The Zim Family Cocker Spaniel Forum

How Often Should You Vaccinate Your Cat or Dog?, an interview with Dr. Ronald Schultz in 4 parts:

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC--bGthNN8

Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_Zvg8tI ... re=related

Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc-6exZc ... ure=relmfu

Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdPhj8Vq ... ure=relmfu

Very interesting. I feel really good since that schedule is what my vets recommend. I think it might be good for you to send these links to one of the moderators and Jim to see if they can "sticky" it at the top of the page. It's a nice reference.

Very very easy to understand. I'll be passing this link along.

Great idea, Vickie. I've taken care of it.

You're welcome everyone, I'm glad that you find it informative and hope that everyone watches all 4 parts.

Great informative videos, thanks for posting. I would love to stop vaccinating my dogs after their first sets of shots, since there is such strong evidence the vaccinations last a lifetime. But, I worry I might have to kennel them at some point if I go on holiday, in which case they need to be up to date. In any case, I hope the growing research on vaccinations helps educate people not to think good breeders have to vaccinate their puppies before selling them on at 8 or 9 weeks old. It always surprises me to read about puppies in the US being vaccinated as early as 6 weeks old, which can often do more harm than good since the maternal antibodies are often still present in the pup and prevent the shots from giving any kind of immunising protection. In the UK, most vets will not vaccinate a puppy younger than 8 weeks, and there is little concern if the puppy doesn't receive first shots even for a few weeks afterwards.

We always did a quickie in-house titer for our dogs before kenneling them, and both of the kennels we used were fine with that. Of course, I had bombarded them with vaccine data well beforehand, and they changed their position on vaccine requirements because of it -- so, educating the kennel owners, groomers, etc... makes a difference.

Therein lies one big problem, educating these laymen who run the boarding kennels. I know some that still require shots every year despite the VET even saying they don't. I refuse to let them dictate to me when and with what my dogs will be vaccinated with. Why don't they worry more about boarding dogs fresh out of shelters that are overrun with disease. Oh no, as long as that shelter dog has it's 'shots' it can board there.

I don't take Eb anywhere (daycares, groomers, kennels, classes) that still insist on annual shots or boosters. For the most part I find many places are more educated than they were but there are still hold outs. What never fails to crack me up is the rationale I've been given which make no sense to me knowing what I know about vaccines and immunity. Those businesses lose my business and I can only hope will continue to lose others until they change their policies to at least coincide with what the new recommendations are.

For now Eb has not had shots since her puppy shots (and those I had spaced and no combo shots) 7 years ago and her titers show she's still immune. It may be harder some times to find places that are up on things but it's worth it to avoid what I feel are not only unnecessary but possibly dangerous shots to my healthy dog.

We can't risk our dog's health for what can be beliefs based on old/bad information. Sheesh I had one daycare tell me they couldn't allow Eb in because she is raw fed (something they thought might kill the rest of the dogs somehow). I had them call my vet at the time who nicely sorted that out for us. They were working with myths and luckily changed their minds when they learned what was what. So sticking to your guns can help.

JeanG

I have used my "dog network" to find people who had extra space to board a dog rather than a commercial kennel that required yearly vaccinations or vaccinations that I don't do.

Colleen Keough

Ultimately, I believe that if dog owners are pressing their boarding kennels and groomers to educate themselves on vaccination protocols and taking their business elsewhere if they insist on annual boosters, then eventually the boarding kennels and groomers will come around rather than lose customers.

I think the problem with kennels is that even if the people who run them sympathise with the overvaccination argument, they still have to follow the rules/regulations of their license agreements or the laws of the land, which are of course behind the times and even harder to change.

That may explain some places but I know there are no such laws in place where I lived/live now. I was once told it had to do with insurance but they couldn't quite clarify that one when I asked about titers and waivers. Then they changed their story to something else. One tried the 'it's the law' thing with me until I asked what law (no such laws here even for rabies) and they were stumped. One tried to tell me that a dog without current vaccines (and even with titers showing they were fine) would make all the other dogs sick. When I asked if my dog looked healthy they said yes. When I asked how my dog who wasn't sick could possibly make other dogs sick (who presumably were all vaccinated) they started sputtering about how I obviously didn't understand vaccines.

What gets me here is the number of times I have asked and gotten different explanations yet right down the street will be a place that has no such rules so I am not sure some places actually know why they have it other than they assume it's a given without checking at all. The other thing I have found is when I start walking towards a door in some places that say they need current vaccines they will suddenly change their tunes to make exceptions and often fess up they only have the rules because some customers insist on them but they know they are not usually necessary. So it seems if the number of customers who won't come in if fresh shots are required start to outnumber those who still believe yearly shots are necessary, they will adapt. It just takes pet owners saying no.

I actually kind of like watching their faces when they are trying to explain sometimes especially when you can tell they really have no idea of why the rules are there.

I could see those who handle animals wanting to make sure they don't have to risk rabies from a bite, but a titer should be good enough to assure them they aren't at risk.

