2008 Rabies Vaccine-JAVMA Report Adverse Reactions in Dogs

[Kris L. Christine]

2008 JAVMA Report on Adverse Reactions to Rabies Vaccination in Dogs

 

The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association has published a report in its April 1, 2008 issue, Vol. 232, No. 7, entitled: Postmarketing Surveillance of Rabies Vaccines for Dogs to Evaluate Safety and Efficacy."

 

Despite the extreme under-reporting of vaccinal adverse reactions, this report states on the second page that between April 1, 2004 and March 31, 2007, the Center for Veterinary Biologics, "nearly 10,000 adverse event reports (all animal species) were received by manufacturers of rabies vaccines..........Approximately 65% of the manufacturer's reports involved dogs."

 

The report further states on the second page that: "Rabies vaccines are the most common group of biological products identified in adverse event reports received by the CVB," and they give the following description of the adverse reaction followed by the % of dogs affected: Vomiting-28.1%, Facial Swelling-26.3%, Injection Site Swelling or Lump-19.4%, Lethargy-12%, Urticaria-10.1%, Circulatory shock-8.3%, Injection site pain-7.4%, Pruritus-7.4%, Injection site alopecia or hair loss-6.9%, Death-5.5%, Lack of Consciousness-5.5, Diarrhea-4.6%, Hypersensitivity (not specified)-4.6%, Fever-4.1%, Anaphylaxis-2.8%, Ataxia-2.8%, Lameness-2.8%, General signs of pain-2.3%, Hyperactivity-2.3%, Injection site scab or crust-2.3%, Muscle tremor-2.3%, Tachycardia-2.3%, and Thrombocytopenia-2.3%.

 

Veterinarians are not required by law to report adverse reactions to vaccines, to which the World Small Animal Veterinary Association stated in their 2007 Vaccine Guidelines that there is: "gross under-reporting of vaccine-associated adverse events which impedes knowledge of the ongoing safety of these products," and in an article entitled, A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Effects and Product Problems, (JAMA - June 2, 1993. Vol.269, No.21. p.2785) Dr. David Kessler, former head of the Food & Drug Administration, reported that "only about 1% of serious events are reported to the FDA."

 

In light of the 10,000 adverse reactions to the rabies vaccine in the JAVMA report, 65% of which were in dogs, the estimated 1% reporting of "serious" events by the former head of the FDA means that the actual number of dogs that had adverse reactions to the vaccine would be more like 650,000.

 

World Small Animal Veterinary Association 2007 Vaccine Guidelines http://www.wsava.org/SAC.htm Scroll down to Vaccine Guidelines 2007 (PDF)

 

A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Effects and Product Problems http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Adverse_Reactions/VAERS/credible_estimates.htm Scroll down to David Kessler statement in JAMA - June 2, 1993,vol.269, No.21, p.2785

[1sheepdoggal]

What do they say about lasting effects primarily in physical, and brain function? I have a dog that had suffered partial paralasis due to rabies vac. He still wont jump, and seems rather ...dumb compared to littermates. Wondering what long term effects are, and can they reverse eventually, or be overcome.

[Kris L. Christine]

What do they say about lasting effects primarily in physical, and brain function? I have a dog that had suffered partial paralasis due to rabies vac. He still wont jump, and seems rather ...dumb compared to littermates. Wondering what long term effects are, and can they reverse eventually, or be overcome.

Darci,

 

Sorry, I can't answer your recovery question because I don't have any data on long-term recovery from paralysis. However, the rabies vaccine consists of a neuroprotein which can cause neurological adverse reactions -- the JAVMA report noted Ataxia as being repored in 2.8% of the dogs suffering adverse reactions. I've heard that there are some successful homeopathic detox treatments available, have you ever consulted with a homeopathic veterinarian?

 

There is more information below on some of the vaccine's components which have impacted human neurological function which you might want to read.

 

Here's the information I mentioned:

 

Rabies, Leptospira, Lyme, are killed, adjuvanted vaccines. Adjuvants are vaccine components (such as aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate) used to enhance the immunological response.

 

"The World Health Organization (WHO) in 1999 classified veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk," IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Volume 74, World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Feb. 23-Mar. 2, 1999, p. 24, 305, 310.)

 

According to the 2003 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm (Page 16), "...killed vaccines are much more likely to cause hypersensitivity reactions (e.g., immune-mediated disease)." Could this be due to the combination of mercury (thimersol) and aluminum additives in the same vaccine?

 

Mercury (Thimersol) is commonly found as a preservative in killed, adjuvanted veterinary vaccines. The combination of the mercury (thimersol) and adjuvant components (aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate) in the same vaccine are of considerable concern because of the reactive properties of aluminum, especially when in contact with mercury (thimsersol).

 

Please see the information below, as well as a Congressional petition to remove aluminum additives in human vaccines. Remember, mercury (thimersol) is still used in veterinary vaccines along with aluminium.

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

When reading, bear this in mind: The 2003 American Animal Hospital Canine Vaccine Guidelines ( http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm ) state that: "There is no indication that the immune system of canine patients functions in any way different from the human immune system."

 

Mercury and aluminium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercuric

 

Aluminum amalgam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury-aluminum_amalgam

"Due to the reactivity of aluminium amalgam, restrictions are placed on the use and handling of mercury in proximity with aluminium. In particular, mercury is not allowed aboard aircraft under most circumstances because of the risk of it forming amalgam with exposed aluminium parts in the aircraft. In the Second World War, mercury was used to sabotage aircraft."

 

Chemical Reactivity of Aluminum: http://www.sciencebyjones.com/chemical_reactivity.htm

 

Petition to Congress "Removal of Aluminum Additive in Vaccines Resolution and Petition" www.petitiononline.com/NoMadVac/petition.html "The combination of mercury plus aluminum is far worse than the sum of the two toxicities added together. The synergistic toxicity could be increased to unknown levels."

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12184366?dopt=Abstract "Dr. Gherardi believes that MMF, a syndrome of ascending myalgias, fatigue and diffuse musculoskeletal pain, may be related to a chronic immune response to aluminum granulomas persisting at the sites of prior immunization with aluminum adjuvated vaccines."

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12660567?dopt=Abstract "Multiple vaccinations performed over a short period of time in the Persian gulf area have been recognized as the main risk factor for Gulf War syndrome."

 

http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/conten...ract/124/9/1821 "Myalgia onset was subsequent to the vaccination (median 11 months) in 94% of patients. MMF lesion was experimentally reproduced in rats. We conclude that the MMF lesion is secondary to intramuscular injection of aluminium hydroxide-containing vaccines, shows both long-term persistence of aluminium hydroxide and an ongoing local immune reaction, and is detected in patients with systemic symptoms which appeared subsequently to vaccination."

 

http://www.vran.org/vaccines/doctors/blaylock-covup.htm "This is especially important in the face of Dr. RK Gherardi's identification of macrophagic myofascitis, a condition causing profound weakness and multiple neurological syndromes, one of which closely resembled multiple sclerosis. Both human studies and animal studies have shown a strong causal relationship to the aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate used as a vaccine adjuvants."

[SoloRiver]

Hi Kristine, do you even have a Border Collie? Just curious.

[1sheepdoggal]

Does it matter? The information she has provided is current and accurate for those that are interested in it. Having a BC I would think is pretty irrevelant. She is concerned enough for dog folks and their dogs to go through the time and trouble to post the info. I would think that should be enough.

[Kris L. Christine]

Soloriver,

 

No I don't, actually. Several friends have border collies, but I have one dog left, a yellow labrador (Butter). I tried to post a photo, but the size of the picture was too lage and I can't figure out how to shrink it.

 

Here's a link to a photo of my Meadow http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/challen...und%20team.html .

