Vaccinating ill animals

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Bob Russell — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 11:28:57 GMT

I totally agree. Looking on the internet every illness is clearly caused by vaccination, commercial diet, radiation from mobile phones (probably volcanic activity now!) etc etc. To claim illness is caused by vaccination just because it happens in pets that have been vaccinated is a complete nonsense.

The press is very good at scare stories - they sell newspapers. As a profession we should be giving advice based on knowledge not superstition. If you think a problem is a result of vaccination report it so it can be investigated. If you like pseudoscience do not spout it as fact by virtue of being a veterinary surgeon - be honest and admit it is based on untested suspicion rather than established facts.

The luxury of not vaccinating individuals is based on the protection of the population as a whole by vaccination - how short are some peoples memories when it comes to these diseases!!!

I have been in practice for a long time now and have no doubts that vaccination is both effective and very safe. I do vaccinate lepto annually the rest every 3 years - it seems to work fine here. Would I return to annual vaccinations without worry? Absolutely.

If an animal is clearly unwell it is prudent to delay vaccinations but those with minor ailments or most chronic conditions my experience is that vaccination is very safe.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Niall Taylor — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 08:04:54 GMT

[quote user="Roger Meacock"]Maybe you're looking for a reaction that is too closely associated with the vaccine itself. I suspect you've seen lots of animals that have an illness as a result of vaccination but because the clinical manifestation may only display itself weeks or months post vaccination the link is not being recognised.[/quote]

Which of course gives the "believer" carte blanche to attribute any negative event at any point in the future to whatever it is he or she is opposed to whether it be vaccination, raw diets, conventional medicines or whatever the prevailing dogma de jour dictates. This type of statement is unfalsifiable therefore completely meaningless, reflecting only the pre-conceptions of those that make it.

[quote user="Roger Meacock"]As an example of this vaccine-related tumours don't appear at the vaccination site overnight.[/quote]

Injection site sarcomas are well researched, their aetiology is recognised and their incidence quantifiable. The fact that they occur some time following the trigger events in no way supports your previous statement. Mentioning real science and pseudoscience in the same paragraph doesn't validate the pseudoscience.

Niall

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

nikki — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:09:13 GMT

we've had 2 injection site sarcomas in the last week! both on back of neck in cats. never seen one before!

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

vs0u — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:00:13 GMT

Had a cat once with a sarcoma that when sent to the lab they got all excited and wanted to use it for a study into vaccine related sarcomas. Unfortunately for them the tumour was in the axilla and the cat had never been injected with anything in it's entire life (it was 12!)

I've never seen anything more severe than a 24 hour fever or transient lump.

If a reaction isn't seen until several months later how do you know it's connected? How would a vaccine cause, for example, autism?

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Vikki Halliday LLB — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:10:25 GMT

I had one Ragdoll Kitten which reacted really badly about an hour after being given it's second vaccination with the quadruple combo (including FeLV).

It developed severe dyspnoea and oedema around the head neck and forelimbs. It did make a recovery after treatment and we did report this to the pharma company, but didn't really get any response from them.

Have had the occasional dog who will get injection site reactions, but am not certain this is the vaccine, or innoculation of bacteria from the skin. Have never had any sarcomas, yet, but hear that they are more common in America with the adjuvant in the FeLV vaccine, hence historically why they use the hindlimbs as they are easier to amputate.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Bob Russell — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:46:35 GMT

Thank god for that I was starting to believe I was alone in not recognising vaccination reactions. We do not get patients back in with immediate vaccination reactions nor do we see any obvious associated autoimmune problems in the perivaccination period. I have never seen a 'vaccine' sarcoma.

I take a little of this back - we briefly used an inactivated cat vaccine and a few kittens were unwell soon after. They did not come to any harm but we obviously stopped using the vaccine (some years ago). No problems since.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Ian Mostyn — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:32:29 GMT

I had two feline sarcomas in the past 12 months, both between the shoulder blades. One cat had not had any kind of injection for 12 months and the other nothing for 6 months. I couldn't directly associate any with a vaccination. Prior to these two, I hadn't seen a case in 10 years.

Ian

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Simon Neuhoff — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:04:42 GMT

I've seen one sarcoma in a cat in 10 years of practice. I've seen one "blue eye" puppy post vaccine and one acute (in consult room) transient reaction of trembling and vomiting post vaccine.

Measured against that I have worked in South Africa in an area where vaccine uptake was poor. I saw over 60 dogs die of distemper in a 2 month period and 30 or more dogs die of parvo in an eleven month period. As such I am a very strong supporter of vaccination!

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Bob Russell — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:46:53 GMT

Never seen one so not convinced. We did have a soft tissue sarcoma at the site of a cat fight injury, a great surprise when the path came back. How many people have seen injection site tumours?

