Jump to content
BC Boards

2008 Rabies Vaccine-JAVMA Report Adverse Reactions in Dogs


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Michelle,

 

Thank you for the link. You may also be interested in this link to an article by homeopathic veterinarian Dr. Dee Blanco of Santa Fe, NM entitled, Vaccines - Are They Safe for Your Dog? http://www.angelfire.com/biz/froghollerfilas/VaccBlanco.html In it, she describes different adverse reactions to the rabies vaccines that she sees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank-you, Kris L. Christine, Michelle for posting links-

 

I've been interested in this for many years. Many people seem to go by science only, or only what their vets say. - I have no facts, numbers or websites to back anything. Just my own dogs, friends and family, and my gut. Also, on a human level, a grandson with problems immediately - right- after being vaccinated.

 

Years ago I had a border collie seize after rabies vaccine. An awful picture , I'll never forget. When those things happen to your dog, you do search for answers, and take another look at vaccines. The vet actually told me, "this reaction is good, means the vaccine is working"- sure a temperature of 104 is very good for my dog! - NUTS!

 

I've been going to a holistic vet for many years. She does limited puppy shots and required rabies. ( she's hoping in time this will change) She works along side conventional old school vets. The amount of auto-immune problems, cancers, and other health issues in the old school vets is outstanding. I'm sure many factors are at play,- diet, flea & tick poisons, too many vaccines, environment? Do I know for sure, no. But my gut tells me otherwise. It does make me take a second look at what goes in my dog, always.

 

I'm not against vaccines, just the amount, and also the company. - ( that's another issue!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kate@Jim,

 

After Meadow developed his cancer, we switched to a homeopathic DVM and have been so pleased, I wish we had made that move years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

 

If you click on this FDA link, www.fda.gov/cber/summaries/vaccdev103007sk.pdf for human vaccines, you will note under

"Vaccine Adjuvants Use in licensed vaccines: Limited currently to aluminum-derived adjuvants in U.S. "

 

You should have also noted on the same slide the underlined statement from the FDA:

"Adjuvants alone are not licensed; a specific antigen/adjuvant formulation is licensed".

 

What the slide really says is that at this time there are no FDA approved vaccines that have other adjuvants; it does not say the FDA excludes the use of other adjuvants.

 

 

Michelle, you say that numbers and facts are not important to you; do you vaccinate for other diseases (not required by law)? If so, did you make this decision based upon the numbers produced in duration of immunity studies, efficacy studies, and prevalence of disease studies?

 

BTW The frequency of revaccination for rabies required by law IS NOT DRIVEN by facts and numbers; it is driven by emotional politics.

 

I will continue to make my health decisions based upon risk-benefit assessments using numbers and facts.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark and Melanie,

 

I know you are both driven by facts and numbers. I am not. I look at symptoms. From the article I linked to in my earlier post, a comparison of the symptoms of Rabies the disease and Rabies Vaccinosis: www.blakkatz.com/Symptoms of Rabies.pdf

 

This is another interesting article: http://www.homeovet.net/content/printable/articles_1.html

 

Note, both of these are written by veterinarians.

 

And both are anectdotal reports. The one linked to above describes a dog with a host of behavioral issues mixed in with some medical issues and claims the dog was cured by treatment with a homeopathic remedy for one year. Of note, previous treatment with homeopatic remedies for a year produced no improvement. Also of note, there is no mention of any behavioral treatment or nutritional changes which are usually intrinsic to treatment regimens by holistic practitioners either of which would better explain the miracle cure.

 

Homeopathy involves taking a dilute preparation of some natural extract or tincture and diluting it serially many times until there is less than 1 molecule of the active ingredient per dose (ie: you are administering water or alcohol only). The theory is that the diluent (water or alcohol) magically retains the shape of the active ingredient and exerts a pharmacological effect.

 

There has never been (to the best of my knowledge) a single double-blind clinical trial with a homeopathic remedy that has shown that it produces a better result that giving plain water or alcohol.

 

Holistic practitioners often combine homeopathy with behavioral therapy and nutritional counselling and many of the GI dermatological and behavioral issues addressed by homeopath can be attributed to these other methods.

