Veterinarians and pediatricians have a great deal in common. Both are highly qualified medical professionals with similar years of education. Both often struggle to determine what is wrong with their patients since pets, like little people, cannot communicate what hurts. Their jobs are not easy, but the premise of their work is simple: Support the health of those in their care and abide by the oath: "First, do no harm."
Wellness checkups for babies and pets are often synchronized with routine vaccination schedules. Before a shot is given, the consent of the caretaker is required. For human patients, this is where discussions with the doctor can turn dark. Parents are aware of others who have been discharged from a medical practice for questioning vaccines and are wary of bringing up their concerns. Their fears are not unfounded. According to a 2005 survey of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), when faced with parents who refuse immunization, pediatricians reported that they always (4.8 percent) or at least sometimes (18.1 percent) tell parents that they will no longer serve as the child's physician. Pet owners, on the other hand, have latitude to discuss their vaccination concerns. In many cases, refusing a vaccination has the full support of their vet.
When it comes to dogs, veterinarian professionals can tailor the vaccination schedule to the pet. The Canine Vaccine Guidelines and Recommendations offer suggestions about shots for puppies and adult dogs. Vaccines are categorized as core (recommended for all dogs); non-core (those that are optional); and not recommended (due to poor efficacy and unacceptable risk of side effects). The guidelines recognize vaccination as a medical procedure that needs to be individualized based on the animal's geographic and lifestyle exposure. Veterinarian professional organizations allow flexibility and encourage doctors to extend vaccination intervals whenever necessary for the safety of the pet.
Most veterinarians agree house pets should be assessed yearly and vaccines - if given at all - should be tailored to an animal's age, health, and lifestyle. For example, Dr. Matthew J. Toia, Chief Veterinarian Officer for PetLabsMD.com ("Pet-Labs"), a national direct to consumer animal health wellness testing laboratory staffed by licensed veterinarians and veterinary technicians, concurs. "An indoor cat with limited exposure to some diseases may never need some of the common vaccinations. For instance, Lyme's disease, a regional illness for outside pets in endemic areas, is not necessary for unexposed animals in low risk regions of the country. Cats can forgo this vaccine without an issue."
His comments are supported by two veterinary associations, the American Association of Feline Practitioners (AAFP) and the Academy of Feline Medicine (AFM). The Advisory Panel on Feline Vaccines (APFV) has guidelines for the selection and administration of vaccinations for cats. Feline shots fall into two basic categories: core vaccines (those recommended for most cats), and ancillary vaccines (those recommended for only a small percentage of cats.) Both of these organizations encourage cat owners to develop a good relationship with their veterinarian so their cat's vaccination schedule can be openly discussed.
Veterinarians limit the number of vaccines given to puppies on a single visit. A study of more than 1,200 dogs found evidence that the risk of a vaccine-associated adverse event was significantly increased as the number of vaccine doses administered per office visit increased; each additional vaccine significantly increased risk of an adverse event by 27 percent in dogs under10 kg (22 lb) and 12 percent in dogs over 10 kg. Vets are cautious about giving multiple vaccines on one office visit.
Unlike their animal doctor counterparts, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), endorses universal immunization and follows a one-size-fits-all vaccination schedule. The AAP not only assumes that all vaccines are necessary, pediatricians assume that children can all equally tolerate all vaccines given in the standard schedule. As many as six doses - and 18 vaccine antigens - can be given at the same time. The Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that if a dose is not administered "on time" at the routine two, four and six month checkups, the shot should be given at the next visit. Every dose is considered to be so essential that the ACIP has created a 'catch up' schedule for children who have missed even one shot.
Parents have become alarmed by the large number of injections given at one time. To by-pass their psychological concerns, manufacturers have created combination vaccines, such as Pediarix and Comvax, to trick parents into believing that their baby is "only" getting one shot at a time. Pediarix is actually three vaccines in one shot (DTaP, hepatitis B and polio) and Comvax combines the hepatitis B and HiB vaccine into one shot. The ACIP states that, "The use of combination vaccines is preferred over separate injections of its equivalent vaccine components". The AAP backs up this recommendation, urging combination vaccines to "improve timely vaccination coverage." Both ACIP and AAP overlook a potentially serious problem with combination shots: If a reaction occurs, it is impossible to determine which vaccine caused the side effect. Animal doctors have figured this out. The Association of Feline Practitioners (AAFP) recommends using single dose vaccines because "increasing the number of antigens in a vaccine also increases the probability associated adverse events."