 

Kris

[Kris L. Christine]

More information specifically on the rabies vaccine can be found at the following links if you are interested to learn more:

 

Animal Wellness Magazine Article Vol. 8 Issue 6, How Often Does he REALLY Need A Rabies Shot Animal Wellness Magazine - devoted to natural health in animals

 

The Rabies Challenge Animal Wise Radio Interview

Listen to Animal Wise (scroll down to The Rabies Challenge 12/9/07)

 

The Vaccine Challenge Animal Talk Naturally Online Radio Show » The Vaccine Challenge - Show #91

 

US Declared Canine-Rabies Free -- CDC Announces at Inaugural World Rabies Day Symposium CDC Press Release - September 7, 2007

[Lenajo]

please keep posting. I live in one of the archaic few hold out states that insists on the totally medically illogical 1 year vaccination. Failure to comply means you risk your dogs life. Comply and your dogs life is at risk. Frankly, it sucks!

[Chesney's Girl]

I'm interested in this stuff too, although I find it all more than a little overwhelming, but I keep reading... Kris, what about Titers? My herding mix boy is due for his rabies according to the animal control at home in California. I worry that if for some odd reason he gets out and is not up to date on his shot the shelter will either not let me have him back or give him the rabies shot anyways... He's only 2 and has already had 2 rabies in his short life, because I didn't know any better at the time. I would like to find another way (legal, I've read some boards where people are willing to falsify rabies information) to help keep him healthy!

 

Enough rambling lol

[1sheepdoggal]

Just has a gal the other day tell me how to falsify the records to make a dog look current. It sure is a draw, as to how I will handle this when the time comes, as he has already had some pretty bad reactions/damage that he has not yet been able to overcome. Physical, mental, and neuro.

[Root Beer]

I'm interested, too. I would really love to see titer tests eventually take the place of rabies vaccination boosters someday - or at least for us to have that option.

[Chesney's Girl]

Just has a gal the other day tell me how to falsify the records to make a dog look current. It sure is a draw, as to how I will handle this when the time comes, as he has already had some pretty bad reactions/damage that he has not yet been able to overcome. Physical, mental, and neuro.

 

What about titers? I don't know much about them but this summer when I am home I plan to take both my boys to Dr. Dodd's place (she's only 45 min away) so I can have their vaccination records current without having to vaccinate them... I would rather find out if there was immunity through titers rather than falsifying papers...

[diane allen]

I believe titers are the wave of the future - but for now? Guess it depends on where you are.

However, if you have a dog that has had recordable reactions, your vet may be willing to make a statement to the effect that a titer has shown good immunity (whatever that is...), and on his recommendation, no vac need be given. (I did this for an older cancer dog at one point....just to cover my hiney....thankfully, never needed it.

 

diane

[1sheepdoggal]

your vet may be willing to make a statement to the effect that a titer has shown good immunity (whatever that is...), and on his recommendation, no vac need be given

 

Good suggestion thanks. He has just turned a yr old in Feb, and will be, according to the records due for shots again this summer. My vet is happy to do titers, I hadnt asked him if he'd do what youve suggested, sure cant hurt to ask. Knowing him as I do, I dont think that he would have a problem with that.

[Kris L. Christine]

Lenajo, Chesney's SL, 1sheepdoggal, and Root Beer,

 

Thank you for the support!

 

Chesney's SL I posted some information on titers you might be interested in at this thread http://www.bordercollie.org/boards/index.p...2&hl=titers . Rabies titers are accepted in some states and localities (unfortunately, my home state of Maine is not one of those enlightened government entities). It is my understanding that the reputation of the laboratory conducting the studies is an important factor in the test results' reliability -- Kansas State University and Hemopet have excellent reputations.

 

Diane Allen, like you, when my Meadow had metasticized mast cell cancer (which started at the site of a rabies shot, syringe hole still visible in the tumor's center), he received a medical exemption under the law, but we had him titered just in case. His titer count was 1:5,800 at the age of 9 and not having had a booster since the age of 6! A rabies titer of 1:5 is considered adequate for humans, and The 2003 American Animal Hospital Canine Vaccine Guidelines ( http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm ) state that: "There is no indication that the immune system of canine patients functions in any way different from the human immune system."

