Golden Retriever Dog Forums banner
61 - 80 of 105 Posts

·
Dr. Rainheart
Joined
·
5,563 Posts
They don't exist. The vaccine/toxins/cancer pseudoscience comes from what is essentially a religious belief: natural—whatever that means—is better and the things that are wrong with our health come from our artificial lifestyles. Then, the person who believes that article of faith goes and finds anything that seems like a plausible connection and offers it up as evidence. There's no science involved at all, no studies.

Here's what vaccine safety science looks like. It's the American Academy of Pediatrics' list of vaccine safety studies, overwhelmingly disproving the common myths about the health effects of vaccines (mostly autism, since that's the biggest and most damaging myth, but also studies on immunological problems, metabolic problems, seizures, etc.).
Exactly! Kind of reminds me of the how the autism and vaccine link got WAY out of hand and still is to a point today... Things get blown WAY out of proportion.
 

·
Ingrid, Now Mom to Brisby
Joined
·
1,111 Posts
There are many articles for those wishing a ubiquitous view and consideration on this topic. Here is just one.

As has been stated earlier in this thread, we all love and want the best for our dogs and cats. It is only through sharing information, learning and discussion without judgement that we can come to the best decisions for our beloved fur babies.

---------------------------------------

Science of Vaccine Damage

by Catherine O'Driscoll
(posted with permission)

A team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted several studies (1,2) to determine if vaccines can cause changes in the immune system of dogs that might lead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted this research because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundation which itself was looking for evidence that such changes in the human immune system might also be vaccine induced. It found the evidence.
The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated, dogs in the Purdue studies developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fibronectin, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen.


This means that the vaccinated dogs -- ”but not the non-vaccinated dogs”-- were attacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in tissue repair, cell multiplication and growth, and differentiation between tissues and organs in a living organism.


The vaccinated Purdue dogs also developed autoantibodies to laminin, which is involved in many cellular activities including the adhesion, spreading, differentiation, proliferation and movement of cells. Vaccines thus appear to be capable of removing the natural intelligence of cells.


Autoantibodies to cardiolipin are frequently found in patients with the serious disease systemic lupus erythematosus and also in individuals with other autoimmune diseases. The presence of elevated anti-cardiolipin antibodies is significantly associated with clots within the heart or blood vessels, in poor blood clotting, haemorrhage, bleeding into the skin, foetal loss and neurological conditions.


The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing autoantibodies to their own collagen. About one quarter of all the protein in the body is collagen. Collagen provides structure to our bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues and connecting them with the skeleton. It is no wonder that Canine Health Concern's 1997 study of 4,000 dogs showed a high number of dogs developing mobility problems shortly after they were vaccinated (noted in my 1997 book, What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines).


Perhaps most worryingly, the Purdue studies found that the vaccinated dogs had developed autoantibodies to their own DNA. Did the alarm bells sound? Did the scientific community call a halt to the vaccination program? No. Instead, they stuck their fingers in the air, saying more research is needed to ascertain whether vaccines can cause genetic damage. Meanwhile, the study dogs were found good homes, but no long-term follow-up has been conducted. At around the same time, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force initiated several studies to find out why 160,000 cats each year in the USA develop terminal cancer at their vaccine injection sites.(3) The fact that cats can get vaccine-induced cancer has been acknowledged by veterinary bodies around the world, and even the British Government acknowledged it through its Working Group charged with the task of looking into canine and feline vaccines(4) following pressure from Canine Health Concern. What do you imagine was the advice of the AVMA Task Force, veterinary bodies and governments? "Carry on vaccinating until
we find out why vaccines are killing cats, and which cats are most likely to die."



In America, in an attempt to mitigate the problem, they're vaccinating cats in the tail or leg so they can amputate when cancer appears. Great advice if it's not your cat amongst the hundreds of thousands on the "oops" list.


