Willem Posted May 21, 2016 Author Share Posted May 21, 2016 (edited) while this link doesn't contain something new, it give a very good summary about the advantage of titer testing vs the widely adopted yearly vaccination regime. The owner of our dog's lab friend told me a few days ago that he was due for his yearly vaccination shot - at the same vet clinic where I discussed the titer testing for our dog a few weeks ago. It just shows that if dog owners don't ask, they just go on and on with this risky vaccination scheme. Very dangerous website. That window, between 8 wks and 16 weeks, is were most parvo deaths occur. There is good reason for the multiple jabs that most vets recommend. Sure, if you live out in the middle of nowhere where there are no potential sources of parvo around, one jab at 16 weeks is adequate protection. Most of us don't have that protection, and when you buy a pup from a breeder, the breeder probably doesn't have that protection either. . LISTS of possible adverse reactions are meaningless without data on how frequent the adverse reaction is. Most are VERY rare. ...less probable than the chance of getting in a car accident when you go out your driveway. Arguments about yearly vs. three yearly are well supported by evidence . . . three yearly is adequate and annual is a waste of money as well as a tiny risk of adverse reaction. But you'll find this advice all over the place. Shultz's work on the rabies vaccine, which it was hoped would show lifetime immunity, has, so far, shown that immunity has begun to wane at 5 years. To my knowledge, equivalent tests have not been done for parvo. Risk:benefit studies often flounder on how you weigh the costs of a death . . . in these cases, a death with extreme suffering (parvo is a hideous disease). For communicable diseases, they also flounder on how to cost the risk of transmission to others . . . and the benefit of wiping out a disease in a community. No question. . . there are vets and clubs and boarding kennels pushing vaccination regimes that aren't supported by science. But I'd hate to see people walking away from puppy jab schedules to save money . . . with the consequence that distemper comes back and parvo becomes even more prevalent. Titer testing is no panacea. You can come out with an inadequate titer result when the dog is still immune, and the titer is generallhy much more expensive than a vaccine. ...That window, between 8 wks and 16 weeks, is where most parvo deaths occur... of course - but what is the impact of vaccination or no vaccination on this stats?...the parvo virus attacks growing cells (a healthy adult dog might well shake parvo just off) and the window when the maternal immunity fades out and seroconversion might not have happened is of course the most likely time the virus can attack. ...Arguments about yearly vs. three yearly are well supported by evidence... nope, no scientific evidence backing up a 1 year or 3 year vaccination regime; even Merck states that the protection last longer. When the guidelines where changed to 3 years it was a compromise between financial interests of the pharma industry and the findings of recent studies. Quote from material listed in previous posts: In 2011, the AAHA updated their Canine Vaccination Guidelines once more to every 3 years or more with the following comment: Among healthy dogs, all commercially available core vaccines are expected to induce a sustained protective immune response lasting at least 5 yr. thereafter... But despite their recommendation of no more than every three years, the AAHA Task Force admitted vets that vaccines protect for a much longer period of time ... wrt titer testing: the test for parvo and distemper cost me AU$ 120 vs AU$ 90 for the CV3 shot - Adenovirus titer test cost AU$ 144. Over the life time of a dog much cheaper than a yearly vaccination regime, and still cheaper than a 3-year vaccination regime - and that doesn't consider the future savings due to avoiding all the nasty side effects of over vaccination requiring medical treatment. http://truth4pets.org/2012/06/titer-testing/ wrt rabies and the possibility of a fading immunity: ...we luckily don't have it here so, but even if I would live in a country with rabies I would prefer a titer test every 5 years over the shot (which is one of the most controversial shots anyway). Eta: ...from the free vaccination guide that can be downloaded from the DogsNaturally website: Edited May 21, 2016 by Willem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spotted Devil Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 No, adult dogs do not "shake off" parvo - what a load of BS. Willem until you have smelt and seen the consequences of a parvo outbreak I suggest you be cautious with your "advice". I have no issue with titre testing or 3 yearly vax. I would take anything I read on "Dogs Naturally" with a grain of salt - some of the rubbish spouted by their articles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottsmum Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 No, adult dogs do not "shake off" parvo - what a load of BS. Willem until you have smelt and seen the consequences of a parvo outbreak I suggest you be cautious with your "advice". I have no issue with titre testing or 3 yearly vax. I would take anything I read on "Dogs Naturally" with a grain of salt - some of the rubbish spouted by their articles... Nothing quite like nursing a pet through parvo.