 

There is an interesting article on veterinary vaccines which you can read in its entirety at the link below.

 

Are Our Pets Being Overvaccinated, by Melissa Burden, The Press http://www.presspublications.com/pages/specialreports10.asp

 

(Dr. W. Jean Dodds) “But there is really no breed that is not at risk,” she said. The only vaccination needed, she asserts, is the rabies vaccine because it is legally required. Dogs’ and cats’ immune systems mature fully at 6 months old, she explained. If canine distemper, feline distemper and parvovirus vaccines are given after 6 months, a pet has immunity for the rest of its life.

 

(Dr. Robert Rogers) “Dogs and cats no longer need to be vaccinated against distemper, parvo, and feline leukemia every year,” Rogers said. “Once the initial series of puppy or kitten vaccinations and first annual vaccinations are completed, immunity…persists for life. Not only are annual boosters for parvo and distemper unnecessary, they subject the pet to the potential risk of adverse reactions, he added.

[Mark Billadeau]

While this is very important I'd like to give everyone some perspective on the large numbers of reported adverse reactions and estimated true number of adverse reactions. I do this so that everyone is aware of how likely this can occur with their dog; I am not saying this problem does not need to be addressed.

 

In 2006 the AVMA reported there were >72,000,000 pet dogs in the USA. Assuming every dog gets vaccinated the percentage of dogs that have adverse reactions are:

 

Reported adverse reactions (10,000):

if every dog is vaccinated annually: 0.005% of dogs have an adverse reaction

if every dog is vaccinated every 3 years: 0.01% of dogs have an adverse reaction

 

 

Estimated total adverse reactions (650,000):

if every dog is vaccinated annually: 0.3% of dogs have an adverse reaction

if every dog is vaccinated every 3 years: 0.9% of dogs have an adverse reaction

 

Mark

 

BTW we have 2 dogs that have had adverse reactions to one manufacturer's combo vaccine but not one from another manufacturer.

[Kris L. Christine]

Mark,

 

You raise an interesting point about the differences in vaccines depending upon the manufacturer. Unlike human vaccines, which are required to have standardized adjuvants for killed vaccines, veterinary vaccines have no such requirement, and the adjuvants and other components vary. Those vaccine components are also proprietary, and the vaccine manufacturers do not release them to the public. So, the rabies vaccine from one manufacturer may contain different components from another, some of which particular dogs may react adversely to.

 

Personally, I would never use a Fort Dodge product on any of my animals. On March 31, 2004, the FDA issued the warning letter below to Fort Dodge.

 

Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service

Food and Drug Administration

Kansas City District

Southwest Region

11630 West 60 Street

Lenexa, Kansas 66214

 

March 31, 2004

 

HAND DELIVERED

WARNING LETTER

 

Ref. RAN 2004-06

 

Mr. E. Thomas Corcoran, President

Fort Dodge Animal Health, a Division of Wyeth, Inc.

9401 Indian Creek Parkway, Suite 1500

Overland Park, KS 66210

 

Dear Mr. Corcoran:

 

On December 1-12, 2003 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Investigators performed an inspection of your veterinary pharmaceutical manufacturing operation known as Fort Dodge Laboratories, Inc., located at 800 5th Street, N.W., Fort Dodge, Iowa 50501. This inspection revealed serious deviations from the current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) regulations, Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 210 and 211 (21 CFR 210 and 211). These deviations cause your drug products to be adulterated within the meaning of Section 501(a)(2)( of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act). Section 501(a)(2)( of the Act requires that the methods used in, or the facilities or controls used for, the manufacture, processing, packing, and holding of drugs conform with cGMP to assure that such drugs meet the requirements of the Act as to safety, and have the identity and strength, and meet the quality and purity characteristics, which they purport or are represented to possess.