JeanG

I thought this was great! I was surprised by what he said about the numbers, though-Callie was titered awhile back and for distemper the titer came back 1:1024, 1:32 was considered good protective immunity. I would think with numbers that high she is set for life. They made a goof on the parvo titer and forgot to do that, but I have since had that redone and am awaiting those results.

Dog vaccines have schedules just like human vaccines. If you don't follow this then the vaccine's protection will not be effective.

Which human vaccines have a schedule like the ones they have for our pets? I have never had a doctor ask for my vaccination records or recommend boosters or come close to what we face annually with a lot of our vets. Unless it's for travel to a new place where we wouldn't have had a needed vaccine or a new vaccine (such as the flu shot which changes every year), we don't have to get boosters (at least I have never had a booster). The only exception I can think of is tetanus and then it's only for those who truly feel the need. When we get a shot we are told it's good for life but not our dogs? Something is very wrong with this picture when it comes to our pets.

The problem with their schedules is they are not based on testing or science at all. For over 40 years the recommendations for rabies was a 'guess' and there is nothing to show any better for the other vaccines. They are simply recommendations by the very folks who make/sell the stuff. No long term testing, no independent studies (except finally the rabies challenge which is in year 8 and so far, one shot is still holding). Those who make/sell convince the vets who make the money from convincing us the boosters are actually needed. Those schedules aren't about health, they are about money.

The consequences for a lot of pets has just been too dire to take their word on this any longer especially when titers can tell you what your pet does and doesn't need. No risk there unlike the ones with some of the vaccines.

Good question, the same group of practicioners (at mercola.com) has proposed a schedule for people, I have found it thanks to the videos posted by the OP:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... t-one.aspx
The article itself is a little outdated, and some information may not hold, but nevertheless it is still very interesting and everyone can judge it for themselves.

Very informative series of videos. Thanks for sharing. Unfortunately, I live in a town that still requires annual rabies "booster" even though the state mandate is 3 years

You could take action to change that.

I personally have met two dog owners in the last month whose perfectly healthy dog died within a week of boosters.Here in uk no rabies so can skip that one.The breeder advised me not to get boosters "he's had his injections but it's up to you".

I kenneled my two in June - I had no problem with the owner - as long as the Lyme is up to date and they have a health certificate from my vet - she took them willingly. She said that kennels need to change their thinking on vaccines even though her website stresses "up to date". She is very knowledgeable when it comes to dogs - a groomer, trainer and raises and shows her dogs. A first rate kennel to boot.

Tetanus is an important booster and is not recommended only for those that feel the need as it is prevalent in the environment and if you haven't had one in between 5-10 years (depends on where you live, different vaccines are used in different places) you should get a booster.

The other thing is that many of the diseases that people are vaccinated against as kids are "childhood diseases". The protection against things like pertussis, mumps and pneumococcus wanes but that is considered acceptable because these diseases just don't make adults that sick. There are outbreaks of pertussis every single year in the US but 90% of the adults who get the disease don't have any idea because it feels like a cold with a particularly bad cough that outlasts the runny nose. In the past few years a new pertussis vaccine for adults was approved for those adults in contact with small children, but the assumption is that protection will wane and people that want to be protected for their entire life will need regular boosters.

Kids get MMR and chickenpox boosters around age 12, if they got meningococcus vaccinations at 12 they get boosted before college. Smallpox immunity also only lasts between 3 and 10 years (varies by person and the level of protection starts to wane around 6 months) but we don't boost because it has been eliminated. Hep A fades after 8-20 years but we don't boost routinely because it is only given to travelers in the first place. Polio fades after ~10 years and again we only boost travelers.

There is also a difference in the purpose of human and canine vaccines. In humans, the only vaccines that are designed to protect individuals as opposed to create herd immunity are the vaccines like Hep B, rabies, and HPV. All of these vaccines are a series of 3 shots at carefully researched intervals (one much later) to boost the human response and create a lifelong memory response and the series of 3 shots isn't enough in everybody. We titer test people and continue to boost them every 6 months if need be. There are enough similarities between the canine and human immune response in my reading that I firmly believe that a booster 6-12 months after the initial vaccine will increase the duration of response. Yes, these guys are publishing papers on a lack of change in titer after boosting, but that doesn't mean that the epigenetic changes aren't happening to create longer lived memory responses like what happens in humans. I don't think they are looking at the right markers to know if a late booster is effective and they certainly aren't doing randomized controlled trials looking at titers 10 years after the puppy shots to know if the basic schedule used in everything from mice to humans would also be useful in canines.

As I mentioned, most of the childhood vaccines are designed to create herd immunity rather than to protect the individuals getting the vaccine. Most canine vaccines are designed to protect the individual rather than to create herd immunity. That is a distinct difference, as a student in the health care field my school didn't ask for my immunization records because they knew that the records didn't mean that I as an individual was protected against things like measles. I had to be titer tested for all of my vaccinations because the point of human childhood vaccinations isn't to create immunity in each individual.