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spotted Devil Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 No, adult dogs do not "shake off" parvo - what a load of BS. Willem until you have smelt and seen the consequences of a parvo outbreak I suggest you be cautious with your "advice". I have no issue with titre testing or 3 yearly vax. I would take anything I read on "Dogs Naturally" with a grain of salt - some of the rubbish spouted by their articles... Nothing quite like nursing a pet through parvo.... Yep. Or euth'ing them in a vet clinic or shelter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 No, adult dogs do not "shake off" parvo - what a load of BS. Willem until you have smelt and seen the consequences of a parvo outbreak I suggest you be cautious with your "advice". I have no issue with titre testing or 3 yearly vax. I would take anything I read on "Dogs Naturally" with a grain of salt - some of the rubbish spouted by their articles... Nothing quite like nursing a pet through parvo.... Yep. Or euth'ing them in a vet clinic or shelter. I got out of rescue after having to hold each pup of a 6 week old litter that had to be euthed because of parvo... it's soul destroying... It's taken me some years to get back into rescue (of a sort) T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebs Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 Thanks Julie :) they're going on 4 yrs old and are still robust little critters. Maybe being slightly older helped? I don't know. For any pup their age my comfort zone is C3 + intranasal KC especially considering it's often a full vetwork & desex day. I'm really nervy about yearly heartworm (not sure exactly why) so it's totally off the table. But everyone who uses it seems quite happy so maybe I'm being paranoid. I figure once something is injected you can't get it out again if there's a bad reaction! wrt the negative side effects of annual heartworm injections here an older thread: http://www.dolforums...erse-reactions/ It is a mystery why annual shots are still available and allowed in areas where heartworm infections are seasonal!!!!!! ...and for areas where it would be really required all year around monthly administrations would keep the toxic levels at least on a much lower threshold. There is much which is mysterious. I live in an area where there are no mozzies - never. My property is miles from any other with dogs, and yet the vets still insist I need heartworm meds .In NSW you have to give heartworm meds unless the vet advises against it - same if it is a breeding dog. Vaccination every year unless the vet advises against it - no such thing as a vet that advises against it around here. So you can let your pet dog go without heartworm meds and yearly vaccinations without breaking the law but if its a breeding dog - who cares? Follow the money. I've never ever heard that I have to give heartworm meds? I've been a dog owner my whole life and work in the animal industry, and this is the first I have ever heard of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 Thanks Julie :) they're going on 4 yrs old and are still robust little critters. Maybe being slightly older helped? I don't know. For any pup their age my comfort zone is C3 + intranasal KC especially considering it's often a full vetwork & desex day. I'm really nervy about yearly heartworm (not sure exactly why) so it's totally off the table. But everyone who uses it seems quite happy so maybe I'm being paranoid. I figure once something is injected you can't get it out again if there's a bad reaction! wrt the negative side effects of annual heartworm injections here an older thread: http://www.dolforums...erse-reactions/ It is a mystery why annual shots are still available and allowed in areas where heartworm infections are seasonal!!!!!! ...and for areas where it would be really required all year around monthly administrations would keep the toxic levels at least on a much lower threshold. There is much which is mysterious. I live in an area where there are no mozzies - never. My property is miles from any other with dogs, and yet the vets still insist I need heartworm meds .In NSW you have to give heartworm meds unless the vet advises against it - same if it is a breeding dog. Vaccination every year unless the vet advises against it - no such thing as a vet that advises against it around here. So you can let your pet dog go without heartworm meds and yearly vaccinations without breaking the law but if its a breeding dog - who cares? Follow the money. I've never ever heard that I have to give heartworm meds? I've been a dog owner my whole life and work in the animal industry, and this is the first I have ever heard of it? You are an owner not a breeder. These laws only apply to breeding dogs My link 8.2.1.6 Dogs must be vaccinated against distemper,hepatitis, parvovirus and canine cough in accordance with the manufacturer’srecommendations, unless with the written approval of a veterinary practitioner. 8.2.1.10 A program for heartworm prevention for dogs must bein place and in accordance with veterinary advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebs Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 Ahh, thanks ! It's good to know, I was never aware of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 (edited) It ticks me off no end that according to the law you can make choices about how you manage your dogs and what meds to give them etc but because someone has a litter now and then its mandated differently Not so long ago the wording said vaccinated yearly so some breeders purchased the Parvac and threw it away - signed off that it was done each year. Some breeders also used references that other vets had written for vet advice. But since then these loop holes have been closed and are specific about what has to be included according to manufacturers recommendations unless you get a written note from a vet. Your vet who profits from not giving you the note. These days some breeders buy the heart worm meds and no one can prove whether the dog gets it or not. Edited May 22, 2016 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willem Posted May 22, 2016 Author Share Posted May 22, 2016 (edited) No, adult dogs do not "shake off" parvo - what a load of BS. Willem until you have smelt and seen the consequences of a parvo outbreak I suggest