 

Deviations observed during the establishment inspection include, but are not limited to the following:

 

1. The Quality Assurance Auditing Staff failed to fully follow established Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 81-003-14 with regard to the auditing of personnel working in the aseptic core. The audits performed have not identified deficiencies in the systems designed to prevent microbial contamination of drug products purported to be sterile. [21 CFR 211.22(d)]

 

2. Employees working in the sterile manufacturing area and sterility suite lack appropriate training in aseptic techniques and aseptic conduct. In addition, these employees have failed to follow established SOPS designed to prevent microbiological contamination of drug products purported to be sterile as evidenced by FDA’s numerous inspectional observations. The inspectional observations include an employee entering the Class [redacted] filling suite with exposed skin between the hood and mask. This same employee was observed to be wearing safety glasses when the Gowning Procedures for the Parenteral

 

Sterile Filling Area SOP 14-011-12 specifically states in bold letters that safety goggles are to be worn. Forceps used to remove fallen vials were brought out of the Class [redacted] room area into the Class [redacted] area and back into the Class [redacted] area. Employees in room [redacted] aseptic filling room exhibited inappropriate aseptic conduct as evidenced by the observation of rapid movement throughout the Class [redacted] filling room. An operator was observed to reach over uncovered vials being loaded onto the turntable while he was removing vials that had fallen over. The plastic curtains that surround the Class [redacted] area, which are intended to protect the product from contamination, were displaced leaving gaps which could affect air flow in the Class e area. An operator in the sterile tilling suite was observed spraying her fingertips with isopropyl alcohol before collecting personnel environmental monitoring samples from her fingertips. The above-referenced observations reveal significant problems in the training of the employees who perform activities in the sterile core. [21 CFR 211.25(a), 21 CFR 211.28(a), and 21 CFR 211.113(]

 

3. The environmental monitoring systems in the small volume parenteral manufacturing and filling areas are deficient in that your firm has not performed a scientific assessment to identify appropriate environmental monitoring sampling sites during the actual manufacturing and sterile filling operations that could pose the most microbiological risk to the products manufactured. Inspectional observations include failure to perform air sampling in the area near the vial turntable to assess the condition of the air during manual loading of vials. Environmental monitoring of personnel was not performed immediately after a significant intervention into the Class [redacted] area. Equipment such as forceps, carts, and tools used during the filling operation a was observed being sprayed directly over the [redacted] located in the Class [redacted] area during the media fill. This occurred after intervention through the plastic curtains that surround the Class [redacted] area and after Rodac sampling of the plastic curtains was performed. Environmental monitoring for viable organisms in the manufacturing area is done in the center of the room at times when there is no activity in the room. [21 CFR 211.113(]

 

4. No evaluation has been performed to show the adequacy and efficacy of the cleaning and disinfection process used in parenteral filling room [redacted] as specified by SOP 14-014-08 [21 CFR 211.42©(10)(v)].

 

5. Investigations of a batch failure or any of its components processed in the aseptic processing area did not extend to other drug products that may have been associated with a specific failure or discrepancy. The heat exchanger used in the Small Volume Parenteral manufacturing rooms [redacted] and [redacted] was found to be contaminating the water for injection (WFI) with bacteria. The failure investigation did not extend to reviewing the possible impact on other previously manufactured drug products. In addition, the heat exchanger continued to be used to manufacture other parenteral products after the equipment was identified as being contaminated. Furthermore, the filter integrity test procedure outlined in SOP 14-177-01 does not specify a limit on the number of times a filter can be flushed or rewetted. [21 CFR 211.192 and 21 CFR 211.42©(10)(vi)]

 

6. All established procedures for production and process control for manufacturing of pharmaceuticals are not followed and documented at the time of performance. For example, during the filling procedures for Factrel®, Lot 431334, the [redacted] air sampler was not placed in the location designated by SOP 14-017-21. In the Package and Product Integrity Examination established in SOP 14-059-10 specifies that each vial will be visually examined to assure the integrity of the filled and sealed products. During the establishment inspection, one of the analysts assigned to perform the visual inspection was observed to look away from the line on several occasions thus allowing other vials to pass the inspection site. [21 CFR 211.100(]

 

It is our assessment that the deviations listed above and discussed with your firm’s senior management are significant and are a reflection of weaknesses in one or more of the systems designed to control the manufacture of veterinary pharmaceuticals purported to be sterile.

