Part
II Safety (Is It
Free of Harm?)
Have you ever
wondered why you get a reminder every year to revaccinate your pet
when your physician never prompts you to do the same for your family
or yourself? I'd like you to question the notion that we need this
frequent vaccinating, and go a step further and listen to some
evidence that this practice may actually be harmful to our
four-footed friends.
If someone, even
someone in a white coat, suggests that you take a drug or get
injected with some substance, two logical questions ought to
immediately arise in your mind:
1. Is this
beneficial to me (or does this work as intended)?
2. Is this safe?
If we ask these
two questions about annual revaccination of animals, and we ask the
right people, we'll get a negative answer to both. We've already
covered the first question in Part I efficacy of annual
revaccination is clearly lacking according to immunologists. A more
important question is the safety issue, as a growing body of
evidence mounts showing a correlation between vaccinations and
chronic disease.
The chronic
diseases have many names, including arthritis, hypo- or
hyperthyroidism, allergies, asthma, inflammatory bowel disease,
repeated ear infections, skin disease, heart disease, diabetes,
kidney failure, and cancer. What makes them nightmarish is that they
linger, they are not easily cured, and they are slowly,
progressively degenerative, meaning the patient declines in health
over the time they are present. The best that conventional medicine
can do with chronic disease is to control symptoms through
suppressive therapies. This is fraught with problems, including side
effects from the drugs, and apparently "new," more serious
diseases arising from the continued course of suppression. So, our
greatest goal as animal caretakers should be to prevent chronic
disease in the first place.
The onset of
chronic disease after vaccination is often delayed, coming about 1-2
months afterwards. This is not close enough for conventional medical
minds to appreciate the correlation, but it's there nonetheless. The
evidence of this comes from both anecdotal sources and research
studies.
A British
veterinarian has, for the last 10-12 years, asked those clients who
present him with an itchy, allergic dog, "When did this
itchiness begin?" The response is striking. Some 75% remember
clearly: it began within 1-2 months of the "puppy shots."
Anecdotal evidence in human medicine is pointing to a cause and
effect relationship between childhood vaccines and autism. There has
been a marked increase in incidence of this devastating disease that
parallels the increased number of vaccinations now required of
children. The interval between vaccination and disease? About one
month.
In a research
study published in 1996, the authors looked at a deadly canine
disease of a confused immune system. Known as immune-mediated
hemolytic anemia (IMHA), it means the dogs' immune systems attacked
their own red blood cells as if they were foreign. Needless to say,
this is life-challenging and the death rate is high, as one cannot
live long without the oxygen-carrying red blood cells. In the study,
58 dogs with the illness, presenting at a veterinary teaching
hospital over a two year period, were compared to a control group
presenting for other problems over the same time. The question was
asked, "Did anything precede the onset of IMHA?" Lo and
behold, a highly statistically significant group of the sick dogs
had been vaccinated with the usual yearly vaccines one month
earlier. It was so significant that the authors entitled their
paper, "Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated Hemolytic Anemia in
the Dog." (Duval and Giger, J Vet Intern Med 1996;10:290-295)
In cats,
researchers have known for the last ten years about the correlation
between vaccines and a malignant tumor. This particular tumor arises
where the vaccines are commonly given, in the area of loose skin at
the back of the neck, or in the back of the hind leg. It appears to
be uniformly fatal, even with extensive surgery. And it has been
clearly associated with two particular vaccines, rabies and feline
leukemia. Finally, in 2000, recognizing the clear cause and effect
relationship between vaccination and this cancer, the disease was
renamed by the research community. It is now officially called
Vaccine-Associated Sarcoma.
In the early
days of homeopathic veterinary practice, a number of us would see
something we would later call the "vaccinosis phenomenon."
It was instructive to us as to just how significant an impact
vaccinations had had on our animal patients. We would be presented
with a chronically ill animal, and after carefully choosing and
giving the appropriate homeopathic remedy, we'd be met with
disappointing results. A second or third prescription would be made
with similar dismal responses from the patient. Finally, we'd go
back to the owner and ask about vaccinations. Inevitably the patient
was vaccinated. "Whenever we got the reminder postcard, we went
in for the shots." Then we would reanalyze the case in light of
this knowledge, and look at remedies that were particularly noted to
have been applicable in illness that arose after vaccination. When
we'd prescribe again with a "vaccinosis" remedy, the
results were often startling. Not only would the disease symptoms
lessen by 50% or more, but the patient would start acting more
normally. The dog who was hyperactive would settle down and pay
attention, the angry cat would become a lover again, or the animal
terrified of visitors would come out and say hello. The owners were
so impressed with the changes that they would often call before the
next appointment to tell us how great things were going!
The inference we
have made from this experience, repeated over and over in different
parts of the country in different practitioners' hands, is simple:
vaccinations are responsible for a significant portion of the
illness we see in the patients with chronic disease.
The veterinary
profession slowly continues to evaluate this practice of vaccinating
annually. In 2000, the American Association of Feline Practitioners
came out with an official statement against annual vaccination in
the cat. They based this position on research from Cornell where
kittens, vaccinated once, measured seven years later still showing
evidence of immunity from those vaccines. Quite frankly though, I
donąt think we can afford to wait for the whole profession to catch
up. Our animals are at risk to become chronically ill if we continue
this baseless practice of annual revaccination. And, years from now
when we look back incredulously at how such a practice was ever
thought to be wise, wouldn't it be nice to be able to smile and pat
your healthy twenty-something pet and say, "We knew. We
stopped. That's why you're still here."
click here for more on vaccination
decisions
|