• Home Contact Us What's New New Litters Puppy ExportsAbout Us Pom Reader Kennel Visit Poms in Canada Kennel Visit  • About Poms Stud Services Links Photo Album • 


   • Fun Photos New Damascusroad ChampionshipsPuppies Growing Up List of ArticlesAbout Pet FoodSkin/Coat Care Vaccination Information CKC Breed Standard • 

 

 

When it Comes to Vaccinating Your Pet, Less is More

Pet-friendly vaccine recommendations from Dr. Karen Becker.

Sources: Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association October 2000; 217(7):1021-4 and www.mercola.com

You’ve undoubtedly seen them in your mailbox. Cute little reminder cards from your vet that it’s time for Beauregard’s annual vaccinations. But after looking a bit closer at the risks and benefits of these vaccines, you might want to paws before making that appointment.

 

Could these vaccines not only be unnecessary, but actually harmful to your pet’s health? Absolutely.

We over-vaccinate our children -- but at least we eventually stop after puberty. But with our pets, we continue vaccine boosters until they are well into their senior years.

 

As adults, we don’t assault ourselves with annual boosters, and we certainly wouldn’t do this to our elderly family members. So why do we inflict this upon our pets, regardless of their immune status or age, when common sense would tell us those vaccines should last longer than a year?

 

Additionally, there are no adjustments in dose for size or age of your animal. Your five-pound Miniature Pinscher receives the same size vaccine as your 150-pound Rottweiler. Your 10-pound housecat gets the same amount as a 400-pound lion.

 

All of these vaccines are overwhelming your pet’s immune system. Vaccine reactions are at an all-time high.

 

A study of more than 2,000 cats and dogs in the United Kingdom by Canine Health Concern showed a 1 in 10 risk of adverse reactions from vaccines. This contradicts what the vaccine manufacturers report for rates of adverse reactions, which is “less than 15 adverse reactions in 100,000 animals vaccinated” (0.015 percent).

 

Additionally, adverse reactions of small breeds are 10 times higher than large breeds, suggesting standard vaccine doses are too high for smaller animals.

 

A few bold veterinarians have paved the way for ending overvaccination, but the research is sparse and the opposition is great, just as with the human vaccine industry -- and for similar reasons.

 

In this article I will be addressing three main points:

1. There is no scientific evidence that annual vaccines are necessary, and in fact once animals achieve immunity from their initial vaccines, they appear to have immunity that lasts for many years, and often for life, without boosters.

 

2. There is growing alarm that overvaccination appears to be causing a multitude of serious medical problems, particularly with the immune system, including allergies, seizures, anemia and cancer.

 

3. Vaccines are a very profitable part of veterinary care -- in fact, some vet practices are built around them. Long-term studies of animal immunity would require a substantial outlay of money -- the kind of money that only the drug companies have, and Big Pharma is much more interested in selling more vaccines than challenging the need for them.

How Current Vaccine Schedules Were Determined

The current recommendation from many veterinarians is for dogs is to receive rabies, parvovirus, distemper, adenovirus, parainfluenza, leptospirosis, coronavirus, hepatitis, lyme (borelia), and annually, bortadella (kennel cough) sometimes being recommended every 6 months.

 

Cats are advised to have rabies, feline leukemia (FeLV), distemper (panluekopenia), rhinotracheitis, and calcivirus annually--and depending on risk, chlamydia, feline infectious peritonitis (FIP), and ringworm can be added.

 

Many vets advise both puppies and kittens get their “core vaccines” at ages 6 weeks, 8 weeks, 10 weeks, 12 weeks, 14 weeks, and 16 weeks. Then, they get boosters at one year, and annually thereafter.

 

All of these shots add up to a tremendous vaccine load over your pet’s lifetime!

 

How did these recommendations for annual vaccines come about?

 

One of the veterinary pioneers, Dr. W. Jean Dodds, president of the nonprofit animal version of the Red Cross called Hemopet, reported that the recommendations for annual vaccines were just that -- recommendations. They were not based on any scientific evidence.

 

The recommendations for annual vaccination were put forth jointly by the United States Department of Agriculture and the drug companies, more than twenty years ago. And veterinary medicine has continued to do it that way because, well, that’s the way it’s always been done.

