Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Sun, 07 May 2017 19:07:24 GMT

Once again one star, no explanation.

Doesn't help anyone and certainly doesn't satisfy the public.

They'll still think "boosters" are a con as they are unnecessary.

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Sun, 07 May 2017 18:48:53 GMT

[quote user="Julie Innes"] I make sure they are aware of the risks and leave it at that[/quote]

So what, exactly are the risks and the benefits?

That's what you should be detailing and defining!

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Julian Earl — Sun, 07 May 2017 10:54:53 GMT

How about responding in the same spirit?

Surely we can state categorically that one hundred per cent of animals that return for annual vaccination survive for at least twelve months after vaccination?

Ho-hum!

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Lazy Bee — Mon, 01 May 2017 08:53:15 GMT

Exactly! Been there, done that - just like everyone else graduating in the 60s (or the 70s too). [quote user="Bob Russell"]

Vaccination is often a victim of its own success. Do a good job, illness rates fall, nutters have the ammunition to say vaccination is bad!

They were not around in the days of mass parvo or distemper deaths because people were too scared of the disease to listen to their nonsense!

[/quote]

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 16:34:44 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]Really? Not Ek-Kommonen's account of the outbreak of distemper in Finland caused by a decline in immunity in the dog population, or Klaasen's challenge study which recommended annual lepto vaccination? [/quote]

Here's the summary so let others decide:

Canine distemper reappeared in dogs in Finland in 1990 after a 16-year absence. In 1994 to 1995 an outbreak occurred in areas with a high density dog population which involved dogs vaccinated against distemper. The estimated total number of cases was at least 5000, and 865 cases were confirmed by indirect fluorescent antibody testing of 3649 epithelial cell samples. The signs recorded by veterinary clinicians ranged from conjunctivitis, pyrexia and anorexia to signs of respiratory and gastrointestinal illness, with an estimated mortality of 30 per cent. Of the confirmed cases 631 (73 per cent) were between three and 24 months of age; 487 of these had been vaccinated at least once and 351 (41 per cent) had a complete vaccination history. Of these 351 fully vaccinated animals the proportion of dogs vaccinated with the most popular vaccine was significantly higher than would have been expected by its market share. In total, 4676 serum samples were collected from healthy vaccinated dogs during the peak and decline of the outbreak and tested for the presence of virus neutralising antibodies. The decrease in the proportion of young dogs with antibody titres < 1/8 coincided with the decline and end of the outbreak during the spring and summer of 1995. It was concluded that a critical decrease in the population's immunity during 1990 to 1994 was a major reason for the outbreak in the summer of 1994 and that the ultimate test for vaccines is an outbreak of disease.

This seems more like a primary course failure, as shown by the age percentage of the affected animals and specially with one brand of vaccine, as the titres don't compare well with the British results. Three quarters of these cases occurred before any booster at all so not relevant to our current discussion?

Mind you the last words above in my bold are probably the most significant.

The other thing, I suppose, as a vet in Melbourne said to me long ago "as far as the owner of a vaccine breakdown is concerned the incidence is 100%"!

[I always understood lepto was a very localised disease so booster advice would vary with location and the dogs' lifestyle.]

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Niall Taylor — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 15:50:38 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]on a closer look at the comprehensive reply to my evidence query the only one I would want to quote to owners regarding boosters is this:[/quote]

Really? Not Ek-Kommonen's account of the outbreak of distemper in Finland caused by a decline in immunity in the dog population, or Klaasen's challenge study which recommended annual lepto vaccination? What about the POOCH study - a comprehensive questionnaire which found dog vaccines to be safe?

Looking at individual papers can be problematic, there is no such thing as the perfect study. That's why we need to rely on the body of evidence and the consensus of experts.

Niall

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Niall Taylor — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 14:59:27 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Of course it does, and very comprehensively![/quote] Great!

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]So why isn't the BSAVA or BVA or "pet writing journalists" responding to the sort of rubbish which the Daily Moan and others rush to print?

Do publications not publish rebuttals because they aren't salacious?[/quote]

I'm not sure really. There is an element of not wanting to fan the flames I suppose. Most of this type of thinking - homeopathy, anti-vaccination etc is, at heart, conspiracy theory and as such believers thrive on the idea that The Establishment is against them and paradoxically the more evidence which is put forward the more convinced they become they are right.

And newspapers and the media will publish what sells copy or generates advertising revenue, not what is true or balanced. Regardless of how a newspaper editor felt about the merits of vaccination they're far more likely to run with stories about evil multi-national pharmaceutical companies, money-grabbing vets and autistic spaniels than ones which simply state that everything is ok, vaccines are fine, albeit with some minor reservations and subject to constant monitoring, and then try to get over the subtleties required to assess the risk:benefit ratio before coming to a carefully weighed decision.

