Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 14:12:53 GMT

I guess without all the possible info (which any vet very rarely would get to obtain in such a situation) you can't know for certain... There's so many potential points of a cause before you even get to vaccine failure, that you can very rarely know with 100% certainty... Hate how the client generally will always secretly or not so secretly blame the vet though...

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 11:48:09 GMT

[quote user="James Laidlaw"]Do your failures get documented as to exactly when they had their vaccinations and tested for antibody levels to see if there has been a vaccine failure?[/quote]

No they didn't,and that's my point; the company just paid out.

I don't think many companies in any field pay out unless they think they will have to at law or they or their product [or in this case, me] was at fault.

The client complained, I advised the manufacturer and they paid out.

Who would you think was at fault, the client thought it was me or the vaccine, when in fact it was neither.

I thought the company should have backed me and the vaccine and told them about maternal immunity as I did.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Alet Engelbrecht — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 10:42:50 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"]Why not just stock a vaccine range that is licensed in combination?[/quote]

I try to in most cases, but my last practice used Vanguard for example and they don't have a kennel cough vaccine in the range to my knowledge, which necessitates the use of a different brand.

As I understand it, it is purely that the manufacturers haven't tested their vaccines (understandably so) to use in conjunction with competion brands, but not that there is a specific contraindication to do so from an immunological perspective. Otherwise, they would also not advocate the concurrent use of their own vaccines.

[quote user="martin atkinson"]Rabies vaccine but I would try to give a gap of 2 weeks between that and anything else[/quote]

Actually - as long it is the same brand - most manufacturers do not object about giving rabies together with normal boosters (Vanguard being the one exception to this)

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 08:00:07 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

James Laidlaw"]and a significant disease challenge may overcome the protection offered by a vaccination. Which is why any incidence of disease in vaccinated animals can't be immediately attributed to vaccine failure.

Of course you're right but, if my actions were blameless, why would the manufacturer compensate the owner on every occasion. I suspect that, had the vaccine been given a day under 12 weeks the manufacturer's attitude may have been different.....

Dire warnings about side effects and complications, let alone failure, are fine in theory but in practice very difficult to get many clients to understand or accept. As is persuading the client to give a further [and vital?] shot at 16 and/or 20 weeks.

[/quote] On the contrary, I find everyone where I work is happy to have a 16 week vaccine and pay for it if they have already had their course elsewhere and are under 16 weeks when first coming to us. Then again, it's a fairly affluent area and we get 20 minute consults so have the time to explain things to people. Also, I don't expect the compensation policy is driven by scientific evidence... Do your failures get documented as to exactly when they had their vaccinations and tested for antibody levels to see if there has been a vaccine failure?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 01:06:13 GMT

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Rob Loxley — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 00:05:48 GMT

[quote user="Alet Engelbrecht"]Personally, I prefer to do them together[/quote]

Why not just stock a vaccine range that is licensed in combination?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:38:35 GMT

[quote user="Alet Engelbrecht"]Jumping into this thread - for those who have (or had in the past) different brands of kennel cough vaccines, rabies vaccines and core+-lepto vaccines in the fridge - would you give an annual booster with kennel cough (or rabies if necessary and due) vaccine or split them up?[/quote]

I give a normal DHPPIL etc vaccine with Kennel cough as I believed anything except Intrac was OK to give with other vaccines. We give very little Rabies vaccine but I would try to give a gap of 2 weeks between that and anything else. May be tested soon as I have someone coming in with a new pup that needs vaccinating and a Rabies vaccine for a passport and they want to travel in 4 weeks.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Alet Engelbrecht — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:26:06 GMT

Jumping into this thread - for those who have (or had in the past) different brands of kennel cough vaccines, rabies vaccines and core+-lepto vaccines in the fridge - would you give an annual booster with kennel cough (or rabies if necessary and due) vaccine or split them up?

Personally, I prefer to do them together - 1x10 min exam for the pet, therefore less stress, 1 free appointment for another patient and, financially, a higher transaction value. I have been doing it for years, then suddenly someone noticed a sentence in the data sheet:

"No information is available on the safety and efficacy from the use of this vaccine with any other except the live vaccines of the *** series..."