 

And it’s a good deal for them financially. So far, protests to annual vaccines have been mild.

 

Now the USDA puts the annual vaccination recommendation right on the product label.

Veterinary Vaccines are Big Money for Many Vets -- and Even Bigger Money for Big Pharma

Without some driving force for change, there is no motivation for the industry to change the most lucrative part of its practice.

Many vets cling to annual vaccine schedules because of economic dependence more than maintaining a “cautious” standard of care. This is particularly true for the typical small vet practices (1-3 people, non-specialty, non-emergency practices).

Consider this ...

One dose of rabies vaccine costs the vet about 61 cents. The client is typically charged between $15 and $38, plus a $35 office visit. The markup on the vaccine alone is 2,400 percent to 6,200 percent -- a markup equivalent to charging $217 for a loaf of bread.

According to one estimate, removing the one-year rabies vaccination and consequential office visit for dogs alone would decrease the average small vet’s income from $87,000 to $25,000 -- and this doesn’t include cats or other vaccinations.

According to James Schwartz, author of Trust Me, I’m Not a Veterinarian, 63 percent of canine and 70 percent of feline vet office visits are for vaccinations.

Clearly, radically changing the vaccine schedule for dogs and cats would result in a huge economic loss for any veterinary practice that is built around shots.

And chances are the vaccines you are paying so much for are creating even more income for vets, because the adverse reactions and other medical issues caused by the vaccines keep Fluffy coming back often!

The profits for vets pale in comparison to the profits being enjoyed by vaccine manufacturers. Veterinary vaccine sales amounted to more than $3.2 million in 2004 and have risen 7 percent per year since 2000. This figure is projected to exceed $4 billion in 2009.

Six companies account for more than 70 percent of world veterinary vaccine sales. The market leader is Intervet, with sales of almost $600 million in 2004. That’s a whole lot of 61-cent vaccines.

The United States has by far the largest share of the national market with revenues of $935 million, and Japan comes in second with $236 million.

Medical Risks Outweigh Benefits

In 1991, an unfortunate observation led many vets to begin rethinking the vaccine protocol.

A lab at the University of Pennsylvania noted a connection between a troubling increase in sarcomas (a type of cancerous tumor) and vaccinations in cats. Mandatory annual rabies vaccinations were leading to an inflammatory reaction under the skin, which later turned malignant.

At about the same time, researchers at University of California at Davis confirmed that feline leukemia vaccines were also leading to sarcomas, even more than the rabies vaccine.

Further investigations led to alarming statistics: vaccine-induced sarcomas were estimated to be one cat in 1,000, or up to 22,000 new cases of sarcoma per year.

It wasn’t long before veterinary professionals began to suspect vaccination as a risk factor in other serious autoimmune diseases. Vaccines were causing the animals’ immune system to turn against their own tissues, resulting in potentially fatal diseases such as autoimmune hemolytic anemia in dogs (AIHA).

Delayed vaccine reactions were also the cause of thyroid disease, allergies, arthritis, tumors and seizures in both cats and dogs.

These findings led to a 1995 article in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association that concluded:

“There is little scientific documentation that backs up label claims for annual administration of most vaccines.”

And then there’s the issue of adjuvants.

Thimerosal, mercury, and aluminum-based adjuvants are still being allowed in veterinary vaccines. So, your pet is being exposed to potential antigens that could abnormally stimulate his immune system, but last a lifetime and cause chronic disease. The less of this, the better.

For more on thimerosal, mercury, and aluminum, please visit Dr. Mercola’s site.

Is Non-Vaccination a Greater Danger?

Giving your dog or cat a vaccine when it is already immune does not give any additional immunity, and it creates an unnecessary risk to your animal.

Evidence suggests that, like humans, dogs and cats could be vaccinated with certain vaccines early in life and be protected for a lifetime. With the exception of rabies, the core vaccines probably last at least seven years and should not be given more often than every three years.

In one study, the antibody levels of more than 1,400 healthy dogs of all ages were measured for parvo and distemper. Nearly all the dogs were immune (95-98 percent), suggesting that annual revaccination may not be necessary.