But other species are okay - right? Wrong. In August 2003, the Journal of Veterinary Medicine carried an Italian study which showed that dogs also develop vaccine-induced cancers at their injection sites.(5) We already know that vaccine-site cancer is a possible sequel to human vaccines, too, since the Salk polio vaccine was said to carry a monkey retrovirus (from cultivating the vaccine on monkey organs) that produces inheritable cancer. The monkey retrovirus SV40 keeps turning up in human cancer sites.


It is also widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause a fast-acting, usually fatal, disease called autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA). Without treatment, and frequently with treatment, individuals can die in agony within a matter of days. Merck, itself a multinational vaccine manufacturer, states in The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy that autoimmune haemolytic anaemia may be caused by modified live-virus vaccines, as do Tizard's Veterinary Immunology (4th edition) and the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.(6) The British Government's Working Group, despite being staffed by vaccine-industry consultants who say they are independent, also acknowledged this fact. However, no one warns the pet owners before their animals are subjected to an unnecessary booster, and very few owners are told why after their pets die of AIHA.

A Wide Range of Vaccine-induced Diseases


We also found some worrying correlations between vaccine events and the onset of arthritis in our 1997 survey. Our concerns were compounded by research in the human field.


The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, reported that it is possible to isolate the rubella virus from affected joints in children vaccinated against rubella. It also told of the isolation of viruses from the peripheral blood of women with prolonged arthritis following vaccination.(7)


Then, in 2000, CHC's findings were confirmed by research which showed that polyarthritis and other diseases like amyloidosis, which affects organs in dogs, were linked to the combined vaccine given to dogs.(8) There is a huge body of research, despite the paucity of funding from the vaccine industry, to confirm that vaccines can cause a wide range of brain and central nervous system damage. Merck itself states in its Manual that vaccines (i.e., its own products) can cause encephalitis: brain inflammation/damage. In some cases, encephalitis involves lesions in the brain and throughout the central nervous system. Merck states that "examples are the encephalitides following measles, chickenpox, rubella, smallpox vaccination, vaccinia, and many other less well defined viral infections".


When the dog owners who took part in the CHC survey reported that their dogs developed short attention spans, 73.1% of the dogs did so within three months of a vaccine event. The same percentage of dogs was diagnosed with epilepsy within three months of a shot (but usually within days). We also found that 72.5% of dogs that were considered by their owners to be nervous and of a worrying disposition, first exhibited these traits within the three-month post-vaccination period.
I would like to add for the sake of Oliver, my friend who suffered from paralysed rear legs and death shortly after a vaccine shot, that "paresis" is listed in Merck's Manual as a symptom of encephalitis. This is defined as muscular weakness of a neural (brain) origin which involves partial or incomplete paralysis, resulting from lesions at any level of the descending pathway from the brain. Hind limb paralysis is one of the potential consequences. Encephalitis, incidentally, is a disease that can manifest across the scale from mild to severe and can also cause sudden death.
Organ failure must also be suspected when it occurs shortly after a vaccine event.



Dr Larry Glickman, who spearheaded the Purdue research into post-vaccination biochemical changes in dogs, wrote in a letter to Cavalier Spaniel breeder Bet Hargreaves:
"Our ongoing studies of dogs show that following routine vaccination, there is a significant rise in the level of antibodies dogs produce against their own tissues. Some of these antibodies have been shown to target the thyroid gland, connective tissue such as that found in the valves of the heart, red blood cells, DNA, etc. I do believe that the heart conditions in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels could be the end result of repeated immunisations by vaccines containing tissue culture contaminants that cause a progressive immune response directed at connective tissue in the heart valves. The clinical manifestations would be more pronounced in dogs that have a genetic predisposition [although] the findings should be generally applicable to all dogs regardless of their breed."

I must mention here that Dr Glickman believes that vaccines are a necessary evil, but that safer vaccines need to be developed.



Meanwhile, please join the queue to place your dog, cat, horse and child on the Russian roulette wheel because a scientist says you should.

