# Dog insurance (no booster vaccinations)



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

I'm looking to insure my two working dogs (terriers) at the moment. PDSA Insurance seemed ideal, offers lifetime coverage for each illness or injury up to the insured amount, their vet fees cover amount is per claim not per year, and importantly they WILL cover dogs who work, excluding coursing. So far, so good!

However it all fell down when I queried the ambiguous policy wording about vaccination. The policy document seemed to indicate fairly clearly that if you choose not to give your pet boosters, then they simply won't cover illness resulting from a disease that vaccination would have covered. Fair enough. 

Upon ringing them to take out the cover however, I queried it to be safe and was told they would not pay out for ANY illness or injury, however sustained, if the pet wasn't boostered up to date. So if (heaven forbid!) they broke a leg for example, the insurance wouldn't pay out because the dog wasn't vaccinated to date?!

That seems more than a little silly! I explained that the prevailing scientific (i.e. independent) literature generally agrees that (1) puppy boosters generally last the life of the pet and (2) boosters are at best ineffectual and at worst positively damaging or lethal! 

My vet agrees that it's unnecessary to booster my dogs, but unfortunately not all insurance companies seem to agree. The lady on the phone was very apologetic and agreed with me that it was daft. She told me there are other 'excellent' companies out there who DON'T require a dog to be vaccinated and/or boostered, but she couldn't tell me who they were. 

So, does anyone know of a good reputable insurance company who will accept dogs who do not receive annual boosters? Many thanks in advance.


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

i dont know, I insure with tesco and they cover all illness except those that would normally be covered by the jabs

I dont do my cats after they have had thier kitten jabs they havnt needed them, and they have paid out the max amount for one cat when he got run over 

Although im not sure about dogs and the cover only goes it £4k which isnt a huge amount but they are very good payer outers lol! and customer services are always pretty good!


----------



## Dally Banjo (Oct 22, 2009)

Sorry dont know either but dont go with E&L unless you can wait months for them to pay out :mad2: I had both these two with them & then Banjo was diagnosed with hip dysplacia so we stuck with them for him but have just changed Holly to argos fingers crossed they better seem good on paper


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

To be perfectly honest I see where they are coming from to an extent, it just covers their back as much as possible.

I am very aware of the apparent over vaccinations of dogs, but have you actually got yours titre tested??

This is basically a blood test where they test the strength of the immunity, and if above a certain amount the dog still has immunity.

Rupert was titre tested at about 13 months old and we discovered his immunity *was not* high enough to be protected, and so this year he had his booster shots. For whatever reason Rupert's boosters hadn't even covered one year of his life, hence why I think it is important to actually test for it.

I wouldn't not vaccinate Roo without getting him titre tested, perhaps if this is done you could discuss with the insurance company, whether it is proof enough that the dog is immune and doesn't need the boosters?

Its not overly expensive, I will do this next year also.

I'm sorry but I don't really go for not vaccinating unless a titre test has been done or there is a specific medical reasons decided by the vet not too


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

I have been looking into pet insurance with a couple of mates, One who is in the forces has opted to go with a company that is little heard of JBH they give it seems cracking discounts to the armed forces but anyone can buy this. There cover is not the highest but from what I have been told they do offer good easy to understand policies and have quite a good write up.

As for the jabs, I don't think there is an insurer on earth who would cover any pet for any illness that could have been avoided by vaccinations.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> As for the jabs, I don't think there is an insurer on earth who would cover any pet for any illness that could have been avoided by vaccinations.


Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check them out.

However, to be clear(!)... I did NOT ask for a company who'd cover an unvaccinated dog for an illness that a vaccine would have covered! LOL

I asked for a company who would cover a dog for anything ELSE, with exception (which I completely understand) for the vaccinate-able diseases. PDSA said they wouldn't pay out on a broken leg, if the dog hadn't had a vaccination that year. Those are the kinds of companies I'm looking to avoid.

So for example, if my dog broke her leg I'd expect my pet insurer to pay out for it. PDSA won't. If my dog got parvo, I'd understand if the insurer DIDN'T pay.

However based on current literature I'm happy to follow my vet's advice and refrain from boosters. Vaccination is a very inexact science to begin with.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check them out.
> 
> However, to be clear(!)... I did NOT ask for a company who'd cover an unvaccinated dog for an illness that a vaccine would have covered! LOL
> 
> ...


I would have thought that the majority of companies would cover any illness other then those that could have been avoided by vaccination should an owner choose not to vaccinate (as more and more are doing now). Perhaps the best way to be certain is to telephone any prosprective companies and ask them specifically the question, that was there can be no confusion.