As a summary, I think annual boosting is horrible, but the opposite extreme really isn't as amazingly awesome as many make it out to be. Titer tests are not the end all be all in terms of vaccines and immunity. There are other components that aren't tested, and the capacity of the titer to respond to a challenge isn't tested either. In addition by the time a dog's titer (of the quality of its titer) is falling (age 8? 10? 12? 15?), they are old enough that it will be much harder to boost them anyways when an early booster (I don't know exactly when would be best in dogs - I wish people were actually studying this rather than comparing yearly boosters to no boosters) might have kept that titer high and of a higher quality until the end of their life.

We're all together on wishing they would actually study these things. As it stands it means we are crossing our fingers and believing the very folks who make the money vs having good science. Meanwhile, I'll take a titer over a shot any day until we can trust vets and drug companies really are working in our pet's best interest vs theirs. Certainly the ones (vets) who are on board are not doing annual boosters so that tells me something.

To use part of your analogy, distemper and parvo are dog childhood deseases so pretty much unnecessary for adult dogs. Borditella (sp?) is basically a cold to an otherwise healthy dog so not necessary either. I could go on with a few more that people do need to check their areas to see if the illness is a problem or not.

Meanwhile this is timely I guess since just this morning we were having a bit of a chat about vets and such at the dog park and there stood someone telling us how his perfectly healthy Yorkie died of kidney failure 4 days after his rabies booster. That makes yet another to add to my list of people I have actually met with dogs who didn't make it through this 'harmless' (according to the experts) practice.

JeanG

I recently did a little research on the tetanus vaccine after receiving the health form for my daughter's college -- you might be interested in what the World Health Organization's position is on that.

World Health Organization 2008 http://www.who.int/immunization/topics/tetanus/en/
To be protected throughout life, an individual should receive 3 doses of DTP in infancy, followed by a TT-containing booster at school-entry age (4-7 years), in adolescence (12-15 years), and in early adulthood.

World Health Organization Tetanus Position Paper 2006 http://www.who.int/wer/2006/wer8120.pdf
Duration of Protection

The antibody concentration and avidity and also the duration of protection depend on anumber of factors, including the age of the vaccinees and the number of and intervals between vaccine doses. Three DTP doses in infancy will give 3-5 years' protection, a further dose or booster (e.g. in early childhood) will provide protection into adolescense, and 1 or 2 more booster(s) will induce immunity well through adulthood -- a duration of 20-30 years has been suggested.

World Health Organization 1993 http://www.who.int/vaccines-documents/D ... mod3_e.pdf

A fifth dose of tetanus toxoid (given as Td or DT vaccine) at school entry will provide immunity for another 10 years, e.g., until 17 or 18 years of age. An additional dose at school leaving or during military service will assure sufficient immunity for at least two more decades.

Further, Danish studies showed that three doses of a combined DT-polio vaccine given at 5, 6, and 15 months of age induced protective levels of tetanus antibiodies lasting for 14 to 18 years in 90% of persons, 20 to 25 years in 85% of persons, and 26 to 30 years in 72@ of persons (Simonsen et al. 1987a, Simonsen 1989). Reimmunization as late as 30 years after primary immunization induced a strong and lasting antibody reponse.

I always felt that it's important to vaccinate against some childhood diseases but there are also some childhood disesase that increase our immunity and protect us our whole lives. Also natural immunity is different than immunity from vaccinations, and in general going through one disease may prevent many other things like cancer. I am very comfortable with the delayed vaccination schedule I and most of my peers had, so I would be also comfortable with it for my kids. However vaccinating against everything too early is not a good solution. For example, in the past people didn't have to worry about babies and newborns getting diseases as long as they were breastfed because all protection babies needed they would get from breastmilk of mothers with natural immunity. And even some vaccinations like Mumps and Rubbella were not given to young babies, they were given to children before they entered puberty as puberty and adulthood is time when these diseases can actually do a lot of damage. There is undeniable positive impact of vaccines like polio, pertussis, diphtheria, or tetanus, and few other (depending on need and geographical location), but chickenpox? I'm all for a smart vaccination schedule but quantity doesn't always mean quality. Sure vaccinations are good, but are there enough studies to say they are safe in a long time (I mean 20, 40 and even 60 years)? Perhaps natural immunity from some diseases gives us defense against cancer and many other things, and maybe professionals should be open to studying this instead of harrassing everyone to get vaccinations. I base that statement on the recent influx of news articles about doctors who deny patients who's parents' didn't vaccinate them, or about doctors who refuse all vaccinations if a parent chooses to skip one or two.

I was going to take my dog to one of few beach dog parks in my area this summer, and I decided not to. The reason: Bordetella vaccination required by the city (it's all regulated and there's even a license). I decided to skip it because I have learned that it only protects for 6-10 months, and that side effects of a vaccine are far worse than the sideeffects of a flu, and that it's not that difficult to treat dog flu. I don't really understand the requirement for that specific vaccination.