Most pediatricians seem to have a "vaccinate no matter what" approach to childhood immunizations rather than ensuring the safety and appropriateness of the individual child. The AAP encourages pediatricians to "work individually and collectively at local and national levels to ensure that all children receive all childhood immunizations on time." This includes giving vaccines to children, even when they are sick. According to the most recent "General Recommendations for Vaccination", published in 2006 by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), there are few reasons for delaying vaccination. In fact, the guidelines state, "Among the most common conditions often inappropriately considered contraindications are diarrhea, minor upper-respiratory tract illnesses (including otitis media) with or without fever, mild-to-moderate local reactions to a previous dose of vaccine, current antimicrobial therapy, and the convalescent phase of an acute illness." Pediatricians, at the behest of the CDC and the AAP, follow the CDC's instructions to use of every encounter as an opportunity to vaccinate.
When animals are sick, most vets choose to err on the side of safety. Vaccines are delayed until the pet is healthy to minimize the risk of a reaction. According to PetEducation.com, the decision to vaccinate a sick animal should be made on an individual basis. The vet determines if a shot is appropriate by performing a physical examination and possibly obtaining laboratory tests to aid in the decision. Not so with children. According to the CDC, a routine physical exam and taking a temperature is no longer a prerequisite before vaccinating. If a child appears in the doctor's office, vaccination should proceed.
Avoiding over-vaccination: Vaccine Titers
Many vets are concerned about the potential for side effects and complications from unnecessary shots and boosters. They order a blood test, called a titer, to determine the need for additional vaccinations. A vaccine titer is test that measures the level of an antibody in the blood, a component usually induced by vaccination. A titer is reported as a ratio of one to a number. The higher that number, the better. For example, a titer of 1:5 is a low titer, and generally implies a susceptibility to disease. A titer of 1:1,000,000 is a very high titer, and implies immunity. It is generally accept that a high titer indicates further vaccination is unnecessary.
While useful as a guide, titer levels have limitations. They only measure one component of the immune system so the level of full protection is unknown. Antibodies cannot be distinguished between those generated by vaccination from those developed after recovery from a disease. Except where vaccination is required by law, all animals can have serum antibody titers measured to determine the need for booster shots. Testing is especially important for pets that have previously experienced an adverse reaction. While not all vets agree with checking antibody titers, the test is available for pet owners who prefer not to follow the conventional practice of annual boosters.
While veterinary medical associations are advocates of vaccination, they insist that immunization is only one component of an individualized, health-care plan for pets. One organization that wants to assist owners in their quest for healthy pets is PetLabsMD.com, the first and only national company to offer consumer-direct laboratory testing. Pet owners can actively participate in the health and wellness for their pets. Tests can be ordered directly through the internet by owners at substantial savings. PetLabsMD.com offers hundreds of screening tests, from preventive profiles for cancer, to tests for infectious diseases, diabetes, nutritional deficiencies, and vaccination titers.
Most importantly, owners will have the added convenience of having their pets' blood tests done in the privacy of their own homes, avoiding the added stress of taking a pet to the vet. PetLabsMD.com is expanding their nationwide network of veterinarians and veterinary technicians who will come directly to your home to draw the necessary samples. Pet owners without access to a holistic veterinarian can order important health tests directly from Pet-Labs.