----------



## alysonandhedley (Oct 29, 2009)

Could you direct me to the literature about not needing boosters please? Our old dog wasnt vaccinated beyond 8 years old as we came to this conclusion as a family. Our puppy is of course vaccinated and will be again next year. How much does titre testing cost? What are the dangers of over-vaccinating?


----------



## sullivan (Aug 29, 2008)

My insurance company will not insure a pet with no boosters etc, i think your find the same with most im afraid.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

alysonandhedley said:


> Could you direct me to the literature about not needing boosters please? Our old dog wasnt vaccinated beyond 8 years old as we came to this conclusion as a family. Our puppy is of course vaccinated and will be again next year. How much does titre testing cost? What are the dangers of over-vaccinating?


The cost of titre testing varies from vet to vet, it does cost more than the boosters but I thought it was worth paying. I paid about £30-35 I think for ours.

This link is very good, the layouts not great but the text is useful
TITER TEST



The basic gist of over vaccinating is that some believe things such as epilepsy can be triggered by an over vaccination when the problem may have never been triggered otherwise. Some dogs have also had funny turns in the days after a vaccination and had to be PTS or just very different since. It is a matter of opinion as to whether it is fact or fiction, but I will continue to titre test


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Vaccination can also cause autoimmune disease, encephalitis, extreme allergy and vaccine-specific cancers amongst other things! Not only that but its ability to actual perform its intended function is also hotly debated in the scientific community! Distemper in dogs was actually originated in a cat distemper vaccine. The vaccinated cats shed the agent from the vaccine in their faeces, which then mutated and began to infect dogs.

Dogs who are vaccinated can get the very diseases they're meant to be protected against, whilst some dogs who aren't don't. It's not clear cut. Meanwhile the risks of vaccination (especially repeatedly, i.e. annually) are clearly documented. It's a mine field.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> Dogs who are vaccinated can get the very diseases they're meant to be protected against, whilst some dogs who aren't don't.


Just out of curiosity can you show me the source where you got this from? Hadn't actually heard of that before


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Tinsley said:


> Just out of curiosity can you show me the source where you got this from? Hadn't actually heard of that before


Off the top of my head right this second, no, in all honesty. But a few minutes on google will provide it, or even ask a vet! It's not esoteric knowledge or a conspiracy theory, it's just a fact of life. 

Even pet insurance policies state they'll cover illness due to parvo/distemper/etc etc if the dog was vaccinated. They definitely do still succumb, even if in receipt of boosters.

Not all un-vaccinated dogs catch illness as they'll have become immune to it in the past through passing (non-infected) contact to the 'real' thing. A healthy immune system, and herd-immunity, go a long way. There is an argument that vaccination actually weakens this effect, and canine immune systems, and drives UP infection rates.

Catherine O'Driscoll's book "Who Killed the Darling Buds of May?" is one of a series on the science (and lack thereof) behind the vaccination drive, and is packed with scientific references against the regular use of vaccines. It also has many case studies showing adverse vaccine reactions, and details the underused 'Yellow Card System' for adverse vaccine reactions.

EDIT: Drat and darn you!  You've pricked my interest now (pardon the pun)... the fact I can't remember these sources and references off the top of my head any longer has prompted me to decide to turn the house upside down to find the books and journals, and re-read them. Long night for me, then. Still, it's all good. Learning's never a bad thing. hehe


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> Off the top of my head right this second, no, in all honesty. But a few minutes on google will provide it, or even ask a vet! It's not esoteric knowledge or a conspiracy theory, it's just a fact of life.
> 
> Even pet insurance policies state they'll cover illness due to parvo/distemper/etc etc if the dog was vaccinated. They definitely do still succumb, even if in receipt of boosters.
> 
> ...


Lol I struggle to find things like this on the internet! I first heard about it on a golden retriever forum I use but it has mostly people from the USA on and so their sources are all for american dogs so I did some digging for over here too, and I've lost half my sources which is why I'm not too specific, can't prove it right now, lol!!

I bet I can't find anything on the net tonight that's remotely useful either 

If you find any of your books or anything I could get hold of to buy, could you tell me the titles so I can get copies?! People always doubt me when I talk about this saying there is no proof etc but there is I just forget where it is :blush:


----------



## Jazzy (Apr 15, 2009)

I'm with Tesco and they insured my older Bichon without boosters but it said that he wouldn't be covered for any illness that arose through lack of boosters but he was covered for everything else I think. He's vaccinated now anyway cos we had him done when we had our puppy done.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

In the meantime, how's THIS for a credible source:

Report of the American Animal Hospital
Association (AAHA) Canine Vaccine
Task Force: 2003 Canine Vaccine
Guidelines, Recommendations,
and Supporting Literature

As you can see from its grand title, it's the official report of an investigation by the AAHA. It pretty much concludes that repeat vaccines are a waste of money and potentially harmful or worse. And that's from an independent vet authority! Read at leisure, I've put the full report on my server for you all to download if you like:

RIGHT CLICK ME - SAVE AS....

