x********u
发帖数: 15396 | 1 not a short article, but it's worth reading it
http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2013/1
Is Your Pet Receiving Any of These Useless Vaccines?
By Dr. Becker
Today I have a very special guest returning for a second time to talk with
us and give us the tremendous benefit of his knowledge, Dr. Ronald Schultz.
Dr. Schultz heads up the Department of Pathobiological Sciences at the
University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Veterinary Medicine. He’s joining
me today on behalf of an important project he’s been involved with for
several years – the Rabies Challenge Fund. The purpose of the fund is to
determine the duration of immunity conveyed by rabies vaccines, with the
goal of extending the required interval for rabies boosters to five and then
to seven years.
Dr. Schultz has agreed to spend some time today, in the first half of our
two-part discussion, talking about core and non-core vaccines in cats and
dogs.
I asked him first to briefly explain the difference between the two types of
vaccines.
Core versus Non-Core Vaccines
Dr. Schultz replied that several years ago, the American Association of
Feline Practitioners (AAFP) decided to look at all the USDA-licensed
vaccines that were available for cats. They put them into categories, with
the first and most important category being the core vaccines, which are
those vaccines that every cat should receive.
Then they went back over the list looking for vaccines that should not be
given to any cat, and placed those in a category called not-recommended
vaccines.
All remaining vaccines on the list – those that didn’t fall into either
the core or not-recommended vaccine categories – were placed in a third
category called non-core or optional vaccines. These were to be given based
on individual need, after considering a number of factors. So that’s how
categories of vaccines came into existence.
The Feline Leukemia Virus (FeLV) Vaccine: Should Every Cat Receive It?
In the most updated feline vaccination guidelines, the feline leukemia virus
(FeLV) vaccine has been moved from the non-core to the core category for
kittens. Dr. Schultz says he would like to see every kitten receive two
doses of the vaccine, administered from two to six weeks apart. (If the
interval is longer than six weeks, you must start the protocol over.) He
feels that with those two doses and a re-vaccination at one year, we can
immunize a large percentage of the cat population against feline leukemia.
Dr. Schultz says the new guidelines recommend revaccination (after the
kitten series and the one-year booster) every two to three years, but he
doesn’t believe boosters after age one are necessary – especially given
the development of age-related resistance.
I asked Dr. Schultz if he thinks even strictly indoor cats with no exposure
to other cats should receive the FeLV vaccine, and he thinks they should (I
don’t) – mainly because indoor cats very often become outdoor cats. In
situations where a cat truly will never go outside or be exposed to other
cats, there’s no need for the vaccine. But in Dr. Schultz’s experience,
even people with the best intentions don’t wind up keeping their pet
indoors at all times.
Dr. Schultz points out that the goal is to achieve population immunity. If
the problem of persistently viremic cats (those who carry the virus) can be
eliminated through kitten vaccination programs, the disease can be
extinguished. Dr. Schultz says his colleagues in Switzerland tell him they
have essentially eradicated the feline leukemia virus from that country’s
cat population. Switzerland is about the size of many states in the U.S.,
and Dr. Schultz believes we could eliminate the virus state-by-state, if we
did what Switzerland did.
He says he’s been talking to colleagues in Hawaii, trying to convince them
to attempt to eliminate it there, since feline leukemia has been a real
problem in that state’s cat population for years. Hawaii also has a large
feral population, which doesn’t mean the feral cats are any more a threat
than housecats. Studies of feline leukemia in feral cats indicate that the
prevalence of persistent viremia is no higher than in pet cats – in fact,
it’s actually higher in pet cats.
I asked Dr. Schultz if he had concerns about the feline leukemia vaccine and
vaccine-associated sarcomas. He answered that initially there were just two
types of vaccines linked to injection-site sarcomas in cats, adjuvanted
leukemia vaccines and adjuvanted rabies vaccines. Dr. Schultz says it’s
important to keep in mind that all adverse reactions to vaccines, including
the development of tumors, occur in genetically predisposed cats. In the
case of an adjuvanted vaccine, that vaccine in a predisposed cat is more
likely to lead to an injection-site sarcoma than a modified-live vaccine.
What About the Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV) Vaccine and the Chlamydia
Vaccine?
I asked Dr. Schultz about the FIV (feline immunodeficiency virus) vaccine
for cats. He replied that he does not recommend it. He said when it’s used,
there must be at least three doses for the primary immunization, and then
annual revaccination. One of the major problems is that there are strains of
FIV floating around that the vaccine doesn’t protect against.