Vets vs Peds: A Interesting Comparison
Unlike the AAP that routinely denies any connection between vaccines, adverse events and side effects, the Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents (COBTA) at the American Veterinary Medical Association concludes that vaccines can cause problems and should be individualized. The following is an excerpt of their policy:
"There are insufficient data available to scientifically determine a single best vaccination protocol regimen for application to all animals globally. Despite significant advances in our knowledge of antigens and antigen presentation, gaps still remain in our under-standing of the immune system's acute and chronic reaction to multiple vaccinations. The body of knowledge surrounding the genetic variability within individual breeds or species and the resulting idiopathic responses to vaccination (including vaccine-associated adverse reactions), is increasing but remains too inconclusive to make specific recommendations appropriate for all patients. Consequently, COBTA believes that a customized approach to recommended vaccination protocols is the safest and most effective method to medically address the increasing diversity in patients presented for immunization."
It appears that veterinarians are more prudent about vaccination than their pediatrician counterparts. A comparison of Vets to Peds can be summarized as follows:
It's time for pediatricians, the AAP, the CDC, the ACIP and all others involved with human vaccination programs to acknowledge that vaccines have risks and can cause serious harm, including death. If animal doctors can work with owners to individualize vaccination schedules, to avoid over-vaccinating though vaccine titers, and to encourage participatory care, human doctors need to start doing the same. Parents need to demand care that is as good for their children as it is for their pets.
Follow Dr. Sherri Tenpenny on Twitter: www.twitter.com/BusyDrT@twitter
David Kirby: EPA Study: Autism Boom Began in 1988, Environmental Factors Are Assumed
Tabby Biddle: The Difference Between Curing vs. Healing
Rose Procopio: The Love of My Dog
http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/ApplyForaGrant.html
Thank you for your article, Twyla. I wanted to comment at Age of Autism but it looks like comments have been closed so I'm placing what I wrote here.
When you're forced by law to get your pets vaccinated, people, make them shoot them in the tips of their tails.
This way if cancer is contracted you may be able to save their lives by removing the tail.
I learned from this site that cancer in animals usually starts at the injection site.
My little chihuahua had a sore on his back that wouldn't heal & I never put 2 + 2 together until I read this most informative site.
It's dedicated to the loving pet of the person who created it & is the most informative I've ever seen.
Many cites & resources are used & even the history of vaccinations is recorded there.
When I learned my "trusting me with his well being" little dog developed cancer & had to be put to sleep at that site, it was like losing him all over again & I'm still outraged.
My little Taco Bob got his rabies booster & fell out. Then life saving measures had to be taken. Stupid me, didn't even figure out the vaccination killed him even after that & the biopsied sore that told us he had cancer until I read the facts at that site.
I want to be very clear. My children are not "quirky". They wouldn't have "slipped by" un-noticed several decades ago. Both of them would have clearly stood out and received some sort of a "diagnosis" - as neither could enter school with the ability to "converse". To clarify - they weren't "shy" - they couldn't "verbally interact with their peers".
Did you grow up with a bunch of kids, who had various "challenges"? I'm honestly curious - because I didn't...and many of the parents that I speak to didn't either. A few older teachers have actually made note of the more "difficult" kids of today. These aren't kids going un-noticed, they are growing up with many more "challenges".
Did you have aunts/uncles with autism? Grandparent aged relatives? Great-grandparent aged? Not "quirky folks" - but, relatives (your age or older) who were diagnosed with full-blown autism? I ask because of the "family history" you keep bringing up.
In terms of "anecdotes" - which you seem to dislike - when SHOULD we believe parents? Should we believe them when they witness a crime? Should we believe them when they report a reaction to a prescription drug? Do you see how there might be a "slippery slope" to this "take them seriously" versus "blow them off"
I grew up in an upper-middleclass neighborhood, so it's not surprising I didn't see many kids with FAS. My graduating class was ~450. I couldn't tell you much about kids at graduation, as not everyone was mainstreamed. In my elementary school though, there were ~100 kids in my year. One of them had Down Syndrome (prevalence ~1/800). Also, I know of at least three who went on to get an AD(H)D diagnosis (prevalence 3-5%). There were 4 kids in my class (of ~25) and another 2-3 (besides the girl with Down) down the hall who got extra time for test taking, I don't know their diagnosis, but they clearly had some sort of learning disability, some primarily in math, others with reading (dyslexia?). Myself and 3-4 others had mild speech impediments as children. Another guy developed schizophrenia before graduation. One girl died from leukemia. I have no idea how many were depressed, but I know two have since committed suicide (RIP). And there was one kid, sweet guy, but could never understand when you didn't have time to talk. He was in the group that got extra time for test taking and the one that had some speech therapy during free period. We all knew there was clearly something off about him, he wasn't "slow" like the other kids, but nobody told US his diagnosis. Sounds like 1/100 with autism to me.
