advice.  I would imagine this is also the case for other makes of vaccine for these diseases but it would be worth checking with the manufacturer.

Hope that clarifies things.

Yes it does, for those it might concern :)  

I hope it would inform and concern everyone Isabel, surely the actual vaccine manufacturer's position should be known by all?  Clearly from my own experience and other cases I have heard, some vets are choosing not to follow these protocols and I think people should be aware of that.  If they're not concerned, well that is up to them, we all choose our own way.

If they are concerned the answer is keep up to date.  But I don't think they should actually be all that concerned apart from perhaps for their pocket :) as it is very unlikely their dog will come by any harm, certainly less than a lapsed vaccination cover.

Again, I beg to differ Isabel but will leave others to make up their own minds, as we all should.

I think it is dishonest to say a double booster is required when it isn't.  I also do not believe that any treatment should be given when it isn't necessary.

Slightly off topic, but i think this shows who is calling the shots.
Dog A had rabies vacc and was blood tested 3 weeks to see if titre high enough for pet passport. Results came back as levels insufficient. DOg had 2nd rabies vacc but failed to come back in 3 weeks for blood test. When we realised it had been 2 months since the 2nd jab was given. THe manfacturers were phoned and we were told the dog would now require 2 more injections (3 weeks apart) of the same vaccine in order to pass the titre test at a sufficient level. THe dog in question would then have had 4 rabies vaccinations within 4 months, whereas most dogs just have one every two years. I fail to see why this would be neccessary, but that is what they reccommended the vets do. Yet it would appear we are just trying to make more money! (which we aren't at all!)
On the subject of the vet who gives the full booster every year, again i can't see why he would do this for profit as there is very little difference between the price of the full bosters and the lpi ones given yearly. He would not be making any extra money.

Can't comment on rabies vaccinations specifically as I know nothing about them.  I don't believe generally though that an adult dog which doesn't gain sufficient antibodies from a first dose of live vaccine will gain more from a second one - therefore to me, it seems pointless and possibly dangerous to just keep repeating them.

In my own case, there is a cost difference of £15 between the cost of a single and double dose but I stress it isn't the cost saving that drives me here.  I am just anxious that my dog doesn't receive any treatment which is not necessary and which I feel could be detrimental to his health.

Do I assume from your comments that you work for a vet or are one? :)

> I don't believe generally though that a dog which doesn't gain sufficient antibodies from a first dose of live vaccine will gain more from a second one

It would appear so

>Experience has shown that a proportion of vaccinated animals, while protected, may not show the 0.5 I.U. antibody titre on blood testing required by the PETS scheme. Veterinary surgeons may wish to consider two vaccinations, particularly in young, naive animals. Blood sampling for antibody titres should ideally be carried out three weeks after the last vaccine injection. - Intervet

I'm still not convinced Isabel :) and to be honest Intervet don't sound convinced either if they are saying the vet may wish to consider, rather than saying he/she should, or maybe Intervet are concerned at the possible side effects of a double dose of this particular vaccine - I don't know.  If they're talking about 'young, naive (?) animals', could this be another case of maternal antibodies interfering with the first dose of vaccine?

As I said, I know nothing about the rabies vax and I suppose where pet passports are concerned, people aren't going to be very willing to give up trying to get a sufficient response.

>If they're talking about 'young, naive (?) animals', could this be another case of maternal antibodies interfering with the first dose of vaccine?

Yes, it could (what is it about the word naive that troubles you? :)) which is maybe why they are suggesting it.
The do say experience rather than research which suggests to me they are being honest about it being just a suggestion and I am sure Vets, being scientists, will understand the distinction.

>people aren't going to be very willing to give up trying to get a sufficient response.

Not if they hope to comply with the law they are not :) but I have never heard of anyone totally failing on the vaccine so presumably a second dose does have a measurable effect.

what is it about the word naive that troubles you

Just not heard it used before in vaccination terms, what does it mean?

As I've just said to JG, I've only been talking about adult dogs here.  Obviously young pups with maternal antibodies could need two doses, I'm not disputing that.

Naive
Would it not be only those dogs whose mothers have received a rabies vaccine that are likely to have any maternal antibodies?  In the UK anyway. 

In this situation definition #4 "Not having previously taken or received a particular drug" is the relevant one. :)

Right, thanks :)

A specialist magazine at work stated that 10% of animals given the rabies vaccine for their pet passport fail the first titre test and the veccine needs to be repeated. Only 1% fail a second time.

As I've already said, I know nothing about the rabies vaccines but I would be interested to know how many of the animals who fail after the first dose were young ones which could have been affected by maternal antibodies.  As I've said all along on this topic, I'm only talking about adult dogs, not puppies. :)

We've had two adult dogs fail their rabies titre test in the 10 months or so since I've been in this job, and we've only done about 6 pet passports in that time - all on adult dogs.

And did the two that failed pass after the second dose of vaccine?

Yes. :)

Interesting! :)

The rather worrying thing is that they'll never need to have another titre test - just boostering the rabies vaccine when required, without finding out whether or not the immunity is still high enough for safety. With such a serious disease as rabies I'm not entirely happy with this. :(