Many of the non-core vaccines are bactrins, vaccines created to treat non-viral infections (Lyme disease and Chlamydia, for example) and may have a shorter duration; about one year. But not all animals are at risk of exposure, and the vaccines have proven to be significantly more reactive to the immune system, so assessing risk versus benefit is very important before considering these very reactive vaccines. .

Researchers say there has been no increase in disease rates among dogs who have gone to vaccines every three years. And there is ample evidence that the dangers of repeated vaccinations are real.

A study published by Purdue in 2005 found correlations between vaccine reactions in dogs and variables such as age, size, and number of vaccines given. The study found:

  • Smaller dogs are more prone to vaccine reactions than larger dogs

  • Risk of reactions increased by 27 percent for each additional vaccine given per office visit in dogs under 22 pounds, and by 12 percent in dogs over 22 pounds

  • Risk increased for dogs up to 2 years old, then declined with age

  • Risk increased for pregnant dogs and dogs in heat

  • More reactions were found in small dogs given Leptospirosis vaccine

As in humans, one of the reasons why dogs and cats need vaccine protection at all is that they aren’t eating an ideal diet. The better your pet’s nutrition is, the healthier his immune system will be, and better able to fend off pathogens.

My Vaccine Recommendations

  1. Wellness visits are important for other reasons than vaccines, such as checking for heartworm and tumors and assessing general health status. I do recommend continuing these checkups every six months, although I do not recommend annual vaccines.

  2. Rabies vaccines are required by law. There are approved 1-year and 3-year rabies vaccines. They are the same product. Please ask for the 3-year vaccine, if you opt to vaccinate your pet against rabies. I also recommend you consider finding a holistic vet that will provide you with the homeopathic rabies vaccine detox, called Lyssin.

  3. Ask for a Vaccine Titer Test: this is a how you can determine if your pet has adequate immunological protection from previously administered vaccines (puppy or kitten shots). Antibody levels can be measured from a blood draw, in place of revaccination. The type of titer that best assesses immune system’s response to vaccinesis called IFA, or indirect immunofluorescent antibody.

    Please discuss with your vet the risks versus benefits of the diseases you are considering vaccinating for, before you automatically assume additional vaccines are necessary.

  1. Indoor housecats should not be vaccinated annually, especially if they never go outside or have access to other cats (potentially exposing them to infectious disease). I believe overvaccination is one of the main reasons the general health of our feline patients is deteriorating.

  2. Do not vaccinate your dog or cat if it has had a serious life-threatening vaccine reaction.

  3. Do not patronize any boarding facility, groomer, training facility or veterinarian that requires you to vaccinate your pet more than necessary.

The decision by some vets to come forward with the truth about pet vaccines is a positive step toward changing our animal health care system. Veterinary vaccines are one more unfortunate example of the corporate greed that permeates the pharmaceutical industry.

 


Related Articles

Abstract

October 1, 2000, Vol. 217, No. 7, Pages 1021-1024

doi: 10.2460/javma.2000.217.1021

Clinical use of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody titers for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs

 

Lisa Twark, DVM  W. Jean Dodds, DVM

Hemopet and Antech Diagnostics, 17672A Cowan Ave, Irvine, CA 92614. (Twark, Dodds); Present address: 5423 Hwy 66N, Rogersville, TN 37857. (Twark)

Objective—To assess whether serum canine parvovirus (CPV) and canine distemper virus (CDV) antibody titers can be used to determine revaccination protocols in healthy dogs.

Design—Case series.

Animals—1,441 dogs between 6 weeks and 17 years old.

Procedure—CPV and CDV antibody titers in serum samples submitted to a commercial diagnostic laboratory were measured by use of indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) tests. On the basis of parallel measurements of CPV and CDV serum antibody titers in 61 paired serum samples determined by use of hemagglutination inhibition and serum neutralization methods, respectively, we considered titers ≥ 1:5 (IFA test) indicative of an adequate antibody response.

Results—Age, breed, and sex were not significantly associated with adequate CPV- or CDV-specific antibody responses. Of 1,441 dogs, 1,370 (95.1%) had adequate and 71 (4.9%) had inadequate antibody responses to CPV, whereas 1,346 of 1,379 (97.6%) dogs had adequate and 33 (2.4%) had inadequate responses to CDV. Vaccination histories were available for 468 dogs (468 for CPV, 457 for CDV). Interval between last vaccination and antibody measurement was 1 to 2 years for the majority (281/468; 60.0%) of dogs and 2 to 7 years for 142 of 468 (30.3%) dogs. Interval was < 1 year in only 45 of 468 (9.6%) dogs.

