Should sound familiar.

Diseases, proactive care, geriatric issues, etc.

Moderator: Moderator Pack

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby JONOV » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:42 am

flitecontrol wrote:
JONOV wrote:Doc E and Flitecontrol are missing the point. If they want a change in the protocol then write their lawmakers, the USDA, the AVMA, etc...But to date I haven't seen any comprehensive studies done on a large scale of dogs that indicates immunity on an acceptable scale to change the rules. If you can point me in the direction of a peer reviewed study, I'm all ears.


Are you familiar with the Rabies Challenge Fund Study? Not sure if it's peer reviewed, but here's a summary and link:

"Rabies Challenge Fund Update - January 25, 2018

UPDATE from Dr. Ronald Schultz: "Results to date of The Rabies Challenge Fund research study showed protection from live rabies virus challenge five years after the dogs received 2 doses of rabies virus vaccine. Other data are still being collected and analyzed for the 6.5 and 7-year post-vaccination periods."" https://www.rabieschallengefund.org/wha ... on-of-immu

I suspect the reason the above is the only challenge study is because conducting such testing is very expensive.

This is the only paper I found dealing with rabies vaccine efficacy: http://www.ksvdl.org/rabies-laboratory/ ... -info.html

That's interesting, but still I don't think it meets the burden of proof needed to revise policies.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby flitecontrol » Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:50 pm

Are existing vaccination policies/intervals based on science? It appears this long term study will provide sound data on which to establish any new policies. Already, it appears that canine rabies vaccines are good for a minimum of five years after the initial two vaccinations.

In looking at the most recent information about rabies in humans in the 50 states, no infections were tied to native dogs. Those that contracted rabies from dogs apparently did so while in other countries. Bats were the most common domestic source of rabies.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby JONOV » Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:19 pm

flitecontrol wrote:Are existing vaccination policies/intervals based on science? It appears this long term study will provide sound data on which to establish any new policies. Already, it appears that canine rabies vaccines are good for a minimum of five years after the initial two vaccinations.

In looking at the most recent information about rabies in humans in the 50 states, no infections were tied to native dogs. Those that contracted rabies from dogs apparently did so while in other countries. Bats were the most common domestic source of rabies.

I would hope, but how many dogs are in it? And what's the acceptable margin of error? Is the 3 year vaccine is actually good for 5 years in 100% of dogs? 99.5%? 98%? 95%? And where's the cutoff? I'm not an epidemiologist or MPH so I couldn't say.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby Misskiwi67 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:41 pm

flitecontrol wrote:Are existing vaccination policies/intervals based on science? It appears this long term study will provide sound data on which to establish any new policies. Already, it appears that canine rabies vaccines are good for a minimum of five years after the initial two vaccinations.

In looking at the most recent information about rabies in humans in the 50 states, no infections were tied to native dogs. Those that contracted rabies from dogs apparently did so while in other countries. Bats were the most common domestic source of rabies.


This is true, and it’s true BECAUSE of our current vaccine policies. Prior to rabies vaccination dogs were the most common source of rabies in humans. It’s going to take quite a bit to convince our public health officials that change is necessary and provides zero risk to humans.

We do not need to see rabies come back like we are currently seeing with polio, pertussis, and the like.
Vivian II vom Jagdkonig- VJP 71 HZP 191 VGP 262 Prize III
Arabella vom Hoheren Boden- VJP 74 HZP 181/189 VGP 281 Prize I
Harvest Moon Drahthaars- vom Herbstmond
User avatar
Misskiwi67
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:04 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby flitecontrol » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:21 pm

JONOV wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:Are existing vaccination policies/intervals based on science? It appears this long term study will provide sound data on which to establish any new policies. Already, it appears that canine rabies vaccines are good for a minimum of five years after the initial two vaccinations.