Your response: "WOW! Really?!? Said by a person who has no "sick children". Perhaps you would prefer a child who is mobile - but, unable to fully participate in our world...to a child who is in a wheelchair, but is otherwise able to fully converse, engage and interact in our world. I'd suspect that others may feel differently from you."
Let me be perfectly clear. I think psych disorders are a BAD THING. They make the lives of people who have them and their loved ones VERY DIFFICULT, both emotionally and financially (even physically at times!). But, until historically recently, we had no hope of understanding or treating them. When we were developing vaccines of rid the country of polio, this was the case for ADD (and autism, for that matter). Therefore, families and society as a whole focused their attention on problems we could fix. Furthermore, diseases like poilio were much more likely to kill, cripple, and disfigure, so whether right or not, it's not surprising that they took priority.
Isjois wrote: "At best, your comment is disingenuous. The majority of American children are fully vaccinated - so, there is no way to prove that "infectious diseases" would lead to more morbidity and/or mortality than our vaccines. You HAVE no accurate statistics - because they don't exist." and the went on to list stats (the irony!) about the current state of vaccination and asked for proof that the 22% of children who have not been fully vaccinated suffer more from infectious disease.
here's the problem: isjois has discounted the history of infectious disease in this country. I do actually have a way of proving a given infectious disease (measles for example) has a higher morbidity/mortality rate than the vaccine for it. Before we began immunizing against measles, more children died/were injured from the disease (per capita, though possibly even without that modifier) than are injured by the vaccine today. We start giving the vaccine, people stop getting measles, stop being hurt by it. As proof of principle, if people stop getting vaccinated, measles comes back (ex: UK) and people start dying again.
Also, regarding children who are not fully vaccinated, keeping in mind that 22% isn't a failure to vaccinate against any one thing, but is scattered across various immunizations given, I refer you to discussions of herd immunity.
Isjois: "Studies" are done by human beings with individual motives. "Science" is not always "innocent" or "pure". then cited this link http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/central-figure-in-cdc-vac_b_494303.html about how a scientist who published a study invalidating the vaccine-autism link disappeared with money intended to fund his research.
My response to the above is "science" is a process, a method by which we asses evidence and draw conclusions. Yes, individuals involved are not infallible, they are human. (I would argue institutional review board oversight, other internal checks, and peer review, make each paper more likely to have integrity than individualX making claims without any oversight) In fact, I could counter isjois' example of human failing with a number of my own centering around people with whose views she agrees. However, to structure my argument this way would be pointless, as the morality of an individual does not necessarily impact the validity of their claim. Though, I will admit if this scientist ran off with the money he was supposed to use to do the study, the the data may well be made up from whole cloth. That is why it is a good thing science does not depend on the results of one person. The scientific consensus comes from replication and peer-review. Just because one person is corrupt does not mean the entire institution is.
My cat lives in my house and only goes elsewhere when I have to go out of town. If I want to space his boosters out, the chances of it being a problem and resulting in infection for him are slim. He cannot get sick if he never has an opportunity to be exposed to other cats, and therefore disease.
A child goes out with his parents visiting family, goes to school five times a week, goes to church, goes with you shopping, and any number of other activities in which they come into contact with other people. The opportunity for infection there is high, therefore, sticking to the recommended vaccination schedule is more important.
The author speaks of Vets considering age and lifestyle when deciding how, when, and what to vaccinate. Doctors might do that too if any child actually lived the sheltered life of a pet. Also, titers for some vaccines ARE done. I have to have blood drawn for a HepB titer next month - after 3 shots have been given to make sure I don't need more. Believe it or not, vaccine suggestions are often conservative.