Conclusion and Clinical RelevanceThe high prevalence of adequate antibody responses (CPV, 95.1%; CDV, 97.6%) in this large population of dogs suggests that annual revaccination against CPV and CDV may not be necessary. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:1021–1024)

 

Citing Articles

, , , . (2004) Duration of serologic response to three viral antigens in cats. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 224:1, 61-66
Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004.
Abstract | PDF (124 KB) | PDF Plus (133 KB) 

, . (2004) A perspective on vaccine guidelines and titer tests for dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 224:2, 200-203
Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004.
Citation | PDF (84 KB) | PDF Plus (92 KB) 

, , , . (2004) Duration of serologic response to five viral antigens in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 224:1, 55-60
Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004.
Abstract | PDF (122 KB) | PDF Plus (134 KB) 

(2003) Calls for marketing methods to promote veterinary medicine . . . . Manufacturer addresses concerns about FIV vaccine . . . . Failure to increase fees, salaries creates concern . . . . Advocate for serologic testing after vaccination . . . . OCD study receives praise. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 222:2, 148-152
Online publication date: 1-Jan-2003.
Citation | PDF (220 KB) | PDF Plus (142 KB) 


 

Abstract

October 1, 2005, Vol. 227, No. 7, Pages 1102-1108

doi: 10.2460/javma.2005.227.1102

 

Adverse events diagnosed within three days of vaccine administration in dogs

 

George E. Moore, DVM, MS, PhD, DACVPM, DACVIM Lynn F. Guptill, DVM, PhD, DACVIM  Michael P. Ward, BVSc, MS, MPVM, PhD Nita W. Glickman, MPH, PhD Karen K. Faunt, DVM, DACVIM Hugh B. Lewis, BVMS, DACVP Lawrence T. Glickman, VMD, DrPH

Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2027. (Moore, Ward, Glickman, Glickman); Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2027. (Guptill); Present address is the Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4458. (Ward); Banfield, The Pet Hospital, 11815 NE Glenn Widing Dr, Portland, OR 97220. (Faunt, Lewis)

 

Objective—To determine incidence rates and potential risk factors for vaccine-associated adverse events (VAAEs) diagnosed within 3 days of administration in dogs.

Design—Retrospective cohort study.

Animals—1,226,159 dogs vaccinated at 360 veterinary hospitals.

Procedure—Electronic records from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2003, were searched for possible VAAEs (nonspecific vaccine reaction, allergic reaction, urticaria, or anaphylaxis) diagnosed within 3 days of vaccine administration. Information included age, weight, sex, neuter status, and breed. Specific clinical signs and treatments were reviewed in a random sample of 400 affected dogs. The association between potential risk factors and a VAAE was estimated by use of multivariate logistic regression.

Results—4,678 adverse events (38.2/10,000 dogs vaccinated) were associated with administration of 3,439,576 doses of vaccine to 1,226,159 dogs. The VAAE rate decreased significantly as body weight increased. Risk was 27% to 38% greater for neutered versus sexually intact dogs and 35% to 64% greater for dogs approximately 1 to 3 years old versus 2 to 9 months old. The risk of a VAAE significantly increased as the number of vaccine doses administered per office visit increased; each additional vaccine significantly increased risk of an adverse event by 27% in dogs ≤ 10 kg (22 lb) and 12% in dogs > 10 kg.