In looking at the most recent information about rabies in humans in the 50 states, no infections were tied to native dogs. Those that contracted rabies from dogs apparently did so while in other countries. Bats were the most common domestic source of rabies.

I would hope, but how many dogs are in it? And what's the acceptable margin of error? Is the 3 year vaccine is actually good for 5 years in 100% of dogs? 99.5%? 98%? 95%? And where's the cutoff? I'm not an epidemiologist or MPH so I couldn't say.


Don't know how many dogs are in the study, but 100% of the dogs given the live virus did not get the disease, and that's at 5 years and counting. AFAIK, there isn't any material difference in the one and three year vaccines, just the time period on their labels, and possibly cost. I'm not sure what percentage of dogs in North America are vaccinated for rabies, but it's logical to assume it's below 95%. Some dogs are feral and in many rural areas, particularly in the South, owners never have their dogs vaccinated. Is this right? No, but nonetheless, there are no instances of humans contracting rabies from dogs, vaccinated or otherwise. And keep in mind that many dogs are bitten by coyotes, raccoons and other potential carriers of rabies.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby Doc E » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:17 am

Misskiwi67 wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:We do not need to see rabies come back like we are currently seeing with polio, pertussis, and the like.


What does that have to do with rabies ?

.
Doc E
HR UH MHR WR SR Casey RIP my friend :(
HRCH HR UH Tucker 1500 HR Ch. points :D
HRCH HR UH Weezle 250 HR Ch. points :)
User avatar
Doc E
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 2421
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 9:19 am
Location: N.E. WA state

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby flitecontrol » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:03 am

Doc E wrote:
Misskiwi67 wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:We do not need to see rabies come back like we are currently seeing with polio, pertussis, and the like.


What does that have to do with rabies ?

.


Doc, your response assumes a germane answer, which hasn't happened so far. I've given up; closed minds will defend an untenable position, and there's no convincing them otherwise.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby ryanr » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:12 am

And some people only hear what they want to hear an disregard the rest. I can think of two people that come to mind. :shock:
Schwarzwald's Hazel, NA 105 Prize 2
Quade vom Buffeltaler, NA 112 Prize 1
ryanr
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 2478
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:54 pm
Location: Lehighton, PA

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby orhunter » Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:02 am

The foundation of this conversation is based on testing, not Rabies. No one in the business of peddling the vaccinations (or the controlling body) truly knows or accepts the testing falls short of the truth.
SARCASM, one of the many free services I offer
orhunter
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:29 am
Location: nw oregon

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby JONOV » Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:49 pm

Doc E wrote:
Misskiwi67 wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:We do not need to see rabies come back like we are currently seeing with polio, pertussis, and the like.


What does that have to do with rabies ?

.

They are diseases that have been largely eradicated through massive vaccination efforts. Like Rabies. Then people stopped vaccinating. But remember, "most" people still vaccinate. Still, you have those that can't vaccinate for health reasons and those that aren't old enough for some of these vaccinations. Then you have a child die from Measles unnecessarily. For the same reason, you need to have a critical mass of vaccinations for dogs, because there are those few feral dogs out there, and those dummies that don't vaccinate, etc, etc...

Think about it; there's a reason that dogs leave shelters with Rabies vaccines and not vaccines for anything else.

There isn't sufficient data that anyone has been able to show that indicates the effectiveness of the vaccine on a level widespread enough to adjust the mandated vaccination schedules. The links provided in this thread say, Most dogs show immunity at five years and "fewer than 30% of dogs in the first vaccine group, now nine years since vaccination, had serum rabies antibody titer levels considered positive on the Rapid Fluorescent Focus Inhibition Test (RFFIT)."

What does "Most" mean? 60%? 90%? 99.8%?