Niall

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:43:33 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]The unvaccinated or nosode brigade rely on 'herd immunity'. Works a lot of the time of course.[/quote]

True, but on a closer look at the comprehensive reply to my evidence query the only one I would want to quote to owners regarding boosters is this:

Serum antibody titres to canine parvovirus, adenovirus and distemper virus in dogs in the UK which had not been vaccinated for at least three years

M. Böhm, BVSc, DSAM, MRCVS,
M. E. Herrtage, MA, BVSc, DVR, DVD, DSAM, DECVIM, DECVDI, MRCVS1,
H. Thompson, BVMS, PhD, MRCVS,
A. Weir, AIMLT2,
A. M. Hasted, MSc, CStat3 and
N. S. Maxwell, MA, VetMB, CertVR, MRCVS4

Abstract

Antibody titres to canine distemper (CDV), canine parvovirus (cpv) and canine adenovirus (cAV) were measured in 144 adult dogs that had not been vaccinated for between three and fifteen years.

Protective antibodies to cpv were present in 95 per cent of the population, to CDV in 71.5 per cent and to CAV in 82 per cent.

The prevalence of protective titres did not decrease with increasing time interval from the last vaccination for any of the three diseases studied. Booster vaccination increased the dogs CAV titres. For comparative purposes, 199 puppies were sampled at the time of their first and second vaccination. In the case of cpv and cAv a significantly higher proportion of the adult dogs were protected than of the puppies immediately after they were vaccinated. Natural cpv boosting was strongly suspected because the dogs had significantly higher titres three years after their primary vaccination than two weeks after it and three unvaccinated dogs had acquired protective antibody levels uneventfully. There was no evidence of natural exposure to CDV.

[my bold]

This is the only reference which actually spells out the risks as far as I could see. The others "recommend boosters" in almost every case.

If owners or publications query booster advice just quote the above scientific, peer reviewed, figures above and see how many take the chance.

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

grumpyoldman — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:27:34 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]Just trying to elucidate a point here, what % income comes from Consultations and drug sales?[/quote]

60% Diagnostics and Surgery

35% none vaccine related consults and drugs

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 12:27:10 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]With apologies for length I have put together a few references:[/quote]

Of course it does, and very comprehensively!

So why isn't the BSAVA or BVA or "pet writing journalists" responding to the sort of rubbish which the Daily Moan and others rush to print?

Do publications not publish rebuttals because they aren't salacious?

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Bob Russell — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 11:13:59 GMT

The unvaccinated or nosode brigade rely on 'herd immunity'. Works a lot of the time of course.

Down to statistics and luck! Give me a bit of science any day.

Also how many spaniels are not on the 'autistic spectrum'? (Daily Mail article)

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

J G Wray — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 11:05:04 GMT

[quote user="Robert Falconer-Taylor"]A bit of a tangent, but we are always being asked advice about how to tackle dogs owners who want to join training classes, but don't vaccinate, or use homeopathy. So I wrote a blog that tackles the issue from a different perspective here[/quote]

Nice, but...

Who amongst our owners knows the word epidemiology?

Typos irradiate - eradicate, infectious - contagious, some-same

The point not quite made forcefully enough is the "free ride" concept, not the scientific study or the crushing logic of the mathematics.

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Niall Taylor — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 10:37:06 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]The veterinary profession and drug companies have not produced any powerful evidence of the need for repeat vaccination nor that it is completely safe.[/quote]

The information is out there confirming that on the whole vaccines are safe, effective and necessary. Very little is completely cut and dried because that is the nature of the science - there are some risks but they are relatively minor and less frequent and/or damaging than the effect of the diseases themselves (including the 'biggie', VAS, which is likely not to be attributal to any one vaccine type but is a non-specific problem with injections generally).

Regarding duration of immunity the recommendation of 3 years for the DHP components are solid, I've heard so often at conferences from experts from Mike Day, Mike Lappin and so on that there will be some dogs whose DOI is longer but it's a bell-curve we're talking about and as time goes by then less dogs will be protected so 3 years is a good compromise. There is also firm evidence that a 12 month interval is what is needed for lepto.

The evidence is fairly widely scattered so we tend to rely on expert opionion (individuals or professional organisations) to collate the facts and formulate the advice.