Vaccines Stimulate an Inflammatory Response


The word "allergy" is synonymous with "sensitivity" and "inflammation". It should, by rights, also be synonymous with the word "vaccination". This is what vaccines do: they sensitise (render allergic)an individual in the process of forcing them to develop antibodies to fight a disease threat. In other words, as is acknowledged and accepted, as part of the vaccine process the body will respond with inflammation.



This may be apparently temporary or it may be longstanding.


Holistic doctors and veterinarians have known this for at least 100 years.



They talk about a wide range of inflammatory or "-itis" diseases which arise shortly after a vaccine event. Vaccines, in fact, plunge many individuals into an allergic state. Again, this is a disorder that ranges from mild all the way through to the suddenly fatal. Anaphylactic shock is the culmination: it's where an individual has a massive allergic reaction to a vaccine and will die within minutes if adrenaline or its equivalent is not administered.


There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed to withstand the vaccine challenge. These are the people (and animals are "people", too) who have inherited faulty B and T cell function. B and T cells are components within the immune system which identify foreign invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they cannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are concerned, the immune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects such as allergies and other
inflammatory conditions.



Merck warns in its Manual that patients with, or from families with, B and/or T cell immunodeficiencies should not receive live-virus vaccines due to the risk of severe or fatal infection. Elsewhere, it lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies as food allergies, inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological deterioration and heart disease. To translate, people with these conditions can die if they receive live-virus vaccines. Their immune systems are simply not competent enough to guarantee a healthy reaction to the viral assault from modified live-virus vaccines.


Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines replicate in the patient until an immune response is provoked. If a defence isn't stimulated, then the vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the patient the very disease it was intending to prevent.


Alternatively, a deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory conditions such as arthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and any number of autoimmune diseases such as cancer and leukaemia, where the body attacks its own cells.


A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith, explains what holistic practitioners have been saying for a very long time. Here is what a few of the holistic vets have said in relation to their patients:


Dr Jean Dodds: "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV vaccines..." (9)


Christina Chambreau, DVM: "Routine vaccinations are probably the worst thing that we do for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses, but not directly to where we would relate them definitely to be caused by the vaccine." (10)


Martin Goldstein, DVM: "I think that vaccines...are leading killers of dogs and cats in America today."


Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: "Homoeopathic veterinarians and other holistic practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm than they provide benefits." (12)


Mike Kohn, DVM: "In response to this [vaccine] violation, there have been increased autoimmune diseases (allergies being one component), epilepsy, neoplasia [tumours], as well as behavioural problems in small animals." (13)

A Theory on Inflammation


Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been saying for a very long time, but perhaps they've not understood why their observations led them to say it. His theory, incidentally, is causing a huge stir within the inner scientific sanctum. Some believe that his theory could lead to a cure for many diseases including cancer. For me, it explains why the vaccine process is inherently questionable.


Gary was learning about inflammation as part of his studies when he struck upon a theory so extraordinary that it could have implications for the treatment of almost every inflammatory disease -- including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, rheumatoid arthritis and even HIV and AIDS.


Gary's theory questions the received wisdom that when a person gets ill, the inflammation that occurs around the infected area helps it to heal. He claims that, in reality, inflammation prevents the body from recognising a foreign substance and therefore serves as a hiding place for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-risk cells produce receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He says that while At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed to switch off the inflammation, in most diseases this does not happen.


"Cancer has been described as the wound that never heals," he says. "All successful cancers are surrounded by inflammation. Commonly this is thought to be the body's reaction to try to fight the cancer, but this is not the case.


"The inflammation is not the body trying to fight the infection. It is actually the virus or bacteria deliberately causing inflammation in order to hide from the immune system [author's emphasis]." (14)


If Gary is right, then the inflammatory process so commonly stimulated by vaccines is not, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable sign. Instead, it could be a sign that the viral or bacterial component, or the adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seen as an invader by the immune system), in the vaccine is winning by stealth.


If Gary is correct in believing that the inflammatory response is not protective but a sign that invasion is taking place under cover of darkness, vaccines are certainly not the friends we thought they were. They are undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators.