 

 

A good human analogy is a comparison between polio and MS; there's no more polio (thanks to the vaccine, maybe, maybe not) not now there's MS and other related diseases like chronic fatigue syndrome.[

 

A bad analogy. Polio still exists in many places. In fact, it exists anywhere where there is not an active vaccination program. It is true that fewer people in such places die of MS. That is because life expectancy in such places is about 45 and people die of polio, malaria, yellow fever, influenza, measles, rubella, AIDS, tetanus, bacterial infection, and starvation.

 

MS has always been around, as has cancer. Problem is, in the good old days before bad old reductive Western medicine, people died of acute diseases long before they lived long enough to die of chronic diseases. Only people who succumbed to MS or cancer at a relatively young age died from them in the good old days.

 

 

Melanie, the conditions you are search for a genetic component for would fall under the definition of Rabies Vaccinosis.

 

So, if I understand you (and the article you cited above), any unexplained, vague, behavioral issue (noise sensitivity, high prey drive, sensitivity to movement, fixation on laser pointers, aggression) are more likely to be "rabies vaccinosis" than genetic or behavioral issues and you base that on a handful of anectdotal reports by homeopathic practitioners?

 

I am not suggesting that people avoid rabies vaccinations, they are the law, but you could sign petitions, etc. in an effort to get the number of rabies vaccinations required reduced.

 

I'll agree with you on that at least.

 

I cannot avoid rabies vaccinations, but I do treat the symptoms my dogs express using homeopathy.

 

In all due respect, I have said all I'm going to say on this matter as I know it's falling on essentially deaf ears.

 

It's not falling on deaf ears. It's falling on skeptical ears, and there's a big difference. I would be very interested in learning if rabies vaccines pose a health risk to my dogs. I'd also be very interested in learning how homeopathic remedies are an alternative to conventional medicines. I'd also be interested in the mechanism by which homeopathic remedies work. So please, do your best to convince me.

 

The problem I'm having is that I've heard these things repeated in popular media and conversation but I have been unable to find any empirical, reproducible , and verifiable evidence to back them up and until such times as I do, I'll remain open-minded but skeptical and my dogs will get their vaccinations and will not be treated with belladonna remedies that contain no belladonna.

 

Pearse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many know what is needed to prove efficacy, safety, and duration of immunity of a vaccine.

 

1. Take two large groups of dogs (large enough to estimate safety for the entire population of dogs)

2. Immunize 1 group

3. Titer both groups over time to follow the development of antibodies against the disease

4. Wait x years (x=the duration of immunity)

5. Titer all dogs (this will be used to assess the efficacy of the titer test)

6. Expose all dogs to the disease (this must be done to prove efficacy of the vaccine)

7. Follow the progression of the disease in all dogs to calculate efficacy in the immunized group vs. the control group

 

This is what must be done to get the facts and numbers required by the USDA and politicians that will rewrite the rabies vaccination laws. The dogs in the control group should get the disease to prove that the immunized group was really exposed to the disease and immunization afforded protection.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem I'm having is that I've heard these things repeated in popular media and conversation but I have been unable to find any empirical, reproducible , and verifiable evidence to back them up and until such times as I do, I'll remain open-minded but skeptical and my dogs will get their vaccinations and will not be treated with belladonna remedies that contain no belladonna.

 

If a titer test shows that the dog has the antibodies according to an empirical, reproducible, and verifiable blood test, why re-vaccinate?

 

I'm not saying that you should or should not do that, I'm just wondering why you would object to others doing so if they feel that it is in the best interest of their dogs, and the blood tests show that immunity is already there.

 

I just don't see the belladonna in that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do I understand that (for instance) "the homeopathic remedy, belladonne, doesn not contain the actual substance"...but..."because of the way homeopathic remedies are prepared, the energy of the substance remains"? Sorry, but that just sounds like hocus-pocus to me although I'll be glad to admit I am uneducated in this matter and am probably missing some essential step between containing a substance, not containing a substance, and retaining the "energy" (whatever that is) of that substance.

 

To quote someone from far away on a topic long ago, I am either always this stupid or making a particular effort at being stupid today, but something just doesn't make sense here to me. And I have been accused of being amongst those with deaf ears before, so perhaps that's compounding my problem understanding this, also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flu shot can cause flu-like symptoms in some individuals. Doesn’t it stand to reason that if an animal is continually vaccinated for rabies that some rabies-like symptoms may occur?

