Took her esp to the vets last monday the dog was very healthy and happy until a few hours after having booster,the poor dog started vomiting and was showing signs of discomfort, the lady took her dog to the emergency vet and on examination was told that it was best if the dog was pts as there was a massive build up of fluid.
She is devastated ,cannot understand what has caused this to her 8 year old dog,she asked the vet if it was to do with the booster,vet said it was just a coincidence.

Sheila.

Way too much of a coincidence and I woudl be insisting they fill our an adverse reaction report to DEFRA.

For a start the dogs health should have had a thorough check before the booster, and I assume was found to be perfectly healthy, as else no booster should have been given.

That is awful. I'm so sorry :(

Why are vets still denying this even when some of them have had pups at their surgery die, as in my parents case????

It's tragic to suspect that a vaccination or booster has caused a pet to die. Reactions can happen immediately, but also much later and as such aren't always associated with the vaccine by the pet owner.
It was only by searching for info on our new puppy that I came across all the info regarding these adverse reactions, and sadly came to suspect that our last dog possibly died because of a booster.

I found information suggesting that certain breeds are more susceptible to this, and sadly saw that our breed is amongst them. Whether totally accurate or not, it has made us feel terrible that in trying to protect our beloved pet, we possibly caused her such suffering because we were totally unaware of any possible problems. There were circumstances about her health that indicate she shouldn't have been given a booster at all, but we were ignorant of these facts at the time.
If only I'd known. It was only in March that she died, and we're still awfully upset about it.
We love our new puppy (little monster) very much and are determined to not make any unwitting mistakes with her if we can possibly avoid it.

Seems the US is ahead of us with this - a friend in LA took his three dogs for their boosters only to be given blood tests to determine their immunity, and they didn't need any boosters. Apparently it's common practice there now.
From what I've read, some vets here have begun doing this.
I think perhaps they don't tell us about possible problems in case everyone stops vaccinating their pets and we get huge problems with diseases gettting out of control.

It's hard enough when our elderly dogs leave us, very hard indeed when prematurely and under such circumstances. So sorry about your neighbours dog Sheila, and your parents perrodeagua.

Hi L, sorry to hear about your neighbours dog, very sad :( sounds too much of a coincidence to me.

You can tell her she can make a suspected adverse reaction report herself from the link below

http://www.vmd.gov.uk/General/Adverse/adverse.htm

Also advise her to get in touch with the manufacturer of the vax herself & inform them what happened, you can find out who they are from the dogs vax card. Maybe ask the vet what exactly was the cause of the dogs death, was a pm done by any chance?

Hi Iam so sorry to hear that, how awful.
Thanks for that link  Christine as one of my dogs had a reaction to vacine, I will be in touch with them.

You`re welcome L/M :)

Don`t forget to inform the manufacturer as well as doing the report.

If you don`t mind me asking, what happened to your dog?

Poor lady, how tragic :(.  I would definitely report an adverse reaction - the vet obviously isn't going to.

I understand it's pretty rare, but it can happen - what a terrible thing for your friend. :-(

Hardly surprising people think it's pretty rare when vets like this one are immediately prepared to put it down to coincidence. :(

The reason we know it is rare is because of the independent studies that have been conducted.  That does not mean it will never happen.  For every case that looks like it should not be written of as coincidence I have seen many on the internet that I really can't see where they are making the connection.
I am very sorry Labrador, it certainly looks as though this will may have a connection, will she be having a PM done?

I'm not going to discuss this with you Isabel as I know I'm wasting my time.

Quite probably :)

What independent studies have been conducted? I can`t recall any

The Pooch Report, I have posted the link many times.

One study not studies as you previously stated :rolleyes:

Not very convincing. It was a postal questionnaire that owners had to fill in & out of 9,000 sent out only 4,000 replied to. Very scientific.

And it was funded by the members of NOAH, who are the manufacturers of vaccines.

The reporting of adverse reactions is under used & until it becomes the normal accepted procedure of vets to use it we`ll never get to the real truth of just how *rare* reactions are :(

I thought that was a very good response actually :).  Even in you target groups with a particularly good interest in research such as GP's you would be lucky to get a response as good as that.  That's irrelevent though the final figure is what is importand and I think 4000 would be regarded by most researchers as a very good figure to be dealing with in terms of extrapolations with most of the element of chance ruled out.  Of course, as we know from the internet any request for information will generally be responded to by more with the negative to say than the positive ;) so any bias is likely to have been in constrast to these findings.

>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.

I think that statement is very clear :)  I would imagine the vaccine manufacturers are as interested as anyone in ensuring the safety of their products.
I totally agree with you for the need of as many of these incidents as possible to be properly investigated. 

Indeed Christine, only 23% were recently vaccinated and the questionnaire asked about the health of the dog for a 2 week period before completion.  :rolleyes:

Questionnaires aren't good science anyway as the questions can be misleading and laid out in such a way so that the researchers get the answers they want.  :-(

I think that makes sense.  If you look only at very recent vaccination you will pick up on the minor reactions that many dogs have which causes no lasting effect.  By looking at a two week period of a large group of dogs some of whom are recently vaccinated but many are not you get a picture of their on going health issues.

