Over 99% of Vaccine Reactions go Unreported

[jp4m2]

For those who are concerned about over vaccinatin titers are now available at a reasonable cost. Vaccicheck is one company that has a test that is done in house, it's supposed to cost around $20 and results are done in house in under 30 minutes in house. Tiger check its another company offering low cost titers. The titer is supposed to run around $120.

[Maximo]

Originally Posted by gemy

In my mind tittering should be as inexpensive as a shot. Yet I pay $242 dollars to titer for Rabies, and the shot is what $30 or so.

That is highway robbery.

The requirements for testing cost more than the production of the vaccination. This is true in human medicine too. Laboratories and the expert techs/doctors are pricey to operate.

Originally Posted by jp4m2

For those who are concerned about over vaccinatin titers are now available at a reasonable cost. Vaccicheck is one company that has a test that is done in house, it's supposed to cost around $20 and results are done in house in under 30 minutes in house. Tiger check its another company offering low cost titers. The titer is supposed to run around $120.

I like the sound of lower cost titers. My concern would be having proof of their accuracy -- of any titer.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by Maximo

The requirements for testing cost more than the production of the vaccination. This is true in human medicine too. Laboratories and the expert techs/doctors are pricey to operate.

I like the sound of lower cost titers. My concern would be having proof of their accuracy -- of any titer.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by jp4m2

For those who are concerned about over vaccinatin titers are now available at a reasonable cost. Vaccicheck is one company that has a test that is done in house, it's supposed to cost around $20 and results are done in house in under 30 minutes in house. Tiger check its another company offering low cost titers. The titer is supposed to run around $120.

My vetting decisions are never based primarily on cost. I am more interested in quality.

[Britster]

I am kind of confused. Cathy, you have agreed with me in the past regarding vaccines.

I'm not really sure why this post was so "bad". Every one posts informative links all the time. The point of forums is to post and discuss things, whether right vs. wrong, opinion vs. fact.

And yes, over-vaccination IS an issue. Is under-vaccination as well? Of course. But I don't think anyone, in this thread anyway, is saying NO vaccines at all? It speaks volumes to me that some AAHA hospitals are already switching to every 5 years (and I know it'll be a sloooww process). The decision was based on the 2011 AAHA Guidelines which state that DHP should be given no more than every 3 years and that it is effective for greater than 5 years (http://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocumen...Guidelines.pdf). From what I recall, the 3 year was basically a "compromise". A jump from annually to every 5-7 years would have been huge for most vets.

But, to me, it just proves that all along people WERE being scammed (but more than likely not on purpose). At one point in time, yearly vaccines WERE given and recommended by most vets. This was the 'standard of care' and many folks STILL believe this to be the case. I believe it probably started in the best interest of our pets but ended with annual income in mind (or just ignorance/lack of current education). Then suddenly every 3 years is okay. Now it's 5. Or 5-7 really according to studies. More than likely the lifetime of the dog. This is not new age internet hogwash, but real studies have been done, and the general population still believes that dogs need yearly vaccines, at least the ones I encounter. These are good dog owners who feel they are doing right by their dog by giving them yearly shots when it's simply... bogus.

The thing is, IMO, a lot of vets don't want to give up that money they get from yearly vaccines. Let's face it - most dog owners wouldn't want to fork up the dough to get titers and a majority of people ONLY take their dogs to the vet when they need vaccines (so it IS a way to get pets into the vet, which is a good thing). It is a fairly large money maker for them no matter how you put it. And no, I am not one who thinks all vets are out to get us, or money grubbing, or bad people who want our pets to suffer so they can reap the benefits. Quite the contrary. Now, an owner like me, I'll be at the vet at least once a year anyway for annual check-ups, bloodwork, etc so they'll still get their money from me. But an average owner... does not do this. So I guess in some way I can understand this viewpoint.


I more than likely won't do titers anyway, because I don't see the point.


Have you had your measles, mumps, and polio titer checked this year? It's kind of the same concept IMO. Humans get vaccines as kids. We don't continue to check the levels every year (unless a job requires it, for example, or you are ill, etc). Some get the flu shot every year. But other than that...?? What would the point be? Would getting the chicken pox shot every 3-5 years decrease your chances of getting chicken pox any more than if you got it only once as a baby?