 

This is a huge leap in "logic" when one considers that the common reactions (besides pain and swelling at the site of injection) to most vaccines are flu-like symptoms. Also the antigens in these vaccines have been tested and found dead or inactivated; meaning they cannot cause the disease.

 

Participants in the study, however, reported only mild side effects that were consistent with any intramuscular vaccine injection, such as a sore arm or mild headache that might be experienced with a tetanus or a flu shot....

 

I doubt anyone could guess the vaccine in this quote.

 

Mark

 

BTW The flu is a poor example to use since this disease is not due to a single virus but two types and several sub-types; in addition these viruses are constantly changing due to "antigenic drift".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn’t it stand to reason that damage from the vaccine could be being passed on generation after generation and it’s becoming more and more common?

 

If you were asleep in biology class when they talked about how Lamarck was wrong, sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used, and had it used by my vet, homeopathy for years on my dogs. Since you cannot get placebo effect in an animal (it either improves or it doesn't) I've become a believer.

 

I believe there is still a time and a place for conventional medicine (for example surgery to fix a broken bone) but I've not found much otherwise that a good homeopathy can't help.

 

There was a Korean study about the "memory of water" (that is that water holds the memory of any substance it has ever touched, and will gravitate towards the last one) that helps explain homeopathy. Perhaps one of the other listers has a link. Basically an extremely dilute exposure to a product (herb, whatever) "reminds" the body of what is is and how to respond. In real like that means when I give a dog Homeopathic Arnica (a plant that causes inflammation) it helps the body stimulate itself to reduce inflammation. When I give Homeopathic Arsenicum (Arsenic) it stimulates the healing and cessation of bloody vomiting and abdominal pain. (That remedy btw, was brilliant with parvo pups)

 

If you want to go straight science then the Rabies shot is already proven for 3 years - how can a state override that? Mine does. Why? I can only presume uneducate fear and money. That's sad.

 

We believed the pharmacutical companies about a lot of things they "prove" and forget whats in their best interest to prove. Disregard ethical arguements of deliberate wrong doing that cannot be proven often and are too involved ot debate here...just look at unintentional bias from the desire of the researcer to do good, the desire of a company to have the "miracle" product and how that can skew results.

 

In human Vioxx is a great example of late, in dogs ProHeart.

 

And money plays a part too. It's extremely expensive to keep a closed colony of dogs to prove vaccines are good for many years. So the companies didn't. They kept them one year, and then just told us to redo the shots. No scientific validity - just the least expensive way to do it for them, at the greatest profit. They couldn't hurt right...?

 

But they did. I have dogs that were hurt by too early, and too frequent vaccines. One Rabies shot nearly destroyed one of my dogs - lending her to a lifetime of putting together the pieces. She is immune to the disease btw (based on titer) but the state law requires I continue to vaccinate her **yearly**. I can do a waiver, but if she is accused of a bite (and we know how easy the public throws about accusations for the slightest perceived bump or scratch) the lack of the vaccine *within one year* will equal her death. We won't even get a court battle - she will be taken away from me and destroyed immediately.

 

It won't even matter about her titer, or how long the vaccine is already proven to be effective for. The law says she dies.

 

Rabies Vaccination is about fear first, then science, then commen sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "study" does not prove cause and effect.

 

I could replace the event "vaccination" with "being weighed", "traveling in a vehicle", "being exposed to a stethoscope", "having blood drawn" and many other events associated with (or not associated with) going to the vets office and still be able to work up the same statistics.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember these same arguements as you have Mark...the same thread and tone...pre the crash of ProHeart, Vioxx, Propulsid, Zyprexa, Avandia....pick the human or canine drug of choice. Some of the drugs remained on the market, but with much greater caution and respect in their use. We (the public especially) are finally realizing there are *no* benign things out there when it comes to vaccines and medications.

 

There are a lot of good people who have problems with the Rabies vaccine. Educated, rational, and reasonable people. Many of the vets linked here are highly respected. Dr Dodds who lead off the Rabies Challange Fund is a brilliant women and a concerned dog owner both. She is not taking Rabies lightly (had you met her you would know that) and neither is she taking the dogs lightly.