Also: "Most vets recognize that a one-size-fits-all vaccine policy is not appropriate. Not so for people doctors." I'm not sure how this is a bad thing. It seems to me there is a lot more difference between a Pomeranian and a Mastiff than there is between two children.
Your child getting the chickenpox may not be life threatening for them, but what about when they go visit grandma before you realize they are sick and grandma escaped chicken pox as a child, but gets it now. Suddenly you're dealing with something very serious. Bottom line: humans are social with others of our species, and herd immunity from vaccines is the best way we know to prevent illness in vulnerable populations.
Different strokes for different folks.Your immune system may prefer the challenge of going commando and fighting off wild strains of measles, mumps, Hib, Hep B, chickenpox, polio, diptheria, tetanaus. But when I asked my immune system, it told me that it would rather live longer and healthier, even if there was less excitement.
This recent, shocking & explosive confession of the brave & noble EX-pharmaceutical employee, John Virapen, should be on every major news network & front page of every newspaper in the world with follow up daily.
At least we can count on Huffingtonpost.com, IMHO, which is the best on line newspaper there is, to keep up posted on real news.
No one should miss this video John Virapen allowed to be recorded. Our children's well being & very lives depend on this truth not being censored.
"EX PHARMACUITICAL EMPLOYEE CONFESSES TO CRIMES AGAIST HUMANITY"
http://www.johnvirapen.com
And all you have to do to find out all about it is buy his book! If would not mind, would you buy the book and report to us all of the proof that this insider has that vaccines cause autism? That is where the answers must lie!
She clearly challenges the mainstream belief that vaccines are "always wonderful" all of the time. To challenge "conventional wisdom" always requires bravery.
Mumps vaccine. Mumps is a childhood illness that is completely trivial for children. However, when adult males get it, it causes catastrophic swelling in the testicles which results in permanent infertility. The mumps vaccine does not immunize everyone who gets it, and when it does work, immunization only lasts about a year. The vaccine therefore needs to be given every year, for life, or the person is vulnerable to mumps again. While schoolchildren may get mumps vaccine on a regular basis, adults do not. What the mumps vaccine is doing is taking a harmless childhood disease and delaying it into adulthood when it has catastrophic effects. And in fact, there is a rise in adult mumps cases.
We should not be vaccinating for mumps. Chicken pox vaccine is the same story. For almost all children, chicken pox is harmless. For adults, it causes catastrophic brain swelling. The vaccine needs repeating every year, but people aren't getting it every year. It would be better to allow children to take the risk of getting the harmless chicken pox, instead of delaying the disease to adulthood when it has catastrophic effects. And in fact, there is a rise in adult chicken pox cases since the vaccine came into being.
-------
Wow!!. According to you, school children get vaccinated against mumps every year.
if I was to check the vaccination schedule of Canada, where I live, or the United States, then I would find that mumps vaccination was recommended every year. And since in Canada and the United States mump vaccine is only available in the MMR vaccine, then every year children would receive MMR. vaccine.
Funny, when I check the recommendations, I find that MMR vaccine is only given twice to children.
Perhaps you are in error.
Besides which, your objection proves my point. No one's immunity is actually kept up for mumps, thus helping delay the trivial childhood disease into a catastrophic adult one.
You seem to believe that if mumps vaccine wore off swiftly that of course children would be vaccinated frequently enough. That's the koolaid, my friend. And in this case, it's absolutely not in the best interest of individuals or society, or of the herd, to give mumps or chicken pox vaccines to children.
The facts I presented are discussed in the following interview of great importance:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/10/wakefield-interview.aspx
They discuss the fact that vaccination schedules and protocols are policy-driven instead of being child-health-and-safety driven, among other crucial information.
Mumps in children is not a life-threatening disease;
The immunity afforded by two mumps vaccinations is not permanent, and will not last into the adolescent years;
Mumps in adults can be cause testicular damage resulting in sterility.