Suddenly, I was advised not to do so, although I have never seen or heard of reaction or major failures of the kc vaccine. Conspiracy theory?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:08:58 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

Oh dear, doesn't anyone agree that a product with a 7 year manufacturers warranty must, therefore, in the purchasers mind, be a better product, at least by implication, as the manufacturer thinks they won't need to be fixed very often?

Particularly if other manufacturers are offering the same or better.

Similarly, a vaccine giving protection for ten years [it's an example!!] would be considered by most people including vets to be a better, in terms of immunity, or at least, more marketable product.

[/quote] I guess it all depends on how the person selling or advocating the product explains it to the client, doesn't it? We aren't selling mechanical products or manufacturers warranties. A vaccinated animal of any species is not guaranteed to be protected against disease 100%, and a significant disease challenge may overcome the protection offered by a vaccination. Which is why any incidence of disease in vaccinated animals can't be immediately attributed to vaccine failure. Biological systems are infinitely more complex and contain many more variables generally than mechanical. For me there's not a sensible comparison between these two areas in the analogy you present.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Thomas Johnson — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:49:01 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

They paid all the vet bills and compensated the owner for the loss of value of the pups leaving the distinct impression that, I, the vet, must have been at fault.... My impression was that this was standard practice when vaccines were challenged.

[/quote]

My reading of that scenario would be that the vet must have done things correctly, otherwise the vaccine manuafacturer would have washed their hands of the situation and left the vet to pay any compensation out of the vet's own pocket.

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[/quote]

Yes, I agree.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Claire Fisher — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 16:46:35 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

We recommend a 16 week parvo top up. Should we be vaccinating for all components?

[/quote]

We do the same

[quote user="Lorna McHardy"]

It also seems to me that in the case of dog booster vaccines at least, the difference between the manufacturers advice and the WSAVA isn't that great. WSAVA says core vaccines every three years and non-core (i.e., Lepto,Bordetella,Borrelia) annually. Which is exactly what every manufacturer whose vaccines I currently use recommends.

Are there many that still say yearly in the data sheets?

[/quote]

Eurican is still yearly but I don't know of any others.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Malcolm Ness — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 15:18:26 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Oh dear, doesn't anyone agree that a product with a 7 year manufacturers warranty must, therefore, in the purchasers mind, be a better product, at least by implication, as the manufacturer thinks they won't need to be fixed very often?[/quote]

I do.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 14:58:14 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]I know that was intended as a throw-away remark, but it isn't an obviously unreasonable idea to expect vets, financially, to stand behind the vaccinations they sell.[/quote]

No they don't, but the manufacturers, in my experience do, even though the pups had been correctly vaccinated to the day, fortunately.

Particularly if other manufacturers are offering the same or better.

Similarly, a vaccine giving protection for ten years [it's an example!!] would be considered by most people including vets to be a better, in terms of immunity, or at least, more marketable product.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Malcolm Ness — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:37:13 GMT

[quote user="James Laidlaw"]Or do you fix or replace broken vaccinated dogs?[/quote]

I know that was intended as a throw-away remark, but it isn't an obviously unreasonable idea to expect vets, financially, to stand behind the vaccinations they sell.

In our referral practice we effectively "guarantee" our elective orthopaedics (cruciate surgery, joint replacements etc) and our fracture repairs such that if complications develop then we will see them back and sort them out at our expense. Client's exposure is limited to cost of meds (or a prescription) and additional implants.

The world is changing.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 10:56:40 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[quote user="James Laidlaw"] Irrelevant. Do you guarantee the dogs you vaccinate each year against the diseases you vaccinate for. It's not a like for like analogy.[/quote]

No, but think of what is implied by a warranty period.