Vaccines ARE important. Very important. Year after year, or even every 3 years? Meh... I have no desire.

[Maximo]

Brittany, part of the reaction is because the first article linked from Dogs Naturally Magazine. It states that distemper is rare and lists it as a reason "not to vaccinate." While the statements are accompanied with reasons to vaccinate, I agree with Linda and others that this is irresponsible writing. Everyone in this thread knows that the distemper vaccination is crucial, but other people may not.

The reason distemper is "rare" and no longer the leading cause of puppy death is because of vaccination programs. Many people may read an article like that and think distemper vaccinations are unnecessary.

[ladyjane]

OK let me clarify things here. When I first posted on this thread this morning I was brief and still not feeling so hot (and I did say that). Been sick for many days. Anyway...

I clicked on the link to see what it was about and then clicked on another link and saw the distemper information. I had not read the entire post!

I do see where the topic is about reporting. I think my concern is the way that magazine used the information. Just MY take on the whole thing. It sort of reeked of don't vaccinate, and go holistic. That always sets my mind spinning. I have nothing against holistic as long as it is not taking the place of proven conventional. What I read was that holistic treatment was better than conventional treatment for distemper and I will NOT be buying into that one.

That's about all I have to say about this entire thread.

As I see it, the point of the thread has been made very clear now because people have spoken and questioned. It is how we all learn is it not?

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by Maximo

Brittany, part of the reaction is because the first article linked from Dogs Naturally Magazine. It states that distemper is rare and lists it as a reason "not to vaccinate." While the statements are accompanied with reasons to vaccinate, I agree with Linda and others that this is irresponsible writing. Everyone in this thread knows that the distemper vaccination is crucial, but other people may not.

The reason distemper is "rare" and no longer the leading cause of puppy death is because of vaccination programs. Many people may read an article like that and think distemper vaccinations are unnecessary.

Thank you. I wish I had known you were posting. It is clearer than my reply.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Maximo

Brittany, part of the reaction is because the first article linked from Dogs Naturally Magazine. It states that distemper is rare and lists it as a reason "not to vaccinate." While the statements are accompanied with reasons to vaccinate, I agree with Linda and others that this is irresponsible writing. Everyone in this thread knows that the distemper vaccination is crucial, but other people may not.

The reason distemper is "rare" and no longer the leading cause of puppy death is because of vaccination programs. Many people may read an article like that and think distemper vaccinations are unnecessary.

Oh, I must have missed that. I skimmed what the OP copied/pasted and assumed it was simply about the reporting of lack of reports of reactions! Which, I wouldn't think were too far fetched. But probably not as large of a problem as the OP made it out to be. As a person who had a dog that did have a terrible reaction to a vaccine, I may be a tad biased, as well as more passionate about over-vaccination issues.

Here's my question though - I am sure my dogs vaccine reaction wasn't "reported" - or maybe it was? I'm not really sure how that works. But I never filed a complaint or anything of the sorts. The vet also never told me what the heck she was even giving my dog, nor explained what any of the vaccines were for, what the possible risks were, and when I got home and thought my dog was dying, rushed him back in there, for them to charge me a ton more for the visit back for his reaction. This was a while back, he was 12 weeks, but I remember being frustrated.

But absolutely can see how the first article could be alarming.

[Maximo]

Originally Posted by Britster

Oh, I must have missed that. I skimmed what the OP copied/pasted and assumed it was simply about the reporting of lack of reports of reactions! Which, I wouldn't think were too far fetched. But probably not as large of a problem as the OP made it out to be. As a person who had a dog that did have a terrible reaction to a vaccine, I may be a tad biased, as well as more passionate about over-vaccination issues.

Here's my question though - I am sure my dogs vaccine reaction wasn't "reported" - or maybe it was? I'm not really sure how that works. But I never filed a complaint or anything of the sorts. The vet also never told me what the heck she was even giving my dog, nor explained what any of the vaccines were for, what the possible risks were, and when I got home and thought my dog was dying, rushed him back in there, for them to charge me a ton more for the visit back for his reaction. This was a while back, he was 12 weeks, but I remember being frustrated.

But absolutely can see how the first article could be alarming.

