UA-12921627-3 Jump to content

Interesting Article Re Vaccination


EGAR

Recommended Posts

Same here.

 

But I am caught between a rock and a hard place bcause I have to re-home *fully vax'd* dogs, so if they are here for longer than a year then I have to give them yearly boosters which I don't do with my own dogs...

 

Sarah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

great, we can hold hands now :biggrin:

 

Me too!

 

I have been a member of Canine Health Concern for around 9 years now and also been on their Foundation Course.

 

I can honestly say that Catherine O'Driscoll is one of the most sincere of people I have ever met and is very knowledgable. She has been slated by the powers that be for so long because of her campaign for the truth but she refuses to give up and I admire her so much for the works that she does.

 

She is a very brave lady :flowers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather not vaccinate yearly and at the moment am thinking that every 3 years is a good compromise. In humans vaccines can last many years but I have known people vaccinated against Hepatitis B and the immunity has lasted 5 years and some people in whom it has lasted 10 or more so boosters are given usually after 5 years.

I do worry that it is easy for people to read things on the internet and become totally anti vaccine, both in humans and animals and that worries me because I think vaccines are life saving in both humans and dogs ( and cats as well although I don't have a cat so I don't know much about it!).

I looked at some of the research and some of the immunity given to dogs by the vaccines lasts a short while and other vaccines longer but not much is really known so more research does need to be done.

I think it is also difficult using something like a questionnaire as research as it is very susceptible to biased responses and also difficult to prove that an illness or problem was definitely attributable to the vaccine. Definitely needs more research but good quality and controlled trials but this isn't easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do dislike sites which are biased and use emotive language though!

There are a few points on the canine health concern that I have issues with. A lot of the science mentioned isn't right- e.g vaccines setting up allergic reactions in many instances- not actually correct.

 

The stuff on inflammation after vaccination isn't quite accurate either.

People may have found viruses in various sites after vaccination e.g in arthritic joints but that doesn'e prove the vaccine or the virus is causing the arthritis, nor does it disprove it.

Questionnaires are always poor research and low quality evidence. People who respond are already biased in some way. When it says many people first noticed that their dog was nervous etc in the 3 months after the vaccine it may be due to many reasons. - the people are being asked with hindsight, depending on how questions are worded you will get different responses e.g - did u notice your dog was more nervous in the 3 months following vaccination - Y/N could get a very different response from - when did you first notice a nervous dog? IF people filling out questionnaires know what the questionnaire is for then they are more likely to answer in a certain way.

 

A more balanced page

http://www.thepetcenter.com/exa/vac.html

 

http://www.britfeld.com/health/canine_vaccine_guidelines.pdf

http://www.canismajor.com/dog/vacci01.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...