Cheers.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Jazzy said:


> I'm with Tesco and they insured my older Bichon without boosters but it said that he wouldn't be covered for any illness that arose through lack of boosters but he was covered for everything else I think. He's vaccinated now anyway cos we had him done when we had our puppy done.


Thanks Jazzy, I'll ring them and ask tomorrow.


----------



## debweb (Nov 15, 2009)

keep this discussion going, i need to know more! My dog started fitting and the vet thought it was epilepsy, he was rushed to Newmarket and had every test imaginable, but the only thing they found was traces of distemper from the vaccination, so I was advised not to have him vaccinated again. He has just suddenly and peacefully passed away age 3 years, I can only think that some vital organ was damaged at the time. I am now looking for another puppy but am of the opinion that no vaccination is needed after the initial one, any more info on this would be appreciated. By the way I got on well with Eand L!


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

debweb said:


> keep this discussion going, i need to know more! My dog started fitting and the vet thought it was epilepsy, he was rushed to Newmarket and had every test imaginable, but the only thing they found was traces of distemper from the vaccination, so I was advised not to have him vaccinated again. He has just suddenly and peacefully passed away age 3 years, I can only think that some vital organ was damaged at the time. I am now looking for another puppy but am of the opinion that no vaccination is needed after the initial one, any more info on this would be appreciated. By the way I got on well with Eand L!


So sorry to hear that. A very sad tale indeed, and you're not alone.  The two vets I trust most in the world (literally the world) both told me to get puppy jabs done AT MOST and never to bother with boosters. One vet (locum at a practice I used at the time) asked why my dogs of the time weren't "up to date".

I explained everything that comprises my stance, and she shook her head and said I and 'people like me' were irresponsible and basically responsible for every sick dog in her surgery. I quickly replied with "Well if they're all vaccinated, why are they bloody sick?!"... :mad2:

I asked her to quantify that allegation with EVIDENCE and asked her why she thought that vaccinations needed to be repeated every 12 months. Did she know how long the average conferred immunity was for a dog? She started to look a bit pale, and left the room to hunt for some vaccine textbooks and manufacturer's leaflets.

After a good five minutes, she was looking sheepish and admitted that (1) average - average mind you - conferred immunity was up to 9 years in dogs, from a single shot, and (2) the exception was lepto of which a vaccine is only ever one or two strains (out of many), usually not the strain in your area, and even then confers immunity for a mere four to six months, and is hence useless even on a 12 month booster schedule.

Suffice to say she apologised and thanked me for my time LOL


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

There is some very dangerous things being said on here. NO vet would ever recommend you not to vaccinate your dog. Good heavens, if your dog then got one of the vaccinated diseases you could sue them. 

Yes, you can titre test because if you happen to live in an area where parvo and distemper are around then your dog will get natural immunity (if it doesnt get the disease) so will not need vaccinating. If it meets the virus it will either get ill or produce antibodies. But if your dog does not meet the virus and has no antibodies then when it does meet it it will very likely get ill and die.
It wont get antibodies to leptospirosis and it will die if it gets it. A lot of vets are only doing annual lepto boosters and spreading the others out for 2 or 3 years.
Vaccinated dogs will NOT get these diseases unless the vaccine failed which is very very rare.
And of course not every unvaccinated dog will get it, some will have natural immunity and some will never meet the diseases.

If you dont want to vaccinate then titre test but dont be so irresponsible as to leave your dog unvaccinated or to assume that vaccinating as a puppy will last a lifetime. It WILL NOT. Years ago it was thought it lasted much longer than it actually does and I worked for a vet in an area where there was no distemper. then someone brought an infected dog into the area and dozens of previously vaccinated dogs caught it and most died. It was heartbreaking but anything that had not been vaccinated for 3 years was going down with it. I never want to see something that horrendous again.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Blitz, it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that no vet (anywhere, ever?) will recommend against repeated vaccination. Don't you think? Even if we ignore all the conventional vets who suggest just that, what about all those homeopathic vets in the UK alone, who recommend 'homeopathic nosodes' instead of the 'dangerous' (in their eyes) vaccines? 