 

The cGMP deviations noted during the December 2003 establishment inspection, where the firm’s employees failed to follow Standard Operating Procedures, do not appear to be isolated events. On November 12, 1999, your firm recalled a lot of Synovex Plus (Trenbolone Acetate and Estradiol Acetate) because it was released for distribution despite failing content uniformity testing. On or about April 30, 2002, Fort Dodge Animal Health sent a letter to FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine's (CVM), Division of Compliance requesting the rework of one lot of Synovex H (Testosterone Propionate, Estradiol Benzoate) because the release assay showed that the product potency was approximately 10% below the labeled claims.

 

It should also be noted that similar rework requests were made for products manufactured at the Fort Dodge Laboratories, Riverside Drive location. On or about April 15, 2002, Fort Dodge Animal Health sent a letter to CVM’s Division of Compliance requesting rework of one lot of Torbutrol Tablets (Butorphanol Tartrate) because the tablets failed average weight testing. The firm had made a similar request during November 1999 to rework a previous lot of Torbutrol Tablets for a similar failure. On or about May 2, 2002, Fort Dodge Animal Health sent a letter to CVM’s Division of Compliance requesting rework of one lot of EtoGesic Tablets (Etodolac) due to tablet chipping and cracking. The firm made a similar request for three other lots of EtoGesic Tablets on or about May 30, 2001.

 

The commonality regarding the above referenced reworks is that the firm’s requests stated that personnel training and experience were factors in the product quality as well as failure to follow Standard Operating Procedures.

 

We reviewed your firm's’s response to the FDA-483 observations dated January 14, 2004 and signed by Michael Mlodzik, Associate Director, Pharmaceutical Regulatory Affairs. We acknowledge that your firm has made some changes and provided additional training to your Quality Assurance Auditing Staff as well as to the employees that work in the sterile core in response to FDA’s inspectional observations. Your firm has revised twenty-two SOPS associated with the sterile core operation, personnel aseptic conduct, environmental monitoring, microbial testing for the water for injection (WFI) system, filter integrity testing, packaging, and product integrity visual examination. Several of the aforementioned SOPS are viewed as critical to achieve cGMP compliance for an aseptic pharmaceutical manufacturing facility. The proposed corrections will be verified during the next establishment inspection.

 

The above identification of violations is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies at your facility. It is your responsibility to assure adherence with each requirement of the Act and its implementing regulations. Deviations from the cGMP regulations were noted on a FDA Form 483 that was issued to and discussed with Dr. Vickie L. Hall, M.S., Ph.D., Vice President of the Iowa Operations and other members of the staff at the Fort Dodge location during a close-out meeting held on the final day of the inspection. A copy of the FDA Form 483 is enclosed for your information.

 

You should know that these violations might result in FDA taking regulatory action without further notice to you. These actions include, but are not limited to, seizure and/or injunction. Also, other federal agencies are informed about certain Warning Letters issued by FDA so they may consider this information when awarding government contracts.

 

Please inform this office, in writing, within fifteen (15) working days of receiving this letter of the steps you are taking to correct these deviations. If the corrective actions are going to extend past fifteen days, please include in your response a detailed and specific timeline for the completion of your actions. In addition, please contact the District Office to schedule a meeting regarding your response to this letter. The written response should be delivered at the meeting. At this meeting, it is anticipated that discussion will be held regarding corrective actions taken by your firm, the effectiveness of these actions, and the status of sterile drug products manufactured under the conditions found during the inspection.

 

You should direct your reply to Ralph J. Gray, Compliance Officer, at the above address.

 

Sincerely,

/s/

Charles W. Sedgwick

District Director

[Mark Billadeau]

Unlike human vaccines, which are required to have standardized adjuvants for killed vaccines, veterinary vaccines have no such requirement, and the adjuvants and other components vary.