Therefore, vaccination transforms a natural and non-threatening childhood disease into a serious adult disease.
Chickenpox Vaccine & Death – New US Government Study
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/chickenpoxadultdeaths/
"A newly published study from the US Centers for Disease Control is further formal confirmation chickenpox vaccine damages natural immunity and causes the more serious highly painful potentially fatal condition of shingles: The incidence and clinical characteristics of herpes zoster among children and adolescents after implementation of varicella vaccination.
It is long and well known in numerous studies that shingles cases and deaths in adults and the elderly will increase as natural immunity wanes as a result of the chickenpox vaccine. It is however perplexing that the US CDC study authors declare themselves mystified by the increase in teenage shingles cases shown by their study....etc @ link
Time4truthnow's certainly knows that mumps vaccination is not done yearly but still writes: "Thank you so much & to add to the facts you explained;"
What a perfect example.
Just to respond to the point about the legal system, it most certainly does admit that there are risks associated with vaccination. Simply proving that activity X has a risk factor of Y does not mean that there will be tort liability as a result. In order to prevail in tort (e.g. products liability) you must prove that something was unreasonably dangerous. The idea that you're going to win on this standard when challenging something that saves an untold number of lives with only minimal complications is purely laughable. The question you would need to answer is - what percisely would the alternative option be? Refuse to vaccinate children and see a reemergence of polio and other horrid diseases?
I am not arguing that Cutter made proper Salk vaccine. They did not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgBBwOnmy3w
Dr. Hilleman, who developed the MMR vaccines, said: “Vaccines are the bargain basement technology of the 20th century.”
In the taped interview (with about 6 Merck executives in the room, their nervous laughter audible in the tape) Dr. Hilleman explains how in his search for uninfected monkeys, Merck imported green monkeys from Africa. Those monkeys, it turned out, were carrying the AIDS virus: “I didn’t know we were importing AIDS.”
Dr. Hilleman also acknowledged that he discovered that the Sabine polio vaccine (manufactured by Merck) was infected with the SV-40 cancer virus. In the process of developing vaccines Merck scientists are shown to blithely disregarded public safety as they conducted massive tests exposing millions of unsuspecting people to wild viruses. Dr. Hilleman acknowledged that the cancer infected polio vaccine had been tested in massive field trials in Russia, then in the U.S.
The interview was conducted by Dr. Edward Shorter, Professor of the History of Medicine and Professor of Psychiatry, University of Toronto. I checked the authenticity of the tape with Dr. Shorter who informed me that he did it when preparing a PBS series called “The Health Century.” Doubleday published a companion volume of the same title in 1987.
The person who posted this censored portion of the interview on Youtube is Dr. Leonard Horowitz, a controversial and prolific healthcare expert with multiple academic degrees–including 3 doctorates.
This just in yesterday is pretty shocking, too;
The FDA Shuts Down Common Infant Vaccine After Startling Discovery
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/17/major-vaccine-suspended-due-to-contamination-with-pig-virus.aspx
“U.S. federal health authorities recommended … that doctors suspend using Rotarix, one of two vaccines licensed in the U.S. against rotavirus, saying the vaccine is contaminated with material from a pig virus,” CNN reports.
The Rotarix vaccine, which is made by GlaxoSmithKline and was approved by the FDA in 2008, has already been given to about 1 million U.S. children along with 30 million worldwide. The vaccine was found to contain DNA from porcine circovirus 1.
“The FDA learned about the contamination after an academic research team using a novel technique to look for viruses in a range of vaccines found the material in GlaxoSmithKline's product and told the company,” FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg told CNN.
Even more amazing is that the assassination attempts on the researches did not succeed even though the attempts were done so cleverly that there is no evidence that they even took place.**
**Since this is Huffington-Post, please note that the previous paragraphs are satire.
"By contrast with live vaccines, which carry a risk of provoking the disease, DNA vaccines are absolutely biologically safe. Moreover, they activate all existing defense mechanisms in the body, are cheap to produce and can be stored without a refrigerator – which makes them ideal for use in subtropical and tropical climates.:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081103091033.htm