Worse, we animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to unwittingly betray our loved ones.


Potentially, vaccines are the stealth bomb of the medical world. They are used to catapult invaders inside the castle walls where they can wreak havoc, with none of us any the wiser. So rather than experiencing frank viral diseases such as the 'flu, measles, mumps and rubella (and, in the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are allowing the viruses to win anyway - but with cancer, leukaemia and other inflammatory or autoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking their place.

The Final Insult


All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their protocols for vaccinating dogs and cats along the following lines; (15) however, vets in practice are reluctant to listen to these changed protocols and official veterinary bodies in the UK and other countries are ignoring the following facts.


Dogs' and cats' immune systems mature fully at six months. If modified live-virus vaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces immunity, which is good for the life of the pet. If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. The litre is no "boosted", nor are more memory cells induced.


Not only are annual boosters unnecessary, but they subject the pet to potential risks such as allergic reactions and immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia.


In plain language, veterinary schools in America, plus the American Veterinary Medical Association, have looked at studies to show how long vaccines last and they have concluded and announced that annual vaccination is unnecessary.(16-19)
Further, they have acknowledged that vaccines are not without harm. Dr Ron Schultz, head of pathobiology at Wisconsin University and a leading light in this field, has been saying this politely to his veterinary colleagues since the 1980s. I've been saying it for the past 12 years. But change is so long in coming and, in the meantime, hundreds of thousands of animals are dying every year - unnecessarily.


The good news is that thousands of animal lovers (but not enough) have heard what we've been saying. Canine Health Concern members around the world use real food as Nature's supreme disease preventative, eschewing processed pet food, and minimise the vaccine risk. Some of us, myself included, have chosen not to vaccinate our pets at all. Our reward is healthy and long-lived dogs.


It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the good and simple news. The gratitude I feel each day, when I embrace my healthy dogs, stretches from the centre of the Earth to the Universe and beyond.
About the Author:
Catherine O'Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns and also delivers an educational program, the Foundation in Canine Healthcare. She is author of Shock to the System (2005; see review this issue), the best-selling book What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines (1997, 1998), and Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? (1997; reviewed in NEXUS 4/04).
She lives in Scotland with her partner, Rob Ellis, and three Golden Retrievers, named Edward, Daniel and Gwinnie, and she lectures on canine health around the world.

For more information, contact Catherine O'Driscoll at Canine Health Concern, PO Box 7533, Perth PH2 1AD, Scotland, UK, email [email protected] , website Canine Health Concern - Putting your dog’s health first.
Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide from Dogwise at Dog Books, Dog Training Books, Dog eBooks, DVDs, Audio CDs, and Dog Toys – Dogwise.com.

Endnotes
1. "Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of Dogs, Phase II", Purdue University, November 1,1999, at
http://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html.
2. See www.vet.purdue.edu/epi/gdhstudy.htm.
3. See http://www.avma.org/vafstf/default.asp.
4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and Canine Vaccination, DEFRA, May 2001.
5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003.
6. Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). "Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated Hemolytic Anemia in the Dog", Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 10:290-295.
7. New England Journal of Medicine, vol.313,1985.
See also Clin Exp Rheumatol 20(6):767-71, Nov-Dec 2002.

8. Am Coll Vet Intern Med 14:381,2000.
9. Dodds, Jean W.,DVM, "Immune System and Disease Resistance", at critterchat.net - critterchat Resources and Information..
10. Wolf Clan magazine, April/May 1995.
11. Goldstein, Martin, The Nature of Animal Healing, Borzoi/Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1999.
12. Wolf Clan magazine, op. cit.
13. ibid.
14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at Journal of Inflammation content/1/1/3.
15. Klingborg, D.J., Hustead, D.R. and Curry-Galvin, E. et al., "AVMA Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents' report on cat and dog vaccines", Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 221(10):1401-1407, November 15,2002,
http://www.avma.org/policies/vaccination.htm.