Conclusions and Clinical RelevanceYoung adult small-breed neutered dogs that received multiple vaccines per office visit were at greatest risk of a VAAE within 72 hours after vaccination. These factors should be considered in risk assessment and risk communication with clients regarding vaccination. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;227:1102–1108)

 

Citing Articles

, , , . (2008) Postmarketing surveillance of rabies vaccines for dogs to evaluate safety and efficacy. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 232:7, 1000-1002
Online publication date: 1-Apr-2008.
Citation | Full Text | PDF (324 KB) | PDF Plus (332 KB) 

, , , , , . (2007) Adverse events after vaccine administration in cats: 2,560 cases (2002–2005). Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 231:1, 94-100
Online publication date: 1-Jul-2007.
Abstract | Full Text | PDF (616 KB) | PDF Plus (642 KB) 

, , . (2006) Summary of adverse event reports for veterinary biologic products received by the USDA from 1999 through 2005. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 229:7, 1100-1102
Online publication date: 1-Oct-2006.
Citation | Full Text | PDF (227 KB) | PDF Plus (220 KB) 

, , , , , . (2005) Postmarketing surveillance for dog and cat vaccines: new resources in changing times. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 227:7, 1066-1069
Online publication date: 1-Oct-2005.
Citation | PDF (87 KB) | PDF Plus (110 KB) 


 

Are We Overvaccinating Our Pets?
Excerpt by Jenette Restivo, ABCNews.com

You may get notices from the veterinarian every year or two suggesting you revaccinate your pet for distemper, leukemia or other diseases. But now some vets are wondering whether the repeated doses can do more harm than good.

If you're a pet owner, you've seen them in your mailbox - postcards from the neighborhood veterinarian reminding you that it's time for Fido's distemper vaccine or Fluffy's leukemia shots.

After all, vaccines are a standard in health care. We vaccinate our children against hepatitis, polio and influenza when they're infants and toddlers, giving up to two boosters of some vaccines until puberty. But then we stop.

Not with our pets, though. In fact, we continue bolstering the immunity of our pets until they are well into their senior years. That has spawned a debate as fierce as any fighting pit bull: To vaccinate or not to vaccinate.

Many veterinarians believe the practice of annual vaccinations is an unnecessary evil, responsible for such diseases as allergy, seizures, anemia, even cancer. They say vaccinations make our animals vulnerable to some of the top diseases plaguing our pets, and that rather than building up immunity we are overwhelming their immune systems. Others would rather stick to tradition and say that vaccinating has warded off the most deadly animal diseases over the past 30 years, so why question it now.

Lack of Scientific Evidence

Dr. W. Jean Dodds, president of the nonprofit animal version of the Red Cross called Hemopet, was one of the pioneers of the vaccine debate, an issue she says has been percolating for the past 10 years. She says as the profession started looking into exactly how the recommendations for annual vaccines arose, they started realizing that they were just that — recommendations. And in fact, they were not based on scientific evidence.

Dodds says that after 20 years of following the United States Department of Agriculture and the drug manufacturer's recommendations to make annual vaccines a standard in veterinary care, professionals who first challenged the standard school of thought were considered rebels. Her arguments were challenged by other veterinary professionals whose belief in the duty to vaccinate was galvanized by episodes such as the deadly parvo virus epidemic in the late 1970s that killed thousands of dogs and was only halted by mass administration of the parvo vaccine.

But Dodds says an unfortunate observation led many vets to begin to reconsider current vaccination protocol. In 1991, three years after Pennsylvania issued a mandatory rabies vaccination requirement for cats, Dr. Mattie Hendrick's lab at the University of Pennsylvania noted a connection between the surprising increase in the number of sarcomas, or cancerous tumors, and vaccination in cats. It seemed that in some cats, rabies vaccinations were leading to an inflammatory reaction under the skin.

Shortly after, researchers at the University of California at Davis showed that feline leukemia vaccines were also likely to cause sarcomas, and to an even greater degree than the rabies vaccine. Further investigating led researchers to estimate the prevalence of vaccine-induced sarcomas to be as much as one cat in 1,000, or up to 22,000 new cases of sarcoma a year.

Soon, veterinary professionals began to suspect vaccination as a risk factor in other serious auto-immune diseases. Researchers surmised that, in some animals, vaccines were stimulating the animal's immune system against his or her own tissues, leading to potentially fatal diseases such as auto-immune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) in dogs. Researchers began to suspect delayed vaccine reaction for the cause of such chronic conditions as thyroid disease, allergy, arthritis and seizures in cats and dogs.

Such observations led to a 1995 Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association article that concluded there is "little scientific documentation that backs up label claims for annual administration of most vaccines," and that the only vaccine tested routinely for duration is the rabies vaccine. In addition, the article suggested that though some vaccines should be given annually, giving others only every few years would be sufficient because of potential risks associated with them.