There is a great deal of peer reviewed and published research confirming that annual boosters aren't necessary - perhaps a 'quick' read of the comprehensive AAHA report I posted above would be of interest to you? 

A quick question about your lepto analogy... Since any given vaccine will only contain one or two strains of lepto (there are actually many strains, all very different - and the one in the vaccine isn't necessarily one even active in your area!), then your vaccinated dog can still 'get it and die'. 

Lepto vaccines only last four to six months, but dogs are only boostered every 12 months. So even your 'vaccinated' dog is only covered for 4 to 6 months out of every 12, and even then only if you're lucky enough to have happened to have had the same strain in the vaccine as lives in your area.

If what you said is true, every ratting terrier I own and know (and there are many thousands of them!) would be dead inside a week. As it is they kill millions and millions of rats each year between them. I've yet to hear of one that caught lepto and died, vaccinated or not. Regular exposure to the real thing seems to work OK, and at least it's local-strain specific.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

I dont believe any vet would put their neck on the line and say a dog did not need vaccinating without titre testing. They have to stick to whatever the vaccine manufacturers advise or they could be in serious trouble if a dog got ill.
And yes, if you have unvaccinated terriers ratting you are putting them at great risk. Not every rat carries lepto and not every farm is infected at all but I would imagine that most terrier owners are responsible and sensible enough to keep their dogs vaccinated. Very many unvaccinated farm dogs die of it and farmers have to be careful too. A lot of farms now blood test their cattle to check if they have lepto on the farm.

From what you were saying on the thread about spaying I have to assume you dont actually have quite the experience you were trying to make out. One moment you had worked in a practice for 5 years and the next you had been allowed to sit on in a consult once and had never gone back.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Blitz said:


> From what you were saying on the thread about spaying I have to assume you dont actually have quite the experience you were trying to make out. One moment you had worked in a practice for 5 years and the next you had been allowed to sit on in a consult once and had never gone back.


Read that thread again and then realise where you're mistaken. I said I'd been let in on a consult that day and that I saw what I saw. After that I never went back. I didn't say I hadn't been there for five years previously. Thanks.

As for the rest of it, I've already posted up scientific literature, and there are what? 20 vets names on that paper, and the recommendation is not to repeat puppy vaccinations/boosters. I seem to have presented factual evidence, whereas you're spouting hearsay so far. Have you any papers for us to read? I'd gladly welcome them!

Contrary to your assertion I love to learn and never try to make out I know it all. I have however spent a lot of time around working dogs and done a great deal of research over the years. I'm always happy to be proven wrong but I'd rather see a scientific paper to refute a hypothesis than an ad homien paragraph attacking me personally without providing any actual references.

I only posted this thread to ask about pet insurance, it wasn't intended to be a debate about the pros and cons of vaccination at all! I have my vets' opinion, which concurs with the literature, and I'm happy with it.

Kind regards.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

Blitz said:


> I dont believe any vet would put their neck on the line and say a dog did not need vaccinating without titre testing. They have to stick to whatever the vaccine manufacturers advise or they could be in serious trouble if a dog got ill.
> And yes, if you have unvaccinated terriers ratting you are putting them at great risk. Not every rat carries lepto and not every farm is infected at all but I would imagine that most terrier owners are responsible and sensible enough to keep their dogs vaccinated. Very many unvaccinated farm dogs die of it and farmers have to be careful too. A lot of farms now blood test their cattle to check if they have lepto on the farm.
> 
> From what you were saying on the thread about spaying I have to assume you dont actually have quite the experience you were trying to make out. One moment you had worked in a practice for 5 years and the next you had been allowed to sit on in a consult once and had never gone back.


I have read you post with interest, and am certainly not qualified to respond, however, it is my belief that the titre testing is unreliable. I only vaccinate my dogs bi annually, but then they are not kenneled, I would always cover for lepto hoever should the dogs frequest water/areas where rats have been evident.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> I have read you post with interest, and am certainly not qualified to respond, however, it is my belief that the titre testing is unreliable. I only vaccinate my dogs bi annually, but then they are not kenneled, I would always cover for lepto hoever should the dogs frequest water/areas where rats have been evident.


Indeed. My only point/question to Blitz in regards to lepto was that the vaccine manufacturers themselves, as well as the scientific literature, both state that lepto vaccines only confer immunity for 4 to 6 MONTHS. So in a dog vaccinated ANNUALLY (12 months) you still have ZERO protection against lepto for 6 to 8 months of each year.

But Blitz's reply was to try to slate my character, and tell me to check the vaccine manufacturer's recommendations! It's those very published guidelines that say I'm correct. And that's presuming the one or two strains in the vaccine happen to be the ones in your area (which is by far from guaranteed or even likely).