16. ibid.
17. Schultz, R.D., "Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs", Vet Med 93:233-254,1998.
18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., "Titer testing and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices", Vet Med 97:1-13, 2002 (insert).
19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., "Clinical application of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody liters for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs", J Am Vet Med Assoc 217:1021-1024,2000.


----------------------------------------------------------


http://www.dogsadversereactions.com/scienceVaccineDamage.html



 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,816 Posts
I am extremely frustrated when I read an article that a journalist wrote regarding studies. The journalist reads the study, then interprets the information and writes the article. The journalist normally footnotes various locations for those studies to be found. Here's my trouble with the above article. It's based on a study completed at Purdue University. Personally I like to read the study, not the journalist interpretation of it. So I went on a hunt to find this study. I was UNABLE to find it based on the two footnotes listed in the article. So I searched on google by the name of the study and the university. I was UNABLE to again find this study. I found lots of people interpreting the study, but not the actual study itself. So if anyone could find the study itself, could you post a link to the study, not another journalist opinion of the study? Thank you
 

·
Dr. Rainheart
Joined
·
5,563 Posts
Very often these articles that are against vaccinations are very skewed by bias (and yes, same goes for those that are very much for vaccines, too!). Which is why it is ALWAYS important to go back to the original studies and look at them. I also tried to search for said articles and couldn't find them, Alaska. Super frustrating because you have no idea the context of where they are taking the information from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
I vaccinate my girl every year because well I know the importance of vaccination. In Austin there was a dog at a famous park that was put down even though it didn't show any signs of rabies. The dog had it. This dog was a family pet. It did spread the virus.
 

·
Millie's Dad, Chris
Joined
·
1,343 Posts
There are many articles for those wishing a ubiquitous view and consideration on this topic. Here is just one.
Researching who Catherine O'Driscoll is reveals that she believes in "Energy Healing" and homeopathy amongst other things.

As homeopathy has absolutely nothing to do with science, medicine or evidence forgive me if I do not pay attention to what she writes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,164 Posts
Again, I don't know any veterinary clinic that isn't vaccinating DHPP every 3 years now, which is the standard protocol.
I think annual vaccination is more common than you realize. I believe it is a geographical thing. Down here annual vaccination is the standard. If you go to big cities (like Houston), then you see the 3 year recommendations.

I get grief because I refuse to do annual vaccinations. I talked to an owner of a boarding place once about bringing a dog there for the weekend. Turned out that because all the vets here go by an annual protocol, dogs who didn't get annual vaccines couldn't board because they were shown to be out of date according to their vet.

I had to contact local media and make a stink because no vet in the area (and we have a lot of vets) would go with a 3 year rabies plan. It was ridiculous the amount of time I spent on the phone and driving around talking to vets, animal control, police jury, and it took me months to finally get it done.
 

·
Inactive
Joined
·
11,326 Posts
There are many articles for those wishing a ubiquitous view and consideration on this topic. Here is just one.
This is one of the least literate, most cherry-picked articles I have ever read, written by one of the least qualified people ever to pretend to be a scientist. This is the Jenny McCarthy of veterinary medicine. Ubiquitous? Try biased and insane. Amazing how the people with no credentials whatsoever are somehow able to come to the opposite conclusions compared to what actual professionals think. Like others who have complained, I note that the sources I was able to isolate do not support the conclusions drawn by the author, and some sources cannot be found at all.
 

·
Dr. Rainheart
Joined
·
5,563 Posts
I think annual vaccination is more common than you realize. I believe it is a geographical thing. Down here annual vaccination is the standard. If you go to big cities (like Houston), then you see the 3 year recommendations.

I get grief because I refuse to do annual vaccinations. I talked to an owner of a boarding place once about bringing a dog there for the weekend. Turned out that because all the vets here go by an annual protocol, dogs who didn't get annual vaccines couldn't board because they were shown to be out of date according to their vet.