Hesitation to Vaccinate

Dodds says that in her own practice, she only vaccinates when necessary. Rather than automatically giving boosters, Dodds gives annual titers, or tests, to check the level of antibodies (disease fighting cells) in the blood to determine if boostering is necessary. Though she expects that immunity would be conferred for life, she says that titers offer "an added measure of security."

Though many vets have in fact begun to change their vaccination habits, many continue to administer annual shots. Dodds believes that the resistance is not so much a financial issue since vets should still asks clients to come in for an annual check-up and titers. Rather, it's more about changing attitudes.

"For decades we were told that this is what we had to do," Dodds says. "The USDA put the recommendation on the label. Our confidence was totally shaken up."

Non-Vaccination a Greater Danger?

Still, many vets believe it's too early to change procedure. The say that until more is known about the immunity conferred by some vaccines, it's best to take a conservative approach. They emphasize the fact that annual vaccinations have been effective at decimating the incidence of formerly common, potentially lethal viral diseases such as feline panleukopenia, rhinotracheitis, feline leukemia, canine distemper, hepatitis and canine parvo virus. And with the incidence of the deadly feline leukemia virus so high, it is too hard and too risky to determine which cats are at risk.

Dr. Donald Klingborg, former Chairman of the Council of Biologic and Therapeutic Agents of the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and Assistant Professor at the University of California at Davis, says that while the vaccination issue is a complicated one, non-vaccination is a major error.

"In most cases, the threat to the animals' health from non-vaccination is much greater than vaccination," he says. "The diseases are real, severe and common."

Klingborg says the vaccination debate could be settled by more information on the duration of immunity most vaccines impart.

Conclusive Answers Difficult

But while vaccine companies are under no legal obligation to demonstrate duration of immunity, that question may remain unanswered for some time.

Dr. Susan Wynn, a Georgia-based veterinarian and former board member of the American Holistic Veterinary Medical Association says that the problem with obtaining immunity duration information is monetary and political.

"This information would have to be gained by challenge studies in which you give viruses to animals inoculated over five to 10 years ago," she says. "You would have to keep those animals in a controlled environment for this time — only drug companies have that kind of money."

Wynn says that for the drug companies, the decision is based on priorities — it's either more products or immunity studies, not both.

http://preventdisease.com/news/articles/overvaccinating_pets.shtml
 


Here's a good link:

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/default.htm


Will Over-Vaccination Kill Your Pet?

CENTENNIAL, Colo., Aug. 14 /PRNewswire/ -- Former Colorado fee-only financial planner James Schwartz has done for over-vaccination of our pets what Jessica Mitford did for American funeral institutions in 1963 -- a documented expose on the questionable practices, often at the expense of companion animals and their guardians. In his new book, "Trust Me, I'm Not a Veterinarian," Schwartz explores the legalities, pitfalls and sad results of over-vaccination in pets, among other topics.


Schwartz's journey began with the sudden decline and death of his beloved standard poodle, "Moolah," after a round of routine vaccinations. Moolah was named for the famed female wrestling champion, "The Fabulous Moolah," a.k.a. Lillian Ellison. Schwartz took Moolah for her annual rabies vaccine in 1999. The dog had also received what is known as the "Wombo Combo" in previous years, which included a triple vaccination for parvo, distemper and rabies.


Schwartz said he requested a delay of 2 more years per the new law, a safer alternative to a yearly rabies vaccination, but was quoted inaccurate
county statues. A few days after Moolah's shot, Schwartz noticed she "wasn't herself." "Every guardian knows his or her dog, and when the dog isn't right," Schwartz said. Moolah "stayed in the cool hallway, panting and panting," Schwartz said. After taking Moolah back to the vet, Schwartz learned she had developed an auto-immune disease. Moolah had challenges which should have precluded her from vaccination -- elderly dogs may be especially vulnerable to lethal side effects of vaccines, Schwartz said. Moolah died of the disease in December 1999.


Since then, Schwartz has led an anti-vaccination campaign in the Colorado state legislature and has been subject to threats and harassment from the veterinary industry. In his book he demonstrates how vaccinations and their revenue offshoots serve as huge income sources for vet practices.
   