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> Indeed. My only point/question to Blitz in regards to lepto was that the vaccine manufacturers themselves, as well as the scientific literature, both state that lepto vaccines only confer immunity for 4 to 6 MONTHS. So in a dog vaccinated ANNUALLY (12 months) you still have ZERO protection against lepto for 6 to 8 months of each year.
> 
> But Blitz's reply was to try to slate my character, and tell me to check the vaccine manufacturer's recommendations! It's those very published guidelines that say I'm correct. And that's presuming the one or two strains in the vaccine happen to be the ones in your area (which is by far from guaranteed or even likely).


All the manufacturers recommend boosters be administrated annually, and this is why the majority of vets choose to do so. However, many vets are now beginning to accept that this is not always the case and that a dogs natural immunity can be affected by such.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> All the manufacturers recommend boosters be administrated annually, and this is why the majority of vets choose to do so. However, many vets are now beginning to accept that this is not always the case and that a dogs natural immunity can be affected by such.


Yes, but when you ask why annually, when lepto immunity lasts 6 months max and others last for up to 9 years, they don't tend to have an easy answer.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> Yes, but when you ask why annually, when lepto immunity lasts 6 months max and others last for up to 9 years, they don't tend to have an easy answer.


I think that nine years would be rather over optimistic myself, four years maybe, by this would depend on the strength of the dogs natural immunity.
What I find more alarming is that vets can and do immuniate dogs that are not in 'peak' condition.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> I think that nine years would be rather over optimistic myself, four years maybe, by this would depend on the strength of the dogs natural immunity.
> What I find more alarming is that vets can and do immuniate dogs that are not in 'peak' condition.


The point being, as you acknowledge, that whether four years or nine that's still not necessitating annual re-vaccination! Immunological studies show mean conferred immunity between six and nine years in dogs. Either way that makes casually administered routine annual booster excessive in the extreme, not to mention unnecessarily expensive.

As you also rightly point out, immunising dogs not in perfect health is also very risky (again, pointed out freely by manufacturers and vets). It still seems to happen rather too often though.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

If it's any consulation I do think that if you 'shop' around you will find more and more vets that are gradually altering their views on this subject. Unfortunately I feel that the blame however has to be laid at the doors of the manufaturers who do still insist that the 'annual' boosters are necessary. I have choosen to disregard their recomendations, but that has to rest on my shoulders, I am fortunate that I have a vet that agrees with me.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> If it's any consulation I do think that if you 'shop' around you will find more and more vets that are gradually altering their views on this subject. Unfortunately I feel that the blame however has to be laid at the doors of the manufaturers who do still insist that the 'annual' boosters are necessary. I have choosen to disregard their recomendations, but that has to rest on my shoulders, I am fortunate that I have a vet that agrees with me.


My point exactly. As I said my vet also agrees with me (us).  Blitz however is adamant no vet would ever say such a thing, I was simply trying to point out that however much Blitz knows, he or she can't possibly speak for all the vets in the UK, never mind on the planet. 

I'm always happy to be corrected, engage in debate and have a laugh along the way. But when someone simply replies with 'you're wrong' and various other personal comments, without presenting any evidence one can't do much but disregard it in favour of the available literature.

Anyway! The search for a decent insurer goes on. From the policy wordings, there are quite a few happy to accept dogs not receiving re-vaccination every 12 months, I'll be ringing them in the morning.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> My point exactly. As I said my vet also agrees with me (us).  Blitz however is adamant no vet would ever say such a thing, I was simply trying to point out that however much Blitz knows, he or she can't possibly speak for all the vets in the UK, never mind on the planet.
> 
> I'm always happy to be corrected, engage in debate and have a laugh along the way. But when someone simply replies with 'you're wrong' and various other personal comments, without presenting any evidence one can't do much but disregard it in favour of the available literature.
> 
> Anyway! The search for a decent insurer goes on. From the policy wordings, there are quite a few happy to accept dogs not receiving re-vaccination every 12 months, I'll be ringing them in the morning.


As I replied in an earlier post, most insurers will take dogs that are not innoculated annually, it is up to you to satisfy yourself that whichever insurer you choose offer cover specific to your requirements, and it this means a phone call to confirm such then so be it.


----------



## WaveRider (Sep 8, 2009)

Maybe the insurance companies should provide the option of allowing the policy holders vet to provide annual titre results. If they meat a particular measure criteria the policy would continue to cover.