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Roger Meacock — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:33:12 GMT

[quote user="Laura Henderson"]I must have vaccinated hundreds of animals by now and so far have only seen one reaction - a dog got distemper from a vaccine.[/quote]

Maybe you're looking for a reaction that is too closely associated with the vaccine itself. I suspect you've seen lots of animals that have an illness as a result of vaccination but because the clinical manifestation may only display itself weeks or months post vaccination the link is not being recognised. As an example of this vaccine-related tumours don't appear at the vaccination site overnight.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Noweia — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:04:46 GMT

[quote user="Robert Russell"]

Am I the only vet in the UK that does not seem to recognise vaccination reactions?

[/quote]

Ditto. I must have vaccinated hundreds of animals by now and so far have only seen one reaction - a dog got distemper from a vaccine. In the same time period I have seen far more cases of diseases preventable by vaccination.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Stephen Ashman — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:05:39 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]1 in 17 dogs will die within 3 weeks of a vaccination if they are done annually! [/quote]

I know what you mean but that is not what you've written!

I think it's more like: of annually vaccinated dogs, one in 17 of those that die in one year will have had a vaccine within the previous 3 weeks.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Michael Woodhouse — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 23:55:28 GMT

[quote user="Garry Bright"]The reason why : I vaccinated a dog and some time later 2-3 weeks it developed renal failure and died.[/quote]

1 in 17 dogs will die within 3 weeks of a vaccination if they are done annually!

I will boost dogs with chronic conditions, but not acute illness. We have some animals on steroids and we still boost them (discuss may not work, BUT more susceptible to infectious disease!).

I see a few lumps in horses after tetanus vaccinations, cattle get lumps after Lepto, but never seen a conclusive bad reaction to a dog/cat vaccine (not one I've ever thought of reporting!)

I will boost lapsed vaccinators with a single DHPPIL IF they had the puppy course AND the first yearly booster. If first yearly booster significantly late they start again. I give owners the option of full course, but unless previous status unknown I can't think of any that started again, just because a booster was late.

I have said recently in another thread I live in a rural area and have had dogs die from both Parvo and Lepto in lapsed vaccination dogs. I know of no deaths directly resulting from the vaccine. In my mind the benefit significantly outweighs any risk.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Roger Meacock — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 23:22:28 GMT

[quote user="Ian Mostyn"]Human flu jabs are given to the elderly and at-risk groups. NICE and the NHS wouldn't spend their money if it wasn't neccesary[/quote]

That's not true. There was a big retrospective study of the effect of human flu vaccination in 2006 I think it was and vaccination was found to have no effect on the illness, mortality or hospital submission rates except for asthmatics who were more likely to need hospitalisation after flu vaccines! Despite this result asthmatics were described as one of the "at risk" groups to receive preferential swine flu vaccination recently showing that science rarely comes into it. When the inventor of the flu vaccine says he wouldn't have it it sort of gives a big hint as to the real efficacy!

Similarly it is interesting to note that when the well-known company that does the vaccine amnesty (to get those pets that have lapsed back onto vaccinations) is pressed there is no scientific research to support the re-starting of the vaccination programme with a double dose ...

There is plenty of research to suggest that vaccination gives immunity duration significantly longer than 3 years and that MLV vaccination boosters have no beneficial affect whatsoever as existing immunity knocks out the vaccine without inducing any further memory cells etc

Vaccine policy in the USA is significantly different from here and I think it is fair to say that litigation is probably a worse issue there in which case they are likely to be much more careful before adapting the less frequent regimes that are standard there.

Vaccinosis is more common than recognised and adverse reactions don't always show up within 48 hours or so of being given them ....

Roger

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Bob Russell — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:06:44 GMT

Am I the only vet in the UK that does not seem to recognise vaccination reactions? I hate to admit it but our patients do not seem to get them. Am I such a bad vet that I am missing them? Obviously we very occasionally get tender necks and some patients are quiet for a day or two - usually appreciated by puppy owners but nothing to cause concern.

When I read about other vets worries about vaccinations I am a bit mistified about the fuss. We use Canigen / Feligen / Leucogen.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

beldather — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 06:20:42 GMT

Well the lepto used in the practice is inactivated, so I would use 2 shots in the initial series. Having never vaccinated against chlamydia not sure how it comes.
Essentially I'll use the minimum vaccinations required to get the job done. In the UK I would tend to stick fairly close to manufacturing recommendations due to the nature of veterinary practice here.
Now what to do with lepto if its lapsed by a few years.... Due to practice protocol they get the two shots so just stick with that. Is it entirely necessary, well from what I read I don't think so, as those little memory cells hang around for a verrry long time

Regards

Blair

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:08:38 GMT

And leptospirosis? Chlamydiosis?