In addition, while FIV is a concern, the percentage of infected cats is
fairly low. We just don’t see it a lot. FIV isn’t even considered in
reviews of what vaccines are necessary for the shelter population.
I asked Dr. Schultz about the chlamydia vaccine. He doesn’t recommend it,
either. The vaccine is primarily designed to reduce the incidence of feline
infectious respiratory disease complex. In the shelter population, the
vaccine hasn’t been helpful, and chlamydia is rare in pet cats. There’s
also a feline bordetella vaccine Dr. Schultz does not recommend, because it
hasn’t proven beneficial for shelter cats.
Is There Any Need to Run Titers on Cats?
Next I asked Dr. Schultz if he is seeing more cat owners requesting antibody
titers these days. He answered that no, very few cat owners bother titering
. He says he’s not sure there’s any real need to titer for cats because
there’s only one disease we can effectively titer for, and that’s
panleukopenia, which is essentially feline parvovirus.
Why Dr. Schultz Prefers the Term “Protective Antibody Testing” to Titering
Dogs are of course a different story, and Dr. Schultz definitely recommends
antibody testing. I asked him what terminology he prefers – does he even
use the word “titer”? He replied that he prefers either “protective
antibody testing” or simply “antibody testing” instead of titers. This is
because many tests today return yes-or-no results rather than titers.
Titer tests tend to become a numbers game, whereas tests that return a
result of either “yes” (the animal has antibody at a level considered
protective) or “no” (the animal does not have antibody at a level
considered protective) give the information everyone needs, and no one has
to get mired in trying to understand what the titer numbers truly mean. It’
s much less confusing and should help veterinarians and pet owners make
better decisions about revaccinations.
As I discussed with Dr. Jean Dodds in a recent interview, the whole subject
of titers is tremendously confusing. Many veterinarians recommend
revaccinations because they simply can’t sort out titer test results. They
feel it’s easier to just revaccinate – especially when boarding kennels
and grooming salons that receive titer test results often don’t understand
them or accept them as proof of a dog’s immunity.
Vaccination or Revaccination is NOT a Guarantee of Protection Against
Disease
Dr. Schultz points out that what many people fail to understand is that
vaccination or revaccination is by no means an assurance that the animal is
protected. He has seen dogs that have been vaccinated repeatedly who have no
antibody. When challenged (exposed to a disease), they are susceptible. And
that includes rabies vaccines. Dr. Schultz has seen dogs that have been
vaccinated five or more times against rabies that have no antibody. In the
case of rabies, distemper and parvo, if there’s no antibody, the animal is
not protected.
To demonstrate that fact, and to demonstrate that dogs can have lifelong
immunity after receiving distemper and parvo vaccines, he keeps them in a
distemper and parvo-free environment after their puppy shots. He does not
revaccinate them. Seven years later, he checks their antibody levels. If
there is antibody present, he challenges them with the virulent virus itself
, and they survive it. If they don’t have antibody, he doesn’t challenge
them because there’s a high likelihood they will get sick and die.
The presence of antibody, even at low levels, means the immune memory
response will kick in and within hours the dog’s body will bring the
infection under control. There will be infection, but it won’t cause
disease. There’s a big difference between infection and disease. And in
fact, reinfection without disease isn’t a bad thing because it leads to
natural stimulation of the immune response. A few vaccines can provide
sterile immunity. It is called this because the antibody produced is able to
completely prevent the virus from infecting the animal, and so can’t
reproduce itself. Vaccines that provide sterile immunity are almost always
against viruses that produce systemic rather than local disease.
So for example, parvo and distemper vaccines provide sterile immunity for
life in most cases, similar to measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines in
humans. Dr. Schultz uses the example of his own case of measles when he was
5 years old. There were no measles vaccines back then. But 50 years later,
he had his blood drawn for a demonstration for his veterinary students. He
sent the blood to the State Laboratory of Hygiene at the University of
Wisconsin and they performed a variety of serologic tests. His measles
antibody response came back at a level considered protective. Now, how did
Dr. Schultz have protective immunity 50 years after being naturally
immunized with measles? He can thank his memory effector B cells.
Dr. Schultz explains the discovery of these long-lived plasma cells is
fairly recent. They reside in bone marrow and are programmed to continue to
produce antibody. A dog that lives on average 15 years will still have long-
lived cells that produce antibodies to distemper or parvo at the age of 15.
Useless Vaccines and Why Some Are Still on the Market
The good news is that distemper and parvo are really the only two life-
threatening canine diseases still active in our environment. Giardia, for
example, is an unfortunate disease, but it’s not life threatening. And
according to Dr. Schultz, the really good news is that the giardia vaccine
is no longer on the market.