Once I was told that titre testing is quite common in the States. Maybe we should follow suit.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Personally speaking I wouldn't not vaccinate Roo without titre testing, purely because, like his showed, his first boosters as a pup weren't enough for him. 

My vets aren't biased either way, I asked for a titre test and they said they don't do them very often because most people seem quite happy to vaccinate each year. They got more money out of me as I paid for boosters and a titre test, so I guess it could work for them it that way a bit.

For the most part dogs vaccinated annually do OK, which is why I had no problems in Roo getting his boosters this year. He will get titre tested each year roughly when his boosters are due because I wouldn't feel comfortable not vaccinating him and not knowing how strong his immunity was.

To me, vaccinating year on year is just the same as not vaccinating without a titre test, I'm not really convinced that either stand up well in an argument over this. Each to their own, I am a paranoid pet owner, we intend to get hip scored and everything!

I don't know about insurers or even kennels, because I waited for his titre results to come back and they showed a low immunity so he naturally got his boosters. Our kennels like certificates proving they are boostered to date, but I think they would accept titre results. Insurance companies I am not so sure of, but until next October we are covered anyway really...Will have to look into that more


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

WaveRider said:


> Maybe the insurance companies should provide the option of allowing the policy holders vet to provide annual titre results. If they meat a particular measure criteria the policy would continue to cover.
> 
> Once I was told that titre testing is quite common in the States. Maybe we should follow suit.


Yes it's quite common in the States, but as Del posted earlier (I think it was Del?) titre testing still isn't an entirely reliable indicator. It's a better idea than jabbing with another vaccine for the sake of it though! 

Personally I prefer the approach (talking about insurers again here) of "If you vaccinate annually we'll cover those named illnesses as the vaccine has failed. If you don't booster annually we'll not cover those diseases but will cover anything else". That seems quite fair and reasonable to me.

As was mentioned in something I read earlier today (damned if I remember what/where though lol), eventually the insurance companies will 'cotton on' to the fact that constant re-vaccination causes more issues (encephalitis, extreme allergy, autoimmune disease, vaccine specific cancers) than it solves. In other words it costs them more money in treatment of the side effects than it saves in vaccinating against those named illnesses.

Once that happens (if it happens) the whole thing will change completely.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Tinsley said:


> I am a paranoid pet owner, we intend to get hip scored and everything!


Will you be getting the dogs done as well?   



Tinsley said:


> Our kennels like certificates proving they are boostered to date, but I think they would accept titre results.


I think that's so if there's an outbreak of a disease in their kennels, they can disavow responsibility (and hence monetary liability) to the affected animals' owners. Seems perfectly reasonable to me from that angle - a basic business decision.


----------



## WaveRider (Sep 8, 2009)

If to few pets are getting ill then people will not look into insurance. Maybe this is why the insurance companies support vaccinations.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> Yes it's quite common in the States, but as Del posted earlier (I think it was Del?) titre testing still isn't an entirely reliable indicator. It's a better idea than jabbing with another vaccine for the sake of it though!


See this is it, damned if we do, damned if we dont 

I wish there was just a simple answer to these things, would make life much easier!

And LOL about getting the dog hip scored too :lol:


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

WaveRider said:


> If to few pets are getting ill then people will not look into insurance. Maybe this is why the insurance companies support vaccinations.


Ooh! Controversy AND cynicism in one post. I like it!  hehehe Of course we can't possibly know that's true, or even partly true. But there are many such 'conspiracies' surrounding related industries.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

quoted from rainmaker above
As was mentioned in something I read earlier today (damned if I remember what/where though lol), eventually the insurance companies will 'cotton on' to the fact that constant re-vaccination causes more issues (encephalitis, extreme allergy, autoimmune disease, vaccine specific cancers) than it solves. In other words it costs them more money in treatment of the side effects than it saves in vaccinating against those named illnesses.

Bang on, It is only a matter of time now before insurers will acknowledge that over vaccinating is costing them thousands if not millions of pounds per annum.

That said I would never want to feel reponsible for any person not vaccinating, so I would urge any of you to check the pros and cons very throughly, and if that means speaking to several vets then please do so.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Tinsley said:


> See this is it, damned if we do, damned if we dont
> 
> I wish there was just a simple answer to these things, would make life much easier!
> 
> And LOL about getting the dog hip scored too :lol:


Yup that's about the size of it. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. :crazy: Glad I made you giggle too :thumbup1:


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> I would urge any of you to check the pros and cons very throughly, and if that means speaking to several vets then please do so.


Now THERE is a philosophy to live your life by, and not just for dogs.