I had to contact local media and make a stink because no vet in the area (and we have a lot of vets) would go with a 3 year rabies plan. It was ridiculous the amount of time I spent on the phone and driving around talking to vets, animal control, police jury, and it took me months to finally get it done.
These are the standards that I know my clinic followed and went by. This is from 2011. Might be a more updated copy around somewhere, not sure, but this will work for purposes here. https://www.aaha.org/public_documents/professional/guidelines/caninevaccineguidelines.pdf

What is the state law regarding Rabies vaccine in your state? I know most states have gone to a 3 year rabies plan after that initial 1 year rabies was given... but it honestly depends on the law. Even if they are the same vaccine (which, they are). Up until a few years ago, West Virginia was on a strange 2 year Rabies vaccine schedule while Virginia was on 3. Being close to the border, we had to be very careful of what dogs we vaccinated (ie, those who lived in WV) got a tag from the clinic and we had to change the date in the computer to notify them in two years instead of 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
I vaccinate my girl every year because well I know the importance of vaccination.
Hopefully you give each type of vaccine weeks apart and not at the same vet visit. Doing so, IMO, could really suppress a dogs's immune system. Plus, if your dog would have a reaction, you wouldn't know which vaccine caused it.

When grooming customers bring in their dogs' shot records at my store, I cringe at some of them. Seeing how many vaccines were given at one time makes me wonder about the competency of their vet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,164 Posts
What is the state law regarding Rabies vaccine in your state?
State law is 3 years, but they try to keep that fact hush. Everybody I talked to kept blaming everyone else for why they wouldn't allow the 3 year rabies vaccine even when I pulled up a copy of the law. This is in southwest Louisiana. In talking to friends in Southeast Texas they have run into similar problems. In this area it is just assumed that dogs are supposed to get vaccines every year because that is what all the vets say. It is very frustrating. You should see the look I get when I tell other pet owners here that my dogs only get vaccines every three years. Good dutiful pet owners are supposed to bring their dogs in every year to get all vaccines in one visit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
OK - I am just a pet owner who struggles to make sure I'm being the best advocate that I can for my animals.

In my own reading about vaccines, before this thread ever was started, I had bookmarked this site - and wondered what some of your thoughs were on the legitimacy of this organization and their recommendations?

http://www.wsava.org/guidelines/vaccination-guidelines

And this was another discussion from almost 6 years ago here on the forum, that I had also bookmarked:

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com...w-jean-dodds-latest-vaccination-schedule.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
I want to see where these studies are (again, this is one of the hopes that the GRLS may show that vaccines, etc don't cancer).
Maybe there is a lot that we just don't know. We do know that vaccines can cause sarcomas in cats so it is a leap of faith to state that there is no harm done in over vaccinating.
https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Reference/Pages/rbbroch.aspx

There may not be studies done that show harm in dogs at this point but that does not preclude more information becoming available as time goes on.
 

·
Ingrid, Now Mom to Brisby
Joined
·
1,111 Posts
OK - I am just a pet owner who struggles to make sure I'm being the best advocate that I can for my animals.

In my own reading about vaccines, before this thread ever was started, I had bookmarked this site - and wondered what some of your thoughs were on the legitimacy of this organization and their recommendations?

http://www.wsava.org/guidelines/vaccination-guidelines

And this was another discussion from almost 6 years ago here on the forum, that I had also bookmarked:

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com...w-jean-dodds-latest-vaccination-schedule.html
Thank you for the links. There is some very good information in both IMHO.

I don't know of anyone who has more expertise in veterinary immunology than Dr Ronald Schultz as he is quoted in both, however if there are others, I would like to read what their findings are.

There is a dead link in the second link you shared...I have found a replacement live link:


http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/images/Duration_of_Immunity_Schultz.pdf
http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/images/Duration_of_Immunity_Schultz.pdf [/B
 
  • Like
Reactions: rabernet

·
Ingrid, Now Mom to Brisby
Joined
·
1,111 Posts
Maybe there is a lot that we just don't know. We do know that vaccines can cause sarcomas in cats so it is a leap of faith to state that there is no harm done in over vaccinating.
https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Reference/Pages/rbbroch.aspx

There may not be studies done that show harm in dogs at this point but that does not preclude more information becoming available as time goes on.
I would suspect it's probably not just cats and I say this from personal experience.