With apologies for length I have put together a few references:

Vaccination links:

AAHA 2011 canine vaccination guidelines (42 pages pdf) https://www.aaha.org/public_documents/professional/guidelines/caninevaccineguidelines.pdf [29 April 2017]

---

Bessant et al 2014 Vaccination and Boarding - Vet Times September 8th - Vol 44 no 36 - http://www.vettimes.co.uk/article/vaccinations-and-boarding/ [29 April 2017]

'Annual vaccination of dogs against leptospirosis must be administered for the vaccine to remain effective. As per WSAVA guidelines, the decision to vaccinate depends on whether a dog's geographical location, local environment or lifestyle places it at risk of contracting disease. While this principle applies, BSAVA consider leptospirosis to be an essential vaccine in the UK...'

'WSAVA states the benefits of protection from life-threatening disease far outweigh the risk of adverse reactions.'

'There is no other scientifically proven way of providing immunisation other than vaccination. Homeopathy and "homeopathic vaccines" are not acceptable. Boarding cattery and kennel proprietors have responsibility for other people's cats and dogs.'

---

Bovens 2014 Leptospirosis, an update Vet Times June 2, 2014 - http://www.vettimes.co.uk/article/leptospirosis-an-update/ [29 April 2017]

'Most available vaccines in the UK are effective at controlling clinical disease and preventing mortality. Only some claim to be able to reduce renal excretion following challenge, which is an important property in reducing the spread of this zoonotic disease". Effective protection has not been shown to persist beyond 12 months [4,17]. It is therefore appropriate to recommend vaccination against leptospirosis annually in all dogs in the UK.

---

Klaasen, H.L., Molkenboer, M.J., Vrijenhoek, M.P. and Kaashoek, M.J. (2003) 'Duration of immunity in dogs vaccinated against leptospirosis with a bivalent inactivated vaccine', Veterinary Microbioogy, vol. 29, no. 95 (1-2), pp121-132. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12860082 [29 April 2017]

Abstract - Duration of immunity in dogs induced with current commercial inactivated leptospirosis vaccines and evaluated against experimental infection, to date, has hardly been documented. The purpose of the present work was to assess the duration of immunity in dogs that is attainable with a commercial inactivated bivalent leptospirosis vaccine. For this purpose, young dogs were vaccinated twice followed by challenge with either Leptospira interrogans serovar canicola or L. interrogans serovar icterohaemorrhagiae 5 weeks, 27 weeks or 56 weeks after the second vaccination. For assessment of the duration of immunity, titres of agglutinating serum antibodies were measured before and after challenge, and the effects of challenge on a variety of parameters were determined including reisolation of challenge organisms from blood, urine and kidney. Both challenge strains induced a generalised infection in control dogs, the canicola strain being most virulent. From the results with different parameters it appeared that the two vaccinations induced a high rate of protection from generalised infection with canicola and icterohaemorrhagiae at 5, 27 and 56 weeks after the second vaccination. In addition, after 56 weeks, still a high level of immunity against renal infection with sv. canicola and, as a consequence, urinary shedding of sv. canicola bacteria, was demonstrated. It was, therefore, concluded that with this vaccine, using this vaccination schedule, a duration of immunity of 1 year can be attained against infection with both serovars.'

---

Schuller 2015 European consensus statement on leptospirosis in dogs and cats JSAP - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1111/jsap.12328/ [29 April 2017]

'Given the widespread recognition of leptospirosis in European dogs that have been vaccinated with bivalent vaccines, the use of quadrivalent vaccines is recommended in an attempt to increase the spectrum of protection.

'There is some debate as to whether vaccines containing Leptospira spp. antigens should be considered core or non-core. In fact, they should be classified as non-core vaccines as the term “core” implies that all dogs, independent of their lifestyle, need to be vaccinated. However, the number of dogs that never have access to wildlife, environmental water sources and potentially contaminated areas is probably very small. It should also be kept in mind that leptospirosis has been diagnosed in urban dogs with no apparent history of access to wildlife or water sources. Exposure to the urine of rodents or other wildlife that visit urban areas during the night might explain this phenomenon. All dogs “at risk” should be regularly vaccinated, as leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease and the disease in dogs can be severe and fatal if untreated.

'After a basic vaccination with two applications three to four weeks apart, annual revaccination is recommended for all at-risk dogs, regardless of the breed. Vaccines have been shown to protect for at least 12 months (Klaasen et al. 2003)...'