----------



## wooliewoo (May 27, 2008)

I think its the insurance companies way of knowing if your dogs had its jabs its had a yearly check-up...... Tescos do payout though for illness not relateing to vaccination/preventative conditions as they paid out on Locket (she hasnt had jabs since she was 7)


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

wooliewoo said:


> I think its the insurance companies way of knowing if your dogs had its jabs its had a yearly check-up...... Tescos do payout though for illness not relateing to vaccination/preventative conditions as they paid out on Locket (she hasnt had jabs since she was 7)


It seems Tesco won't cover working dogs though so unfortunately I can't use those. On the subject of ensuring an annual health check, it'd be quite simple to state that explicitly as a clause in the policy without resorting to requiring boosters. In fact PetPlan state they require an 'annual dental examination' for the cover to remain valid.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

DelboyTrotter said:


> If it's any consulation I do think that if you 'shop' around you will find more and more vets that are gradually altering their views on this subject. Unfortunately I feel that the blame however has to be laid at the doors of the manufaturers who do still insist that the 'annual' boosters are necessary. I have choosen to disregard their recomendations, but that has to rest on my shoulders, I am fortunate that I have a vet that agrees with me.


Our vets vaccinate for lepto annually but the others are bi annually as that is what the manufacturer recommends.

When I say that no vet would recommend not vaccinating a dog I say that because if that dog then got distemper/parvo etc the vet would be held responsible, he would be negligent and I imagine he could be struck off. Personally I dont vaccinate my dogs every year, though they are done for lepto as we live on a farm but I would not expect that they would have any immunity after a couple of years as we live in an area where there is no parvo or distemper so they cant top up their immunity.

I think there seems to be a basic lack of understanding here. The vaccine causes the dog to produce antibodies against the disease. These antibodies will stay for x number of months or years. Every time the vaccinated dog meets the disease it is self vaccinating itself, therefore it is quite possible for a puppy to be vaccinated and then to keep itself 'vaccinated' throughout its life. But if it does not come in contact with the disease then the antibodies will disappear and then if it meets the disease it will become infected. So therefore if you want to titre test and make sure that your dog is 'self vaccinating' then there is no need to give it a booster, but if you dont want to titre test then it is far safer to vaccinate as per the manufacturers instructions because if your dog gets these diseases it will probably die. They are horrible diseases and treatment for them has not really improved over the years so the mortality rate will be just as high as it was pre vaccination days.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Blitz said:


> When I say that no vet would recommend not vaccinating a dog I say that because if that dog then got distemper/parvo etc the vet would be held responsible, he would be negligent and I imagine he could be struck off.


A vet couldn't be struck off the register for following the mainstream published literature. For the record, just so there's no misunderstanding, I DO know what you're saying. I'm not being purposely dense or anything! 

But using your own argument it's just as logical to say that a vet who did vaccinate every year regardless would be liable for all those autoimmune diseases, severe allergies, vaccine-specific cancers (only caused by and directly traceable to vaccines) and cases of fatal encephalitis. It works both ways!

At the end of the day it's down to choice, and my vet is happy to agree with me that the science just doesn't back up the need for annual boosters.


----------



## jenniferx (Jan 23, 2009)

Rainmaker, 

There is a question in the latest Dogs Today about this on their Think Tank page. Tesco Pet and Direct Line are the ones they say don't require annual vaccinations. So perhaps maybe see if Direct Line will cover working dogs?


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

jenniferx said:


> Rainmaker,
> 
> There is a question in the latest Dogs Today about this on their Think Tank page. Tesco Pet and Direct Line are the ones they say don't require annual vaccinations. So perhaps maybe see if Direct Line will cover working dogs?


Excellent find, thank you!


----------



## JSR (Jan 2, 2009)

jenniferx said:


> Rainmaker,
> 
> There is a question in the latest Dogs Today about this on their Think Tank page. Tesco Pet and Direct Line are the ones they say don't require annual vaccinations. So perhaps maybe see if Direct Line will cover working dogs?


Brilliant thanks. I've followed this thread with interest. I don't and won't ever yearly vaccinate my dogs again. I vaccinate them until they are 3 years old and then stop (on advise of my very open minded and progressive vet). My old dog has suffered for the last 5 years from a disease thought to be bought on by over vaccination (he was don't yearly as I blindly followed the norm without researching properly...won't do that again!!) so I'm now extreamly careful about what chemicals I pump into my animals.

So I'm glad to see some insurance companies are recognising the shift in owners and vets opinions, I wanted to insure my younger 2 dogs..the older 3 no insurance company will touch anyway because of their medical and behavioural history but the younger 2 I would like to have covered as they go lots of places and are always out and about getting into scrapes!!!