I believe you will find that this is not correct; the FDA does not "have standardized adjuvants for killed vaccines".

FDA: Vaccine Product Approval Process

Vaccine clinical development follows the same general pathway as for drugs and other biologics. A sponsor who wishes to begin clinical trials with a vaccine must submit an Investigational New Drug application (IND) to FDA. The IND describes the vaccine, its method of manufacture, and quality control tests for release. Also included are information about the vaccine's safety and ability to elicit a protective immune response (immunogenicity) in animal testing, as well as the proposed clinical protocol for studies in humans.

There is no reference in the application/approval process that the applicant MUST use a particular set of ingredients.

 

Mark

[mbernard2424]

<post removed>

[Mark Billadeau]

Michelle,

 

The data for reported adverse reactions is from the OP. The data for the number of dogs is from the AVMA. The assumptions I made are stated. The rest is simple math.

 

I'm also not saying that there isn't risk with vaccinations; I just wanted to put it in context of how many vaccinations are leading to adverse reactions since the original post (and number of posts) gives the impression that vaccinations are adversely impacting a very large percentage of dogs.

 

Retrospective studies looking for correlations should be taken as a guide for what needs to be studied more carefully (controlled); they should not be taken as proof of cause and effect. This is because there was way too many uncontrolled variables in these studies that can be effecting the results.

 

Mark

[mbernard2424]

<post removed>

[Kris L. Christine]

Mark,

 

If you click on this FDA link, www.fda.gov/cber/summaries/vaccdev103007sk.pdf for human vaccines, you will note under

"Vaccine Adjuvants Use in licensed vaccines: Limited currently to aluminum-derived adjuvants in U.S. "

 

The information on the standardized human adjuvant components versus the proprietary, non-standardized veterinary adjuvants came from veterinary vaccine research scientist, Dr. Lawrence T. Glickman of Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine

625 South Harrison Street

W. Lafayette, IN 47907 (main phone at University: 765-494-7608)

Phone: (765) 494-6301

e-mail: ltg@purdue.edu .

 

If you were interested in details on that you could contact him.

[Pearse]

I personally believe the rabies vaccination is causing a lot of damage in dogs today more in terms of chronic disease. Are you familiar with the term "Rabies Vaccinosis?" It's a plague in dogs today. I can't avoid giving rabies shots to my dogs, but I hate it and wish things could be changed. Maybe, thanks to the efforts of people like Kris, they will be.

 

Michelle

 

 

What you "personally believe" is of no consequence in absence of actual data.

 

What is "rabies vaccinosis"? What are the symptoms?

 

You state that rabies vaccinosis is a "plague" How many dogs per year are affected? What percentage of the population of dogs is this? Where do those numbers come from (references from peer reviewed journals would be useful)?

 

If rabies vaccinosis is a plague in the domestic dog population, why aren't veterinarians doing something about it (and don't tell me "profit motive" because I just won't believe it. If vet's were money driven, they'd be physicians or lawyers or stockbrokers)?

 

It's all very well to "personally believe" something, but if you want to take responsibility for urging people not to vaccinate for rabies, you had better have decent data to back up your assertion that current vaccination practices are responsible for a "plague".

 

Pearse

[SoloRiver]

In many instances, if an illness is suffered by dogs (and cats) after vaccination, veterinarians, more likely than not, will deny that it is vaccine-related and thus, it is not reported.

 

If you believe this then there is essentially no data, positive or negative, about the incidence of vaccine reactions in dogs.

 

I'm not saying that dogs never suffer adverse vaccine reactions, but that positions on this matter seem to be more a matter of faith than science.

[Chesney's Girl]

I'm not saying that dogs never suffer adverse vaccine reactions, but that positions on this matter seem to be more a matter of faith than science.

 

That's why I am looking into Titers for Chesney and Tucker this summer. If there is not immunity to the vaccine that shows on the Titer then I don't have a problem vaccinating for it.