---

Edwards, D.S., Henley, W.E., Ely, E.R. and Wood, J.L.N. (2004) 'Vaccination and ill-health in dogs: a lack of temporal association and evidence of equivalence', Vaccine Vol. 22 nos. 25–26, pp. 3270–3273 ('POOCH' [Practice Overview of Canine Health] report) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X04002865 [29 April 2017]

Abstract - Following concerns raised over the safety of canine vaccines, an epidemiological investigation was conducted to evaluate the evidence for a temporal association between vaccination and ill-health in dogs. The owners of a randomly selected population of dogs were sent 9055 postal questionnaires, 4040 of which were returned. No temporal association was found between vaccination and ill-health in dogs after adjusting for potential confounders, such as age. However, reliable inferences from non-significant test results are limited and so equivalence-testing methods were also used to make informative inferences. Results demonstrated that recent vaccination (<3 months) does not increase signs of ill-health by more than 0.5% and may actually decrease it by as much as 5%. This general approach should be used in all field studies of vaccine safety.

The claim by anti-vaccination campaigners that 1 in 10 dogs suffered illness within 3 months of vaccination has attracted public interest and has the potential to influence future vaccine uptake. However, the claim was based on an unrepresentative magazine survey where the hypothesis was known to the reader and no attempt was made to minimise responder or recall bias

---

Bedford, H., Elliman, D., 2000 'Concerns about immunisation', British Medical Journal (Education and debate) Vol. 320 pp. 240-243

[A British Medical Journal article about the efficacy & safety of vaccines generally. This article points out that the Faculty of Homeopathy endorses vaccine use & there is no evidence for short or long-term protection from homeopathic nosodes] http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/320/7229/240 [29 April 2017]

---

Day, M.J., 2006 Vaccine side effects: Fact and fiction Veterinary Microbiology Vol. 117 no. 1 pp. 51-58 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378113506001441 [29 April 2017]

'Available data suggest that the overall prevalence of true adverse reactions is exceedingly low and that vaccination does not significantly contribute to ill-health in companion animals. There is increasing public interest in vaccination issues with transfer of focus from publicity over human vaccine side effects to those perceived to occur in animals. We must not lose sight of the fact that vaccination is a safe procedure that has impacted significantly on infectious disease control. Reduced population uptake of vaccination leads to re-emergence of disease in both humans and animals'

---

Schuller, S., Francey, T., Hartmann, K., Hugonnard, M., Kohn, B., Nally, J.E. and Sykes, J. (2015) European consensus statement on leptospirosis in dogs and cats Journal of Small Animal Practice Vol. 15 pp 159-179 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsap.12328/abstract [29 April 2017]

"After a basic vaccination with two applications three to four weeks apart, annual revaccination is recommended for all at-risk dogs, regardless of the breed... Evidence to show the protective effect of currently available leptospirosis vaccines beyond 12 months is lacking. Until more data become available, the panel recommends restarting a basic vaccination schedule with two doses administered three or four weeks apart in dogs that have not been revaccinated against leptospirosis for more than 18 months...

"Leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease. In humans, leptospirosis... is most often a mild, influenza-like illness. In a smaller percentage of humans, it is manifested by severe, multi-organ failure, with renal failure and hepatic damage with or without pulmonary haemorrhage. Abortion can occur during pregnancy."

"Until more data become available, the panel recommends restarting a basic vaccination schedule with two doses administered three or four weeks apart in dogs that have not been revaccinated against leptospirosis for more than 18 months"

---

Ek-Kommonen, C., Sihvonen, L., Pekkanen, K., Rikula, U., Nuotio, L., 1997 Outbreak of canine distemper in vaccinated dogs in Finland Veterinary Record Vol.141 pp. 380-383 http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/141/15/380.abstract [29 April 2017]

---

Kass, P.H., Spangler, W.L., Hendrick, M.J., McGill, L.D., Esplin, D.G., Lester, S., Slater, M., Meyer, E.K., Boucher, F., Peters, E.M., Gobar, G.G., Htoo, T., Decile, K., 2003 Multicenter case-control study of risk factors associated with development of vaccine-associated sarcomas in cats Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association Vol. 223 no. 9 http://www.felineasthma.org/vas/vascatsfiles/riskfactorsstudy.pdf [29 April 2017]

'Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Findings do not support the hypotheses that specific brands or types of vaccine within antigen class, vaccine practices such as reuse of syringes, concomitant viral infection, history of trauma, or residence either increase or decrease the risk of vaccine-associated sarcoma formation in cats. There was evidence to suggest that certain long-acting injectable medications may also be associated with sarcoma formation'

---

NOAH Dog Vaccines: Your Questions Answered - http://www.noah.co.uk/issues/briefingdoc/12-dogva.htm [29 April 2017]

---

National Office of Animal Health briefing document 10 (revised November 2010) - Vaccination of Companion Animals www.noah.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/bd12.pdf and http://www.noah.co.uk/briefingdocument/vaccination-of-companion-animals/ [29 April 2017]

---

Veterinary Medicines Directorate position paper on authorised vaccination schedules for dogs 2010 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/485325/Vaccines_VMDPositionPapaer.pdf [29 April 2017]

---

As I say, massive apologies for length, but I hope this lot helps!