I had my beloved Yaichi re-vaccinated at the age of 9....regular veterinary protocol. Shortly there after, she developed a lump/tumor at the injection site. The lump/tumor when it grew to the size of half a golf ball was aspirated and diagnosed as a lipoma ( fatty tumor). My vet said it was common, nothing to worry about. Removal was not recommended as I was advised that these types of tumors reoccur at the same site therefore there was really no point. in 3 years, the tumor grew to the size of about a 3-4 lb roast. Again the vet said, nothing to worry about as it was not impeding her mobility, nor was it in an area where it was being abraded, infected etc ( outer rear hip/leg area). I blame myself for blind faith in my veterinarian and not insisting that the tumor be re-tested.

At age 12 and a few days after she collapsed, this "lipoma" burst and was leaking blood, gelatinous material etc. To make a very long story short, I suspect Yaichi had hemangio, however I also believe this lipoma had turned cancerous as well, or had been cancerous for quite a while and my vet kept relying on the results of the initial aspiration, did not bother to recheck it and I went on blind faith in what I was advised by her.

I have no proof that this tumor was caused by the last vaccine at the injection site, however it started growing at the exact spot about 2 weeks after the vaccination...at first just like a small pea. I am convinced that the vaccine was the catalyst...and yes, I could be wrong.

Needless to say, we no longer see the same veterinarian.

I just wanted to post this to share with all of you and also to let you know why I am so passionate about this topic after loosing my girl to what may have been vaccine stimulated
 
  • Like
Reactions: rabernet

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
I would suspect it's probably not just cats and I say this from personal experience.

I had my beloved Yaichi re-vaccinated at the age of 9....regular veterinary protocol. Shortly there after, she developed a lump/tumor at the injection site. The lump/tumor when it grew to the size of half a golf ball was aspirated and diagnosed as a lipoma ( fatty tumor). My vet said it was common, nothing to worry about. Removal was not recommended as I was advised that these types of tumors reoccur at the same site therefore there was really no point. in 3 years, the tumor grew to the size of about a 3-4 lb roast. Again the vet said, nothing to worry about as it was not impeding her mobility, nor was it in an area where it was being abraded, infected etc ( outer rear hip/leg area). I blame myself for blind faith in my veterinarian and not insisting that the tumor be re-tested.

At age 12 and a few days after she collapsed, this "lipoma" burst and was leaking blood, gelatinous material etc. To make a very long story short, I suspect Yaichi had hemangio, however I also believe this lipoma had turned cancerous as well, or had been cancerous for quite a while and my vet kept relying on the results of the initial aspiration, did not bother to recheck it and I went on blind faith in what I was advised by her.

I have no proof that this tumor was caused by the last vaccine at the injection site, however it started growing at the exact spot about 2 weeks after the vaccination...at first just like a small pea. I am convinced that the vaccine was the catalyst...and yes, I could be wrong.

Needless to say, we no longer see the same veterinarian.

I just wanted to post this to share with all of you and also to let you know why I am so passionate about this topic after loosing my girl to what may have been vaccine stimulated
I'm so sorry for your loss of Yaichi! I am fully aware that it is believed that vaccinations cause sarcomas in cats - I had one that developed fibro sarcoma, and that's when I first learned that vaccines could be the cause, and why now, at least with my cats, I am very vehement about kitten series of shots, and nothing after that (indoor cats only).

It makes it very difficult for the lay person to work through what is the best decision for one's own animals. Until you've gone through a vaccine related sarcoma yourself, it's easy to sit back and say that vaccines cause no harm.

I don't profess to be an expert in anything medically related to my pets, I just try to do the best I can, gleaning the information that I can from these forums and other sources and hope I come to the right conclusion for MY pets.
 
61 - 80 of 105 Posts
Top