[/quote] That if things break down they fix or replace while under warranty free of charge? Or do you have a different warranty? Or do you fix or replace broken vaccinated dogs?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 00:56:07 GMT

[quote user="James Laidlaw"] Irrelevant. Do you guarantee the dogs you vaccinate each year against the diseases you vaccinate for. It's not a like for like analogy.[/quote]

No, but think of what is implied by a warranty period.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Lorna McHardy — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:25:57 GMT

Are there many that still say yearly in the data sheets?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:34:49 GMT

Bob, According to WSAVA, yes. Apparently we don't all agree with the WSAVA so I guess you decide what you do. Guidelines can be found here:

http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf

James.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:28:37 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[quote user="James Laidlaw"]Why would the vaccine companies get a license for 3 yearly vaccination when it would cost them money to do so and mean ultimately they sell less product?[/quote]/

Would you rather buy a car with a one year warranty or a three year warranty?

Which one would you think might breakdown first? [nice parallel actually]

[/quote] Irrelevant. Do you guarantee the dogs you vaccinate each year against the diseases you vaccinate for. It's not a like for like analogy.

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Bob Russell — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:25:24 GMT

[quote user="James Laidlaw"]

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[quote user="Lorna McHardy"]on what basis would yearly vaccination be expected to work any better?[/quote]

Well, exactly my point, but, in an effort to compete in the vaccine market, they stretch the "test-tube" evidence to 3 years and say it's OK if 95% show a 2 times dilution increase in titre.

That means that 1 in 20 may be at risk, and even on that "test-tube" "evidence" they get a licence........!!??

[/quote]

Why would the vaccine companies get a license for 3 yearly vaccination when it would cost them money to do so and mean ultimately they sell less product? Especially if it's so disastrously ineffective as people seem to be claiming?

Also, to those pushing the annual vaccination necessity, of these, how many are giving a booster at 16 weeks to animals that finished their initial course prior to this age? No one seems to have answered that. We do at my current practice and it's categorically the only practice I've worked at in the UK (out of maybe 30-40) that does this. So I am assuming it's not commonplace.

Personally I've seen a dog with viral hepatitis diagnosed post mortem at a referral centre which wasn't vaccinated and a fox with lepto which I can only assume wasn't vaccinated. Parvo cases yes, but only one in a vaccinated puppy - which I suspect was a puppy farmed dog due to it's inherent "runtiness" and lack of "thriving". That's on the back of a meagre 9 years experience.

[/quote]

We recommend a 16 week parvo top up. Should we be vaccinating for all components?

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:57:46 GMT

[quote user="James Laidlaw"]Why would the vaccine companies get a license for 3 yearly vaccination when it would cost them money to do so and mean ultimately they sell less product?[/quote]/

Would you rather buy a car with a one year warranty or a three year warranty?

Which one would you think might breakdown first? [nice parallel actually]

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

James Laidlaw — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:25:37 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[quote user="Lorna McHardy"]on what basis would yearly vaccination be expected to work any better?[/quote]

Well, exactly my point, but, in an effort to compete in the vaccine market, they stretch the "test-tube" evidence to 3 years and say it's OK if 95% show a 2 times dilution increase in titre.

That means that 1 in 20 may be at risk, and even on that "test-tube" "evidence" they get a licence........!!??

[/quote]

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 01:59:49 GMT

[quote user="Lorna McHardy"]on what basis would yearly vaccination be expected to work any better?[/quote]

Well, exactly my point, but, in an effort to compete in the vaccine market, they stretch the "test-tube" evidence to 3 years and say it's OK if 95% show a 2 times dilution increase in titre.

That means that 1 in 20 may be at risk, and even on that "test-tube" "evidence" they get a licence........!!??

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Anthony Todd — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 01:55:30 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]It's not just Poms that whinge![/quote]

I've been here for 45 years but I'm a very slow learner......;-)

Re: Dog and Cat vaccine protocols - WSAVA vs Data sheets?

Lorna McHardy — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:19:04 GMT

Maybe I'm missing something.

If the data provided by vaccine companies from test tubes is so unreliable and untrustworthy in the context of clinical challenge, on what basis would yearly vaccination be expected to work any better?