Niall

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Robert FalconerTaylor — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 09:36:41 GMT

A bit of a tangent, but we are always being asked advice about how to tackle dogs owners who want to join training classes, but don't vaccinate, or use homeopathy. So I wrote a blog that tackles the issue from a different perspective here

http://tinyurl.com/pvkbke5

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

J G Wray — Sat, 29 Apr 2017 08:32:11 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]They have annual check ups etc if they want them which is probably more importan[/quote]

Quite

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]Most of our income comes from Diagnostics and Surgery, letting the vaccines dwindle made little difference financially,[/quote]

Just trying to elucidate a point here, what % income comes from Consultations and drug sales?

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 23:34:51 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]I'm not sure what you're trying to get at Anthony,[/quote]

All I am trying to say is:

There is a lot of negative comment based, on no sensible or logical evidence, from the pet-owning public that vaccination is not necessary and causes all sorts of problems and the more vaccines that are injected into animals the more harm is likely.

The veterinary profession and drug companies have not produced any powerful evidence of the need for repeat vaccination nor that it is completely safe.

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Niall Taylor — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 20:31:26 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

It wouldn't be that the vaccine producers already have the evidence, but don't want it published.....

Any "breakdowns" anybody??

[/quote]

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at Anthony, in your last few posts. Are you suggesting there is a cover up of some sort about the adverse effects of vaccination. I'm probably missing the point as usual, I never was any good at cryptic. Could you do me a favour and spell it out please.

Niall

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 19:09:22 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"]

About a decade ago when the vaccine lobby was at its most strident and was affecting vets themselves, I had a very bright bunch of vets in the practice clamouring to adjust the vaccine policy we had in place. I told them to go and find the evidence that vaccination was excessive and that we were harming the animals, and then we would possibly make changes. They didn't find anything other than the hyperbole and the noise - and were pleased they had researched it.

[/quote]

See what I mean [2]

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 19:07:46 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

[quote user="Bob Russell"]File it with Metacam/Rimadyl/Nexguard kills and move on![/quote]I wouldn't - the first two are true!

[/quote]

Yes, and you've got evidence!

But has anyone got any evidence that "booster" vaccination does any good to any animal.

if you have, fine; if not get some or don't complain when someone says it is unnecessary!

You know, the Holy Grail; EBVM!!

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Anthony Todd — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 19:00:12 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"]

[/quote]

It wouldn't be that the vaccine producers already have the evidence, but don't want it published.....

Any "breakdowns" anybody??

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

grumpyoldman — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 18:59:42 GMT

We changed the core vaccine interval to every 3 years in 2005. Some say that is still too much. If they think the Lepto is a problem they can have it every 4-6 months, we recommend that to working terriers etc, interestingly clients tend to ignore that recommendation. They have annual check ups etc if they want them which is probably more important. Most of our income comes from Diagnostics and Surgery, letting the vaccines dwindle made little difference financially, and people do not shop for cheap vaccines they do not need.

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Julie Innes — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 18:46:18 GMT

I'm another who prefers dialogue with people rather than "These are the rules"

If they don't want to vaccinate, I make sure they are aware of the risks and leave it at that

I point out that they get a full MOT at vaccine check, which, compared to the price of a consultation, makes the vaccine effectively lost less than £5- hardly a "money spinner" for vets!

I vaccinate my own dogs every year, and have always done. Even my elderly dogs. They can make of that what they will

I have seen some animals develop reactions to vaccines, never life threatening. Parvo, on the other hand, I have seen far more frequently, and with a less favourable outcome. It's really their choice.

I never try to persuade the frothers. I would rather we agree to differ, forget about it, and ensure that they aren't driven away from the profession into the arms of charlatans when anything does go wrong with their animal. You won't change their minds

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

George Cooper — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 18:02:57 GMT

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 16:42:14 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Is there any evidence, [not anecdotes], at all, that over-vaccination in any species at any excessive frequency with one or more antigens is harmful [thinking of MMR etc in humans as well]??[/quote]Quite frankly its quite possibly the opposite, there is evidence to show the vaccines don't work very well in the first place - thinking especially of CPV and CDV vaccines finishing at less than 12 weeks.

RE: Sigh! Vaccines Kill - FACT

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 16:37:56 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]File it with Metacam/Rimadyl/Nexguard kills and move on![/quote]I wouldn't - the first two are true!