Of course you'll get a picture but whether it's an accurate picture is another matter.  :-)

It's pretty amazing actually, no temporal association was found between vaccination and ill-health in dogs after adjusting for potential confounders, such as age.  I have another publication that says 16% reported ill health, I suppose they were the oldies?, but then how old is old?.  And then we have the Vaccine Damage Payment Unit for children severely disabled as a result of vaccination.  Mmmmm......  

It's a picture of 4000 dogs, a jolly good sample for making extrapolations I would have said, that is was surveys do.  You cannot feasably study every single animal in the UK :)
Don't understand the connection with childrens' vaccination.

It depends on how the questionnaire was worded, Isabel, the observation skills of the owner and the skills of those interpreting the results.  It doesn't mean that a dog will not develop long term consequences that may not be visible at that point in time which may or may not be contributable to build up of vaccine in the system.  16% reported signs of ill-health but it appears that was conveniently contributed to something else, with no further studies.  :rolleyes:  And it certainly was not independent.

That survey says very little, raises more questions than it answers.  IMO, it was more of a marketing ploy than anything else, but it's served its purpose;it's convinced some.  ;-)

The study compares to normal rates of illness.  I think you can expect some dogs in any survey to be ill anyway.  Of the 4000 dogs you can expect many of them to have been boostered for years so long term consequences would be showing.  This is clearly a very significant survey. 
I have provided the link before that shows this was very definately an independent study and I am not sure what you think the Animal Health Trust market.
When looking at research it is important that we not limit our searches to that which shows the results we were expecting or even hoped for ;)

When looking at research it is important that we not limit our searches to that which shows the results we were expecting or even hoped for

From you that sounds like kettle calling the pot black to me :)

Not at all Annie, I have looked at this every way out I've done all the usual web sites and all the available research and I hope always with an open mind. Believe me nothing would please me more to discover my dogs would be equally well protected without vaccines or booster, think of the money I would save! :D Nor could I opt to do anything I thought was not in their very best interests, like every Champdogger I would imagine.
If you have a look at the link I have given you I think you will know where I am coming from, I will go wherever the evidence leads whatever it is :)

ROFLOL.... :-D

Me too S :D :D

Was the POOCH report carried out by AHT? 

I believe AHT ask for funding?  I also believe most of their funding comes from the drug companies!  Therefore not a totally independent body to do such a report!
Maria

>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.

AHT do ask for funding and are funded by the drug companies, so definitely not independent whatever they say - NOAH did not want to influence the outcome because they were confident what the outcome would be by using AHT!

The AHT is a charity.

The Animal Health Trust is an independent charity working for many people including the Kennel Club.

she asked the vet if it was to do with the booster,vet said it was just a coincidence.

Those of us who have had dealings with hundreds of dogs rather than just a few of our own, have heard this MANY times before!  I really don't understand (apart from my sceptical mind!) why Vets don't add one and one together.  Maybe a bit like Rimadyl, which is given routinely after operations and if the dog dies, then their first thought is that it's a result of the operation/illness. :(

Golly I feel so sorry for your neighbour. :(

Sheila
I'm really sorry to hear about your neighbours dog, it is definitely too much of a coincidence - my 3 year old GR died after his booster, he had the booster on 18th March and he became so poorly the following week that we had no alternative but to have him put to sleep on 25th March 2006.  It is heartbreaking and I do understand how your neighbour is feeling.
Please advise your neighbour to report this as other people have advised on this forum, and don't let the vet try to convince them that it wasn't the booster.  Virbac, the drug manufacturer paid for all Spangler's treatment, and have written to me and said  'in a perfect world all dogs would be titre tested each year to establish whether they needed a booster'  now if that isn't straight from the horses mouth!!

You can see Spangler's story, it was posted on 27th March on champdogs 'Adverse reaction and death after booster'.
also take a look at the following website: www.canine-health-concern.org.uk you'll see Spangler's story on there too, Catherine O'Driscoll wrote an article about Spangler and it is in the June issue of Dogs Today.

My thoughts are with your neighbour at this very sad time
Maria
x

I was a very 'innoculate' person, as in they must be done, very much with blanket vision. reading the posts here, and on other dog boards, and looking at past messages relating to this, i think if they were all compiled it would in itself make a good arguement against vaccinations without blood testing first. So many dogs have been ill or died following them, it does make you wonder. In the old days was there so much put into one jab? (As in the things vaccinated against?) I always boostered the dogs, as did my family, but I cant for the life of me remember the process now. In those days with the diseases rampant it was a lifesaver, for your own dog and the passing it on thing. Now we can check if the dog has full protection to what we innoculate against, i wont be boostering till Iv had the test if it can tell me what my dog is not protected against, and whatever protection they dont have I'll be requesting vaccination for that, but not a combined one, if I can get it.

So sorry to hear of the dog that died, they must be so upset. We expect to lose them sometime but if its from something we give them thinking its for the best that must be so hard to bear. I hope they find the strength to report this, not easy at this time.

I don't believe the combinations have changed much in the 30 years I have had dogs, it always covered several diseases, plus for two years out of three now the combination is less than it used to be.  I think it is also worth noting that the MMR research that made a lot of people wary of combined vaccines has been completely debunked.
I understand why reading these boards and the internet in general you would feel apprehensive but, as I alluded to earlier, the negative is reported rather more often for instance few of us post to say "my dog was vaccinated last week/last month and is still in robust health" :)

Well, i suppose you are right, after all every dog that goes into RSPCA, Dog Trust, Battersea, Wood Green etc get vaccinated, thats a heck of a lot of dogs, never mind all the pet dogs that go every year for their health and booster checks. if it really was that bad, maybe these groups in rescues may have noticed. Vaccination certainly improved the chance of not getting the diseases, I remember them as a child, knowing of some that actually died and it was awful. My old vet was worried about people not vaccinating any more, because he was a vet when they were rampent and vividly remembers treating the animals. With all the dogs and cats we have had as I was growing up, and as an adult myself, andfriends with dogs, i have never known anyone have anything this serious happen, maybe a bit of 'off colour' for a couple of days, but never so serious. Think this will be a long winded discussion with the vet lol.

I took a very deep breath, crossed fingers and hoped that giving the boys the MMR jab was the right thing to do, and they wouldnt react. They were a bit poorly and feaverish a couple of days after, but thank goodness nothing lasting. I really feel for the parents that had perfectly normal babies/children before the jab, and severe problems after. Something caused it, and whatever is published I would still wonder if it was the MMR.

>thats a heck of a lot of dogs, never mind all the pet dogs that go every year for their health and booster checks. if it really was that bad, maybe these groups in rescues may have noticed

That's a very good point.
Like your vet I remember a different time and lost a puppy, when I was a child, to distemper.
The reason why the MMR fears were debunked was it was found that countries that had never used it had the same rates of autism occuring.  It would appear that it is a condition that unfortunately becomes apparent during that age anyway.

To me, its not the rates of autism occuring, but when it does, and it was in babes that had recently had the vaccine, which makes me wonder. I doubt the parents would have gone to all the time and trouble if there wasnt something going on. if the only reason it was debunked was because of numbers, i wouldnt take it as read the vaccines didnt cause the problems in those children so affected. I remember one child was progressing well, was at all its targets, happy and bubbly, till the injection. Thats when a change occured, and the child never regained its former self. i wouldnt want to make the choice myself today.

The trouble is nobody can tell that it wouldn't have happened anyway. There are descriptions of what sounds very like autism going back very many years before immunisation was even invented. Interestingly in the past decade the Japanese realised that their rates of autism were exactly the same as ours, and they'd only ever used single vaccines.

Yes, I should have made it clearer :), the rates in other countries that have not used MMR occured at the same time in the childs life.  Autism develops in that way from a previously normal child. That is one of the reasons that make it so tragic and on top of all that these poor mothers have probably been forever left with feelings of guilt despite the debunking of that single piece of research.

calmstorm, I had 250 dogs on my books at any one time.  I was concerned with what I perceived to be a problem and so started keeping accurate records of my clients' dogs and 12 died in a 12 month period, directly after initial vaccination or booster.  In addition, there were also a number who developed difficient immune systems and didn't see their 2nd birthday. :(

If you just take that very small snapshot of my own personal experience, then it's a very small percentage that died, and a very large percentage that survived, but it's still more that the 'very rare' reaction that is accepted by the Veterinary profession.

There is a one in 12 chance of a dog dying within the month after their booster anyway, even a week after only drops to 1 in 52.  Nor is it just a booster they have had but a visit to the vets with all the risks associated with that.  This is why scientific studies that compare the natural occurance of these incidents are so important.

There's an article on another dog site which by a well-known anti-vaccinator that evidence of arthritis showing nine months after vaccination could be considered to be vaccine-related! :rolleyes:

(Also that parvovirus was created by vaccine manufacturers and deliberately injected into dogs worldwide, all at the same time. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: )

I would like to know which site you are referring to JG (PM me if you wish).  I have read that parvo was possibly caused by a cat vaccination which subsequently affected dogs via excreta but nowhere have I heard the notion of dogs being deliberately injected with it worldwide all at the same time so would like to check this story out for myself.  As for arthritis showing nine months after vaccination, I don't find that very far fetched as a damaged immune system needn't necessary give immediate outward symptoms.

As arthritis can occur in an unvaccinated individual I don't believe there's any way a link between the two can be justified.

I'll PM you the link to the article.

>as a damaged immune system needn't necessary give immediate outward symptoms.

Have a read of the Purdue study, Anne, published in 1997.  I don't know if you can find it on the internet.  It has some interesting possibilities on the long term effects of vaccinations in dogs compared with non vaccinated dogs. 

Link to the Purdue study :)

http://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html

Thanks for that Spender and to Christine for providing the link - I'll have a read later. :)