Schwartz calculates that 300 animal hospitals would administer an average of 2.25 million shots per year with a profit of $156 million over three years. He also notes that 63 percent of canine and 70 percent of feline vet office visits are for vaccination shots.
   

Schwartz learned that a British study demonstrated that up to 12 percent of vaccinated animals showed adverse reactions within 45 days of vaccination. Schwartz views current American vaccination practices as a betrayal of trust by the vet industry, quoting the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Journal as stating: "The one-year vaccination frequency recommendations for rabies found on many vaccine labels is based only on historical precedent, NOT on scientific data."
   

He also quotes the Colorado State University's Animal Vaccination Protocol, which states, "Of particular note has been the association of
auto-immune hemolytic anemia with vaccination of dogs and vaccine-associated cancers in cats."
   

Deconstructing the science and economics of pet vaccination, the author finds little value in current rabies protocols, demonstrating far more harm
than benefit to pets.
   

While Schwartz has worked closely with veterinarians on the projects, none would go on the record with their views on the business motives of
over-vaccination by vets. "The reason I had to write this book is the veterinarian choosing collegiality over fixing their vaccination protocols.
The legislation drafts are already written -- making companion animals living property rather than a couch, which they are by law, and also would be a deterrent to over-vaccination through loss of companionship damages. It all boils down to this -- over-vaccination has caused physical and fiscal harm knowingly, due to their business model and the failure of veterinary ethics," Schwartz said.
   

For information, contact James Schwartz at (303) 850-9166. "Trust Me, I'm Not a Veterinarian" is available at http://www.amazon.com.
    

This release was issued through eReleases(TM).  For more information,
visit http://www.ereleases.com.
 

SOURCE  James Schwartz http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS143615+14-Aug-2008+PRN20080814
 


BOOK: Veterinary Vaccines

PJB Publications Ltd.

Overview:

Features national market profiles, market sizes and market forecasts to 2009

The veterinary vaccines sector accounted for 20% of global animal health product revenues in 2004. Global sales totalled $3.2 billion and the latest market forecasts predict the sector will grow in excess of $4 billion by 2009.

This report examines the market forces within this commercially important sector, highlighting key market drivers and providing a detailed analysis of future growth, enabling your organisation to:

  • Understand the development and application of new technologies that have enabled the successful commercialisation of new vaccine types, including gene-deleted, subunit, naked DNA and vectored vaccines

  •  Identify the viral, bacterial and parasitic pathogens that represent core targets for veterinary vaccines in each of the main food and companion animal species

  •  Assess the world market for veterinary vaccines, charting recent growth and examining its structure by major market region and species.

  •  Examine trends in ownership, corporate restructuring and the rising costs associated with the development and commercialisation of new immunological technologies.

  •  Gather key information on the six leading veterinary vaccine companies, detailing the relative importance of vaccines as a revenue source and revealing related structural changes

Key findings

  • Veterinary vaccine sales amounted to $3,205 million in 2004 and have risen by 7% per year since 2000. This figure is forecast to exceed $4 billion by 2009.

  • The largest national markets are the US ($935 million), Japan ($236 million), France ($22 million) and Brazil ($221 million).

  • The Brazilian vaccines market is dominated by FMD products, which account for 40% of sales. 348 million doses were sold in 2004.

  • Six companies account for more than 70% of world veterinary vaccine sales. The market leader is Intervet, with sales of almost $600 million in 2004.

  • More than half of Fort Dodges animal health sales are vaccines, and the company continues to invest in new products - a DNA vaccine against West Nile virus was approved by the USDA in July 2005, and the company has a five-year with the US government to develop an avian influenza vaccine antigen bank

  • In France, sales of vaccines for small animals were worth ?50 million in 2004, accounting for 27% of total vaccine sales. The livestock and poultry markets are more valuable, but it is the small animal market that is driving growth.


 

 

 

 

 

 • Home Contact Us What's New New Litters Puppy ExportsAbout Us Pom Reader Kennel Visit Poms in Canada Kennel Visit  • About Poms Stud Services Links Photo Album • 


   • Fun Photos New Damascusroad ChampionshipsPuppies Growing Up List of ArticlesAbout Pet FoodSkin/Coat Care Vaccination InformationCKC Breed Standard •