 

Sometimes Mark, the presence of smoke really is a fire. It's not just all these people's brain cells cooking up mayhem to create a thread on an internet board so that we can be treated to trivialization and hand flapping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying there isn't a problem with over-vaccination or that vaccination does not have risks; in fact I suspect that many vaccines may yield lifetime duration of immunity (note that I said suspect). I'm saying that what data (from controlled studies) is out there does not confirm or refute that vaccination leads to ________. There clearly is enough anecdotal evidence that warrants more a more through investigation of the suspected links between vaccination and ___________.

 

The problem I have is that people read these anecdotal reports (or worse still the posted report from Canine Health Concern) and wrongly assume these prove cause and effect. Also, the ill effects of over-vaccination are not likely of epidemic proportions; if the ill effects of over-vaccination were of epidemic proportions then the lifespan of all dogs would be getting shorter not longer.

 

I can come up with the reverse for your "sometimes smoke means there really is fire": you sould never give your Border Collie ivermectin because the breed is "sensitive". Sometimes, smoke is just internet lore.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you sould never give your Border Collie ivermectin because the breed is "sensitive". Sometimes, smoke is just internet lore.

 

Mark

 

Funny you mention that Mark, because I no longer use any ivermectin on my dogs. MDR-1 didn't even apply to me in that regard because I stopped long before science provided us with that scare.

 

Several years before MDR-1 my vet and I spotted progressively decreasing thyroid levels and she suspected ivermectin was the cause. Based on her experience and intuition that drug's effects on the central nervous system are apparently not limited to the parasites it is given for. Taken of the ivermectin and put on Standard Process thyroid support for several months we saw several dogs return to normal thyroid levels and stay there. The one dog that didn't was put on Synthroid and does fine as long as she is given no heartworm medications of any kind (yes, none, and I do live in the deep south). She's been on heartworm nosodes for years with no problems.

 

Had we not stopped the ivermectin when we did the vet and I both question if and of the dogs thyroids would have recovered. Of course...had I a different vet, a more science first and only one, we would be talking about "genetic thryoid problems" and all that ensues...etc etc.

 

Where there's smoke...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean the Canine Health Concern report does not prove cause and effect? Of the ___ # of dogs who were vaccinated ___ dogs suffered ___ disease? What is wrong with that?

The study proved what? Dogs got sick within 3 months of being vaccinated (in other words within 3 months of going to the vet).

 

Did all other possible sources of illness get proven to not be the source of the illness that occurred within those 3 months. Did the dogs live in an aseptic bubble for 3 months, never coming in contact with other animals? Assuming the dogs were vaccinated at the vets office; all other aspects of the trip to the vet were excluded as possible source of the illness. For example the reduction in their immune system due to the stress/excitement of going into a vets office, or exposure to other possibly sick animals that were in the vets office.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more generations of dogs who are vaccinated annually or even every three years, I firmly believe, the more problems we are going to see as the vaccine damage travels through the generations.

If this were true, shouldn't dogs also inherit immunity via genetics thereby eradicating all diseases for which we vaccinate?

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several years before MDR-1 my vet and I spotted progressively decreasing thyroid levels and she suspected ivermectin was the cause. Based on her experience and intuition that drug's effects on the central nervous system are apparently not limited to the parasites it is given for.

Where there's smoke...

Hmm, was it the ivermectin or the other stuff that comes with the ivermectin? Here there may be a cause and effect (still anecdotal); but you have not shown cause and effect to ivermectin (HeartGard is a mixture of stuff). A way to possibly prove cause and effect to ivermectin would be to start giving ivomec (a different mixture that contains ivermectin) and follow the thyroid panel.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, was it the ivermectin or the other stuff that comes with the ivermectin? Here there may be a cause and effect (still anecdotal); but you have not shown cause and effect to ivermectin (HeartGard is a mixture of stuff). A way to possibly prove cause and effect to ivermectin would be to start giving ivomec (a different mixture that contains ivermectin) and follow the thyroid panel.

 

Mark

 

I dont' believe I said Heartgard but Ivermectin. The chemical, and actually, yes we were giving Ivomec at the standard vet perscribed rate of 0.1cc per 10 lbs of weight.

 

I did switch to Heartguard for a while during the debate over if it was the cause, but the results were the same. Just higher cost. No more ivermectin was the answers.

 

My anecdotals, aka my dogs, are healthy with normal thyroid levels in all but the one dog now. But she was one that crashed after her Rabies vaccine too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...