you be cautious with your "advice". I have no issue with titre testing or 3 yearly vax. I would take anything read on "Dogs Naturally" with a grain of salt - some of the rubbish spouted by their articles... ...there are even adult dogs that show no sign of symptoms at all, however they can carry the virus. This is one of the reasons why Parvo is still around as it is easily spread by such older dogs. Parvo is a puppy killer as it only attacks fast reproducing cells of the intestinal lining - conversely the mortality rate in dogs over 2 years is relative small. Talk to your vet if you don't believe this... Vaccination during the first 16 weeks can reduce the risks for puppies, but won't prevent Parvo 100% as seroconversion is not tested (I assume it would be also very tricky to test it as the seroconversion takes time, so there is a lot of speculation and hope involved when we talking about protecting pups against Parvo via vaccination.) Eta: ...if it had the same mortality for adult dogs as it has for puppies I would also assume that the problem with straying dogs would be close to zero. Edited May 22, 2016 by Willem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaCC Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 (edited) Thanks Julie :) they're going on 4 yrs old and are still robust little critters. Maybe being slightly older helped? I don't know. For any pup their age my comfort zone is C3 + intranasal KC especially considering it's often a full vetwork & desex day. I'm really nervy about yearly heartworm (not sure exactly why) so it's totally off the table. But everyone who uses it seems quite happy so maybe I'm being paranoid. I figure once something is injected you can't get it out again if there's a bad reaction! wrt the negative side effects of annual heartworm injections here an older thread: http://www.dolforums...erse-reactions/ It is a mystery why annual shots are still available and allowed in areas where heartworm infections are seasonal!!!!!! ...and for areas where it would be really required all year around monthly administrations would keep the toxic levels at least on a much lower threshold. There is much which is mysterious. I live in an area where there are no mozzies - never. My property is miles from any other with dogs, and yet the vets still insist I need heartworm meds .In NSW you have to give heartworm meds unless the vet advises against it - same if it is a breeding dog. Vaccination every year unless the vet advises against it - no such thing as a vet that advises against it around here. So you can let your pet dog go without heartworm meds and yearly vaccinations without breaking the law but if its a breeding dog - who cares? Follow the money. I've never ever heard that I have to give heartworm meds? I've been a dog owner my whole life and work in the animal industry, and this is the first I have ever heard of it? You live in one of the few areas left that vets still say it's ok not the treats for heartworm, I was advised not to bother by all vets until I moved away. There used to be a lot more areas but it's spread to colder areas. I wouldn't be surprised if cases start popping up in the area sooner or later though. Edited May 22, 2016 by LisaCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebs Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 Not anymore. I have heard molong had some cases (I can't be 100% sure as I'm still off work and miss all the goss) But when my new vet asked did I treat for heartworm and I said no. She just said OK and left it at that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willem Posted May 23, 2016 Author Share Posted May 23, 2016 wrt parvo: http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/parvovirus-2/ http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/parvovirus/ ...some will say it is BS...for others it still maybe interesting... what I took from the article is another advantage of doing titer testing I wasn't aware of: e.g. if a combined parvo-distemper titer test discloses that the dog is immune against parvo, but not against distemper, you need only the distemper vaccine for a second shot thus minimising the risks associated with the combined shots and unnecessary stress for the immune system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willem Posted May 23, 2016 Author Share Posted May 23, 2016 (edited) All the vets I talked to so far (had another chat on the weekend with a vet) still 'recommend' the 1 year vaccine regime for the core vaccines, despite the amended Australian guidelines. They argued that they have to stick to the product labels issued by the manufacturers that recommend the yearly vaccinations - otherwise they would open themselves up to lawsuits if something goes wrong. Now, that seems to be a valid argument. Still they might be a little bit biased due to the potential income losses a changed vaccination regime would cause them. A single CV3 vaccine dose cost less than AU$ 20 (might be even much cheaper if they can source it straight from US), that leaves AU$ 70 to the vet (I refer to the AU$ 90 I was charged once for a puppy CV3 shot). Regarding the 'AU$-4-Billion-over-10-years' estimation I did in post #1: a modified regime based on titer testing would result in AU$ 2 - 3 billion loss for the vets in Australia over the next 10 years - that's quite substantial and considering all the expenses they have (insurances, equipment, nurses etc.) it could be existence threatening. While the titer testing cost more than a shot, the interaction of the vet is mostly limited to taking a blood sample (AU$ 20?) and send it off to the lab, so it would lead to a dramatic income shift from the vets to the labs. Taking this into consideration it seems to be no surprise that they don't offer titer testing if not asked by the customer. Edited May 23, 2016 by Willem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now