[quote user="beldather"]

I would usually just follow recommendations of manufacture. However I've always just gone with the practice of live virus - Single vaccination. Killed viruses, will usually booster 2 weeks later. The whole point of most of puppy courses are to cover during maternal antibody decrease, therefore in any dog over 12-15 weeks, regardless of vaccination history, why do more then a single vaccination??

Regards

Blair

[/quote]

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

beldather — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:45:49 GMT

Regards

Blair

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Liz w — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:25:57 GMT

What are your policies regarding previously vaccinated animals, who are presented for a vaccine say 3 or 4 years after their last one. Is a single vaccination sufficient, or do you generally start the whole course again?

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Neil Paton — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:11:14 GMT

I agree with vaccinating 100% but does anyone know what is meant by a weakened immune system? Seems a bit wooly as a phrase to me. Does it reflect neutrophil function chemokine production or antigen specificity?

I remember reading an article that suggetsed that we all need a flu vaccine but less of the adult healthy population were likely to die. Will see if I can retrieve it my memory is sketchy - could be b****

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Ian Mostyn — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:35:05 GMT

Human flu jabs are given to the elderly and at-risk groups. NICE and the NHS wouldn't spend their money if it wasn't neccesary - which is why everyone doesn't get a flu jab. There must be good evidence in humans that your immune system weakens with age.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Garry Bright — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 07:38:48 GMT

From the few replies it looks to me its a moving target - as to when to vaccinate in the older patient. I agree the immune status of the older patient is weakened. But do we have the science to prove that vaccinating them is beneficial - I don't know.The logical argument that vaccinating them protects them, is it sound scientifically?

@Blair - yes this is tough one. I used to run a horse practice - based on my clients paid me a monthly fee and I in return gave vaccinations/ teeth rasping wormers and free callouts. I had loads of clients signed up on this. The whole basis of the practice was preventative care. I had problems with local reactions of vaccinations. Changed vaccine and within a short while < 4 weeks of this vaccine I had health problems - problems that these horse never had prior to the vaccination. Bear in mind I had a large pool of 450 horses that I had been in my control. So basically I drew a conclusion that vaccination was closely linked to conditions I was seeing. I eventually could no longer mentally cope with the trauma my clients were facing based on what I was doing. I sold up. I retrained in Acupuncture and Herbs -in the hope that I could treat animals and not really have to make those decisions. Unfortunately that does not pay a mortgage a feed 3 kids mouths. So I am back in normal practice and I tow the line - by following what I would term is all your codes of practice. So that is why I am asking you all for your opinion - because I am perplexed at what age do we stop vaccinating, and what are those guidelines that we would say no more to vaccs.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:34:33 GMT

In my opinion older animals, especially those with underlying prolems, are more likely to contract contagious diseases, and also be less able to fight them, due to a weakened immune system and general ill-thrift. Thus vaccination is probably more needed in senior animals than in younger ones.

Re: Vaccinating ill animals

beldather — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:21:24 GMT

Hey Garry,

When do I not vaccinate? That would have to be one big moving target, but essentialy my decision comes down to if I feel that the immune system is up to doing what its supposed to be doing in regards to the vaccination. Peridontitis - yes, otherwise there would be a hell of a lot of dogs I wouldnt be doing, of course in the process of that exam I strongly recommending we deal with the peridontitis,
CRF, CHF - Lots of those guys and still vaccinate, to me thats more of a plumbing problem (be it cardiovascular or urinary) then immune based.
Dogs over 12-13, I would tend to drop DHP (pretty good data that those vaccinations have good length of duration) but would continue lepto and likely start including KC as that would concern me in the older dog more then say distemper.

Dog that 2-3 week later develops renal failure after vax, I'd be hard pressed to be convinced thats got anything to do with the vaccination unless urinalysis/biochem were done at the time which showed perfect health.
Same would have to be said for the cat, progressive renal failure cat that is then put through the stress of a cattery, can't say my finger points to the vaccination. The ulcerative dermatitis on the back possibly related to the injection, but question is would it have mattered what was in that injection?

[quote user="Garry Bright"]personally only vaccinate my animals when they are puppies-[/quote]

Sorry but that is one of my pet peeves, you are letting everybody else take the risk of vaccination (albiet small but still present) and benefitting from the herd immunity that results from this. What gives you the right to make your clients animals take the risk, but not your own?

For the last 2 years I have worked in places that vaccinate every 3 years for DHP, and yearly for Pi & L. Should further studies show we can reduce these to even less I'll be more then happy to.

Just my thoughts

Blair