Very scary. My memory is failing me, was it the Lepto vaccination that Jackson reacted to?

We left our first vet because she did the same with Max's puppy shots -- gave him everything under the sun without discussing with me. I didn't know what I was doing.

I don't think anyone posting in this thread takes vaccinations lightly. I think we are all mindful of potential reactions and monitor our pups after they are done.

Reporting of reactions -- yes, very good questions.

[Maximo]

Originally Posted by Britster

The vet also never told me what the heck she was even giving my dog, nor explained what any of the vaccines were for, what the possible risks were, and when I got home and thought my dog was dying, rushed him back in there, for them to charge me a ton more for the visit back for his reaction. This was a while back, he was 12 weeks, but I remember being frustrated.

I meant to add that I think this is irresponsible and our first vet also neglected to inform us.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Maximo

Very scary. My memory is failing me, was it the Lepto vaccination that Jackson reacted to?

We left our first vet because she did the same with Max's puppy shots -- gave him everything under the sun without discussing with me. I didn't know what I was doing.

I don't think anyone posting in this thread takes vaccinations lightly. I think we are all mindful of potential reactions and monitor our pups after they are done.

Reporting of reactions -- yes, very good questions.

Yep, it was lepto. We ended up finding a new vet very soon after. Not just because of that, but I didn't like how they dealt with him, and still believe his experience as a pup left a lasting imprint on how he deals with going to the vets/groomers/etc now.

[Maximo]

Originally Posted by Britster

Yep, it was lepto. We ended up finding a new vet very soon after. Not just because of that, but I didn't like how they dealt with him, and still believe his experience as a pup left a lasting imprint on how he deals with going to the vets/groomers/etc now.

Are you sure we didn't have the same vet? Seriously, that is so sad. Poor Jackson. It is a miracle that Max was not scarred for life. 13 weeks old, endured all of the shots including rabies (!), and bordetella poured down his nose -- he was being such a trooper and the vet proceeded to show me how to "show him who is boss". She forced him onto his back and held him down. Terrible bedside manner.

[ShowGirlLola]

I could write a 10 page post about under vaccinating, fear mongering (this thread is not fear mongering), herd immunity, titers, and ignorant doctors/vets, but I'll try to keep it short.


Under reporting doesn't surprise me at all. Human doctors are also unlikely to blame a shot or medication for a symptom, especially if it's pretty mild. It's not the easiest thing to put two and two together, and to do so accurately.

My mom and grandmom have many severe allergic reactions to many common medications and a lot of their experiences with doctors haven't been great. They've been told they're wrong it's from something else, they took too much medicine, and they're over dramatizing what happened.
We constantly have to double check that doctors don't give them medications related to the ones they're allergic to.

My mom got the depo shot twice, and second time she went into anaphylactic shock in the doctor's parking lot. They swore up and down she must have gotten stung by a bee, I'm not sure if they reported it. It was defiantly from the shot because every month when it was released into her system she got very sick. After that horrible reaction her coworker realized she was not right every month after the first shot too. That coworker also helped her figure out she's got a mild allergy to black olives.

~~~~~
I think a good bit of the reason why vets are hesitant to switch the rabies shot to every 5-7 years is it would be harder to remember. Yeah the vet can send a notice out to remind you, but a lot can happen in that time such as moving and record issues.

Under vaccinating scares me a lot more than over vaccinating, although neither is good.

[Ellie May]

I don't doubt the figure that 99% of reactions are unreported. That is because almost all reactions are minor (lethargy, vomiting, inappetance, injection site irritation).

Vaccine reactions are NOT rare. Vaccine deaths ARE rare (unless we are talking long term immune effects in which case nobody can quantify).

I don't know where the author gets the idea that distemper is rare, but I am sure we can find an incidence map. If it is nearly eradicated (and it is not) then that would be bc of vaccines.

Reactions are not really reported around here... In 20 years my vet can't even remember a near death from rabies vaccines. Lepto, yes. Distemper, rare.

I am a vaccine minimalist and can't justify doing titers any longer. And they will never be cheaper than vaccines, nor should they be.

As much as I am totally opposed to overvaccinating, if getting one a year is the only way some poor pups gets to see their dogtor then I think the risk/benefit is even up.