----------



## mollythecollie (Aug 29, 2009)

JSR said:


> Brilliant thanks. I've followed this thread with interest. I don't and won't ever yearly vaccinate my dogs again. I vaccinate them until they are 3 years old and then stop (on advise of my very open minded and progressive vet). *My old dog has suffered for the last 5 years from a disease thought to be bought on by over vaccination* (he was don't yearly as I blindly followed the norm without researching properly...won't do that again!!) so I'm now extreamly careful about what chemicals I pump into my animals.
> 
> So I'm glad to see some insurance companies are recognising the shift in owners and vets opinions, I wanted to insure my younger 2 dogs..the older 3 no insurance company will touch anyway because of their medical and behavioural history but the younger 2 I would like to have covered as they go lots of places and are always out and about getting into scrapes!!!


What disease did he have?


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

I recently insured my pup with Sainsbury's, after talking to them on the phone to query the part of the application about vaccination - I couldn't say she was vaccinated because, at 8 weeks, she wasn't (but is now). They said I wouldn't be covered for the things the vaccination covered, but OK for everything else. I don't know if they do working dogs though, there was no question about it on the application form one way or the other.


----------



## Rainmaker (Nov 15, 2009)

Burrowzig said:


> I recently insured my pup with Sainsbury's, after talking to them on the phone to query the part of the application about vaccination - I couldn't say she was vaccinated because, at 8 weeks, she wasn't (but is now). They said I wouldn't be covered for the things the vaccination covered, but OK for everything else. I don't know if they do working dogs though, there was no question about it on the application form one way or the other.


I just checked the Sainsbury's policy document and it states:



> Vaccinations
> You must ensure that your pet is vaccinated in accordance with the recommendation
> of your vet against distemper, hepatitis, leptospirosis and parvovirus for dogs and
> feline infectious enteritis, feline leukaemia and cat flu for cats.


Since my vet is happy to agree that vaccinations consist of puppy jabs with no boosters, I'm presuming the policy conditions are fulfilled. The only working dogs they exclude are those for guarding, racing and commercial use. My dogs fall into none of those categories, but I'll ring them to check though.


----------



## DelboyTrotter (Nov 14, 2009)

Maybe be worth your while taking a look at Green Bee insurance - which is part of the john lewis partnership. They only offer one policy, so at least there is no confusion and need to check policies, there customer service is also second to none so should you not find the answers you are looking for it may be woth a phone call.


----------



## the melster (Mar 20, 2010)

Very interesting thread and I'd never heard of titer testing before. I don't want to vaccinate Bo every year and with Tinka our last dog she was only vaccinated 2 or possibly 3 times in her life. 

Is it pronounced 'tee-ter' or 'tighter' as I want to sound like I know what I am talking about when I ask for one.


----------



## Dally Banjo (Oct 22, 2009)

Tee-ter I think


----------



## lisa0307 (Aug 25, 2009)

Pet Plan will cover but not for illnesses that could have been prevented through vaccination...our dog only has puppy vaccs and isn't vaccinated yearly but Pet Plan still paid out when he got a problem in his mouth a couple of years ago.


----------



## Spoodles (Jun 16, 2010)

I use Argos and my mum uses Homebase, both will cover you even if you don't do boosters, but won't cover for an illness the boster would protect against - makes sense.

I know for sure they do as I phoned then to query it. My dog has had Pancreatitis so can't have boosters.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> So, does anyone know of a good reputable insurance company who will accept dogs who do not receive annual boosters? Many thanks in advance.





Jazzy said:


> I'm with Tesco and they insured my older Bichon without boosters but it said that he wouldn't be covered for any illness that arose through lack of boosters but he was covered for everything else I think. He's vaccinated now anyway cos we had him done when we had our puppy done.


Direct Line also do this. They have a whole range of things you can chose to add to the policy or not, and vaccination is one of them. They won't pay out for any illness that could have been prevented by vaccination, but everything else is covered. (And the monthly payment is cheaper if you chose the no vaccination option!) They do pay out cos Baggio has not been vaccinated for four years now and we've just claimed for Baggio's snip - they paid out without a murmur.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

the melster said:


> Very interesting thread and I'd never heard of titer testing before. I don't want to vaccinate Bo every year and with Tinka our last dog she was only vaccinated 2 or possibly 3 times in her life.
> 
> Is it pronounced 'tee-ter' or 'tighter' as I want to sound like I know what I am talking about when I ask for one.





Dally Banjo said:


> Tee-ter I think


I think it's pronounced "tighter" - it comes from the word "titration" (which is pronounced "tight -ration")


----------