I asked him about the dental plaque vaccine, and he said there’s more good
news – it’s no longer on the market, either. It was in clinical trials
under USDA authorization for four years. At the end of the four years, when
they looked at the results, it was clear the vaccine didn’t work. It was
taken off the market, and according to Dr. Schultz, credit is due Pfizer,
the manufacturer of the vaccine, because they were willing to pull it.
I asked Dr. Schultz why he thinks some of these totally unnecessary vaccines
ever enter the marketplace to begin with. He believes that very often there
is some potential for those vaccines to provide benefit. But he also feels
it’s critical that there’s a test period that actually determines whether
vaccines do or don’t meet the requirements for licensure. Dr. Schultz
believes the USDA is looking much more carefully at those types of vaccines
now than they used to because these days we understand much more about what
immunity is, how to measure it, how it protects us, and how it translates
into an effective vaccine.
Dr. Schultz says one of his “favorite” vaccines is the canine coronavirus
vaccine. He calls it “a vaccine in search of a disease.” This vaccine came
into being back in the late 1970s when canine parvovirus first appeared. No
one recognized parvo yet, but dogs were getting sick and many of them also
happened to have coronavirus.
As it turns out, every animal has coronavirus -- even puppies. Dr. Schultz
says it’s actually a beneficial virus. It doesn’t cause disease by itself.
When scientists finally discovered the minute, spherical virus we now know
as parvovirus, they found what was making the dogs sick. Meanwhile, Dr.
Schultz and some of his colleagues were able to demonstrate that corona, in
coexistence with parvo, could enhance the virulence of parvo.
In the 1990s, Dr. Schultz published studies that looked at what benefit the
canine coronavirus vaccine might provide in the case of even a dual
infection. What it provided was … nothing. But the vaccine still exists
even though it has no value. Why? Because veterinarians still buy it. As Dr.
Schultz explains, the only thing that removes a licensed vaccine from the
market is if the manufacturer discontinues it. That’s what happened to the
giardia vaccine and the porphyromonas (dental plaque) vaccine.
So if your vet says your dog needs the canine coronavirus vaccine, you can
argue against it because you know its history.
Stay Tuned for Part 2 of My Interview with Dr. Ron Schultz
Stay tuned for the second half of my discussion with Dr. Ron Schultz on
Friday, in which we’ll cover many more vaccine-related topics and also talk
about his wonderful work with the Rabies Challenge fund.
Mercola Healthy Pets is proud to partner with the Rabies Challenge Fund to
raise money to help improve the lives of animals. This week, for every $1
donated to the Rabies Challenge Fund by a Mercola Healthy Pets reader, we
will donate $2, up to $30,000. I hope you’ll join us in helping
RabiesChallengeFund.org fund the remaining research needed to complete their
seven-year study. | c********x
发帖数: 1565 | 2 本来以为可以不打的，这个还是支持打3in1的
joining
【在 x********u 的大作中提到】
: not a short article, but it's worth reading it
: http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2013/1
: Is Your Pet Receiving Any of These Useless Vaccines?
: By Dr. Becker
: Today I have a very special guest returning for a second time to talk with
: us and give us the tremendous benefit of his knowledge, Dr. Ronald Schultz.
: Dr. Schultz heads up the Department of Pathobiological Sciences at the
: University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Veterinary Medicine. He’s joining
: me today on behalf of an important project he’s been involved with for
: several years – the Rabies Challenge Fund. The purpose of the fund is to
| R******0
发帖数: 6158 | 3 嗯，前段时间也仔细研究过，最后决定还是遵守法规每年打rabies，确保用不加
adjuvent的疫苗（目前好像只有PureVax一种，我当时问了一圈才找到家附近一家vet有
），并且每三年打FVRCP
【在 c********x 的大作中提到】
: 本来以为可以不打的，这个还是支持打3in1的
:
: joining
| c********x
发帖数: 1565 | 4 学习了~FVRCP 这个是不是头两年都要打？
【在 R******0 的大作中提到】
: 嗯，前段时间也仔细研究过，最后决定还是遵守法规每年打rabies，确保用不加
: adjuvent的疫苗（目前好像只有PureVax一种，我当时问了一圈才找到家附近一家vet有
: ），并且每三年打FVRCP
| R******0
发帖数: 6158 | 5 如果你那法律没要求，rabies也不用每年这么频繁~~
RVRCP是头两年都要打，然后就是每三年一次了
【在 c********x 的大作中提到】
: 学习了~FVRCP 这个是不是头两年都要打？
| m*****f
发帖数: 4970 | |
|