And where, in between year 3 and Year 5 and Year 9 do we start to lose efficacy? None of those questions have been answered. So changing policy is at this point, irresponsible.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby flitecontrol » Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:01 pm

Reading an earlier post about only one state requiring annual rabies vaccinations got me curious. I thought Louisiana required them annually, and the veterinarians I've had during the 34 years I've lived here never told me otherwise. I was wrong; every three years is fine. My current vet doesn't offer a three year vaccine, so I'll need to find one that does when it's time to get him re-vaccinated.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby carramrod » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:43 pm

flitecontrol wrote:Reading an earlier post about only one state requiring annual rabies vaccinations got me curious. I thought Louisiana required them annually, and the veterinarians I've had during the 34 years I've lived here never told me otherwise. I was wrong; every three years is fine. My current vet doesn't offer a three year vaccine, so I'll need to find one that does when it's time to get him re-vaccinated.


Why do you find it so critical to vaccinate every 3 vs 1 years that you would change your vet? Which I'm assuming all else is good. Is it purely cost or some other reason?
carramrod
Senior Poster
Senior Poster
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 1:17 pm
Location: Kansas City

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby Misskiwi67 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:35 pm

carramrod wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:Reading an earlier post about only one state requiring annual rabies vaccinations got me curious. I thought Louisiana required them annually, and the veterinarians I've had during the 34 years I've lived here never told me otherwise. I was wrong; every three years is fine. My current vet doesn't offer a three year vaccine, so I'll need to find one that does when it's time to get him re-vaccinated.


Why do you find it so critical to vaccinate every 3 vs 1 years that you would change your vet? Which I'm assuming all else is good. Is it purely cost or some other reason?


Annual vaccines when 3 years are legal is often a sign that the business model is based around vaccines only and not individualized medicine. I’d ask the clinic why this is their policy first, (ours is 1 year unless you ask because 50% of our clientele is college students that move, so annual vaccines increase the likelihood of ongoing medical care) and if they don’t have a legitimate reason it would be a reason to look elsewhere.

Decreasing the frequency further seems dumb to me. The risk vs. reward, particularly for humans, is too high.
Vivian II vom Jagdkonig- VJP 71 HZP 191 VGP 262 Prize III
Arabella vom Hoheren Boden- VJP 74 HZP 181/189 VGP 281 Prize I
Harvest Moon Drahthaars- vom Herbstmond
User avatar
Misskiwi67
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:04 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby JONOV » Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:47 pm

carramrod wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:Reading an earlier post about only one state requiring annual rabies vaccinations got me curious. I thought Louisiana required them annually, and the veterinarians I've had during the 34 years I've lived here never told me otherwise. I was wrong; every three years is fine. My current vet doesn't offer a three year vaccine, so I'll need to find one that does when it's time to get him re-vaccinated.


Why do you find it so critical to vaccinate every 3 vs 1 years that you would change your vet? Which I'm assuming all else is good. Is it purely cost or some other reason?

It’s literally the same vaccine.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: Should sound familiar.

Postby flitecontrol » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:26 pm

carramrod wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:Reading an earlier post about only one state requiring annual rabies vaccinations got me curious. I thought Louisiana required them annually, and the veterinarians I've had during the 34 years I've lived here never told me otherwise. I was wrong; every three years is fine. My current vet doesn't offer a three year vaccine, so I'll need to find one that does when it's time to get him re-vaccinated.


Why do you find it so critical to vaccinate every 3 vs 1 years that you would change your vet? Which I'm assuming all else is good. Is it purely cost or some other reason?


I'm convinced there is no benefit to vaccinate a dog every year versus every three. So why go to the hassle and expense of taking the dog to the vet more often? I didn't say I was going to change vets, just find one that offered the three year vaccine when the dog is due. It hasn't been discussed much, but a small percentage of dogs have bad reactions to the vaccine. My last Griffon had a seizure a few hours after a rabies vaccination. He never showed any signs of seizures before then. After that, when he got exercise, he would often have a very slight seizure. It wasn't as noticeable as the first one, but I could tell when it happened.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

PreviousNext

Return to Healthcare

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests