# Is annual vaccination really necessary?



## daisy1990 (Sep 15, 2011)

I have been reading USA sites which suggest that once a dog has been vaccinated for the first two years of life there is no evidence that vaccination offers any further protection. To be cautious some American vets suggest vaccinating at three yearly intervals, but there are some studies saying every seven years would be fine. I remember a friend who was a Vet telling me years ago that vaccination was a vets 'bread and butter' and that research was suggesting that vets were over vaccinating. I have had my dogs vaccinated annually until now but wonder if this is unecessary and potentially harmful. What do others think or do?


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

No it isn't necessary and it's dangerous. I don't vaccinate mine at all after their initial puppy jabs, I did but two years ago my Flynn had head tremor after his first booster so I looked up on the net and decided it wasn't for me.

Here's a site with info and the director of Dogmatic head collars also advises on here after losing her show winning Dobe after a booster vacc. Canine Health Concern - Putting your dogs health first


----------



## daisy1990 (Sep 15, 2011)

Interesting link, we have just had our four dogs vaccinated but think it will be for the last time. Am thinking similarly for our four rabbits who are all due vaccines this month. Research now suggests unless you vaccinate them twice a year there is limited protection
Thanks


----------



## sianrees1979 (Feb 27, 2009)

i only give the puppy vaccinations, when i bought dai at 18 months though he didn't have his vaccinations so he went to the vets straight away to get his health check and vaccinations done all my dogs have lived past 15-16 years the eldest was 22 when she died a few years ago and done the same with the cats they only had the baby vaccinations and my eldest she cat lived to 24 years old.


----------



## Manoy Moneelil (Sep 1, 2011)

Is annual vaccination really necessary?


Canine distemper has a 95% mortality rate once established, there is more research & development in vaccination than any cure to the illness. 

Not vaccinating is gambling with your dogs' life. 

I hope you are lucky.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Manoy Moneelil said:


> Is annual vaccination really necessary?
> 
> Canine distemper has a 95% mortality rate once established, there is more research & development in vaccination than any cure to the illness.
> 
> ...


I was 'lucky' enough to vax and lost two pups to an adverse reaction to the parvo jab so it aint all black and white by any means!

There is more research going into vax than cures as the big pharma wont make money from cures, but they make billions on vax!!


----------



## Manoy Moneelil (Sep 1, 2011)

Indeed it's not black and white.


Dose and body weight is an issue - the rabies inoculation for example a standard dose regardless of size of dog.


----------



## clairesdogs (Aug 10, 2011)

was going to ask the same thing, my 3 are due now, Skye is 5 year old GSD and has always been done, my working cockers are 15 months and 14 months and both had their puppy vaccines last year (Olny got Jess 5 months ago). 

I've read so many peoples stories of their dogs having bad reactions it worries me. 

does anyone titre test?


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

My boy got titre tested last year and came back with fabby levels against all what he should be - and he has never received a jab and he has never had a days illness


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

My last two had their baby jabs and since then I titre test, so far they have been ok and covers adequate. The are now nearly 5yrs 5mths and 2yrs 9mths.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> My boy got titre tested last year and came back with fabby levels against all what he should be - and he has never received a jab and he has never had a days illness


Thats amazing mine had the baby jabs and titre tested since OK, just goes to show though doesnt it if he didnt even have them!!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Sled dog hotel said:


> Thats amazing mine had the baby jabs and titre tested since OK, just goes to show though doesnt it if he didnt even have them!!


Yep, vet said the levels for Parvo were so high he must had actually had parvo, but had it so slightly as his body must have been good enough to fight it off without any outward sign of illness.

I really would rather trust Nature than any manmade, synthetic $hite - sorry, thats a bit strong, but tis true!!


----------



## clairesdogs (Aug 10, 2011)

How do I go about titre testing? do all vets do it do you think?! whats involved and any ideas of cost?! 

Im not going to put drugs into my dogs for no reason!


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> Yep, vet said the levels for Parvo were so high he must had actually had parvo, but had it so slightly as his body must have been good enough to fight it off without any outward sign of illness.
> 
> I really would rather trust Nature than any manmade, synthetic $hite - sorry, thats a bit strong, but tis true!!


Without checking I think its the Modified live vaccines that may be the culprits mostly, and Lepto I think is another one that has caused problems.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

clairesdogs said:


> How do I go about titre testing? do all vets do it do you think?! whats involved and any ideas of cost?!
> 
> Im not going to put drugs into my dogs for no reason!


You just need to get your vet to take a blood sample and they send it to a lab. I had mine done at the same time as a load of other tests as mine have conditions or 2 of them do, that need regular blood tests, cant remember for certain think probably about £70/80. If you phone the vet should be able to confirm, just tell them you want a titre test for all the diseases which would be in a standard set of vaccines. One thing though if the titres come back OK
you should really tell your insurance. Mine accepte it, but its likely they and most wont cover you if your dog did go down with one of the diseases that the vaccs cover.


----------



## clairesdogs (Aug 10, 2011)

Sled dog hotel said:


> You just need to get your vet to take a blood sample and they send it to a lab. I had mine done at the same time as a load of other tests as mine have conditions or 2 of them do, that need regular blood tests, cant remember for certain think probably about £70/80. If you phone the vet should be able to confirm, just tell them you want a titre test for all the diseases which would be in a standard set of vaccines. One thing though if the titres come back OK
> you should really tell your insurance. Mine accepte it, but its likely they and most wont cover you if your dog did go down with one of the diseases that the vaccs cover.


thanks for the info, I'll give the vet a call :smile5:


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

I had a partial vac for Monty last year which was Lepto ( which needs to be done yearly) and another Can't remember now.

Milly had a full one as it was her first booster.

This year both are having partials and full vacs will be done every 3 years.

My vets are happy to do this and I did discuss with them before doing.

You do need to check your insurance and if you put dogs into kennels a lot require full vacs.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> I had a partial vac for Monty last year which was Lepto ( which needs to be done yearly) and another Can't remember now.
> 
> Milly had a full one as it was her first booster.
> 
> ...


Good point about the Kennels, thought about insurance but forgot all about them as my lot are never kennelled so didnt occur to me.


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

i have to vac my dogs because the training club i use wont accept members with un vaccd dogs , and also the insurance issue and what if you suddenly needed to put them into kennels .


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Sled dog hotel said:


> Without checking I think its the Modified live vaccines that may be the culprits mostly, and Lepto I think is another one that has caused problems.


It was the lepto vacc that paralysed the Dogmatic lady's Dobe as he didn't have any other at that time and he was screaming in pain after just 30 mins! 

As for training, i have found the same thing and wonder why a recent titer test cert isn't good enough. I do know of a Mal trainer who accepts titer test certs but she's in Norfolk so to far away for me. I have never kennelled a dog in my life so kennelling isn't a problem for me.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

You have to weigh up what is best for you and your dogs/situation.

At least when people share info and give links to studies etc... people can make an informed decision.

I only changed last year after reading about it on here and then looked into it on internet then asked the vet.

But I wouldn't force my choices on anyone but advise people of some alternatives like partials and as some have said titre testing.

Nothing is black and white and would be easier if it was!!!

Vaccinations, neutering and diet have such differing opinions it can make you :crazy::crazy:


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

The vast majority of insurance companies will require proof that you have had your animal vaccinated should it contract any disease that can be immunised for.

Things like Leptosirosis mutate. If you don't have an annual vaccination then you are putting your dog at serious risk. 

Most other things don't require an annual vaccination but you would be unwise to go more than two years without at least testing. However, if you are insured you should see what your insurance company says. If you want to deviate from their policy then you need their written agreement or you will invalidate your insurance.

Very, very few dogs get adverse reactions to vaccinations. It's always the owner's choice but you would be weighing a very low risk of adverse reaction against immunisation against a disease that will probably be fatal.

One problem with the titre testing is that it can show a good result one day and yet the protection level can drop off the scale the following day. Vaccine manufacturers give a tested length of time for which their vaccines will remain active. They err on the side of caution but those tests are pretty reliable.

Personally, I'd vaccinate against Lepto every year and against everything else at or within the guidelines for the manufacturer of that particular vaccine. That way I'm pretty certain my dogs will be OK.


----------



## dvnbiker (Dec 2, 2009)

My vets are very good and only vaccinate for certain things every other year and and only what is necessary every year. 

I am not willing to gamble with my dogs at all so do vaccinate using my vet's policy every year. I compete in agility with two of them and therefore probably come into contact with more dogs than the average pet dog at home. 

We have had several cases of parvo in and around this area recently which makes me even more sure that I will continue to vaccinate. I have dogs all my life and not one has had an adverse reaction.


----------



## OllieBob (Nov 28, 2010)

I vaccinate yearly. Having seen what these terrible diseases can do I won't put my dogs lives at risk by not vaccinating them. I've never had a dog have a bad reaction in 45years nor have they had health problems. 
As long as the majority are vaccinated then the minority who aren't are protected to a certain degree. The problem arises when the majority are not vaccinated then we will see these killer diseases return. 
It is worth remembering that foxes are also affected by these same diseases and as such can be considered as potential carriers. The same is true for worms, fleas, mites and lice.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

I dont think it has ever been said by experts that you shouldnt vaccinate full stop, in fact they say vaccinate. The concerns are more on how they are vaccinated. First as pups with a cocktail of vaccines all in one go bombarding a fairly imature immune system, and then year in year out with boosters. The concern mostly is over vaccinating. Not that they shouldnt be vaccinated.


----------



## Mum2Heidi (Feb 17, 2010)

Sled dog hotel said:


> I dont think it has ever been said by experts that you shouldnt vaccinate full stop, in fact they say vaccinate. The concerns are more on how they are vaccinated. First as pups with a cocktail of vaccines all in one go bombarding a fairly imature immune system,


It's done whilst they still carry immunity from their Mum which isn't right in my mind.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

daisy1990 said:


> I have been reading USA sites which suggest that once a dog has been vaccinated for the first two years of life there is no evidence that vaccination offers any further protection. To be cautious some American vets suggest vaccinating at three yearly intervals, but there are some studies saying every seven years would be fine. I remember a friend who was a Vet telling me years ago that vaccination was a vets 'bread and butter' and that research was suggesting that vets were over vaccinating. I have had my dogs vaccinated annually until now but wonder if this is unecessary and potentially harmful. What do others think or do?


I say no! with the exception of lepto that is! (assuming your dags are near water/rat urine) BUT that said I believe that lepto is the one that causes the most reactions! BUT!! many of the drug manufaturers state that the readministation is to be annually - and the vets can do nothing but follow that!

However - we are lucky with our vet/
Really you need to do you own research and go on what you find.
Google Jean Dodds (usa vet) I take whatever she writes as gospel!


----------



## dorrit (Sep 13, 2011)

I continue to vaccinate yearly 
They get a varying cocktail which includes lepto every year..My friend missed one year after moving house and his dog died of lepto..Not nice.


For the moment at least its a requirement to travelling with the dogs..

BTW have you seen the changes about travelling in Europe with dog as from jan 2012?
Made much simplier, rabies vac wait 21 days then you can travel no more need for the blood test and the 6 month wait..


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

Mum2Heidi said:


> It's done whilst they still carry immunity from their Mum which isn't right in my mind.


Dont take this as gospel as its from memory, but I think if my memory serves me well, if the pups already have the natural immunity going on, the Vaccs are cancelled out anyway.

With the Lepto also that from what Ive read is one of the culprits, along with the MLV Parvo, or can be, it doesnt cover all strains anyway only some, and there was at one point question whether the protection lasted a year it was thought that it only possibly latest 3/6mths I think. However I havent double checked myself on this, so you would have to double check. Its also possible they have upgraded the lepto vaccs too to last longer, as that could be old data. There have been some updated vaccines think there is one that lasts 3 years now instead of one anyway not on the Lepto though thinks that is parvo, and a couple of others. Again you would have to check.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

dvnbiker said:


> My vets are very good and only vaccinate for certain things every other year and and only what is necessary every year.
> 
> I am not willing to gamble with my dogs at all so do vaccinate using my vet's policy every year. I compete in agility with two of them and therefore probably come into contact with more dogs than the average pet dog at home.
> 
> We have had several cases of parvo in and around this area recently which makes me even more sure that I will continue to vaccinate. I have dogs all my life and not one has had an adverse reaction.


that is exactly what my vets do! But these vets are few and far between
I have been told though that some of the drug manufacturers have ammended their dosage to three yearly - whether this is true I do not know


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

In all my life I have only ever vaccinated one dog and its the only dog that has ever had continuous niggly issues and cost me a fortune at the vet. 

I dont and wont vaccinate for anything and I have healthy dogs full of vitality


----------



## Mum2Heidi (Feb 17, 2010)

Kazastan said:


> In all my life I have only ever vaccinated one dog and its the only dog that has ever had continuous niggly issues and cost me a fortune at the vet.
> 
> I dont and wont vaccinate for anything and I have healthy dogs full of vitality


I dont think you are alone there either. Lots of people that I speak to either just to first puppy jabs, then nothing, some follow up with a booster and then stop.

Seems which ever way you go, there is an element of risk.


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

my dogs only had puppy jabs and then the one time they went into kennels (we really had no choice) they had their kennel cough jabs

my boy lived to 15
and my girl is still going strong  *touches wood*

my cat had jabs as a kitten and hasn't had any since and she is still going strong at 17 *touches wood again*


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

The chances are that all those healthy dogs who have never been vaccinated have never come into contact with a disease carrier. If they had there's a pretty fair chance that the owner's post would be saying "I wish I'd had my dog vaccinated. Dying from xxxxx isn't a nice thing to see".

Can you 'over-vaccinate'? Not really. You simply boost your dog's immune system - if it's immune system is OK for that particular disease then it won't need vaccinating but the titre test simply isn't reliable as an indicator. (This has been beaten to death on this forum before).

Even vets who don't agree with annual vacs for everything agree that Lepto needs annual vacs - it will last the year and it will be effective for that period but it's not going to work for the latest Lepto mutations which will be along shortly after that.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

For anyone interested in reading Jean Dodds views on this subject you may find the following interesting

Dr. W. Jean Dodds Latest Vaccination Schedule | Facebook

Profile on Dr. Jean Dodds - changing animal vaccine protocol | DEC blog

And for any one who wants to read more just a little digging will unearth loads!


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> The chances are that all those healthy dogs who have never been vaccinated have never come into contact with a disease carrier. If they had there's a pretty fair chance that the owner's post would be saying "I wish I'd had my dog vaccinated. Dying from xxxxx isn't a nice thing to see".
> 
> Can you 'over-vaccinate'? Not really. You simply boost your dog's immune system - if it's immune system is OK for that particular disease then it won't need vaccinating but the titre test simply isn't reliable as an indicator. (This has been beaten to death on this forum before).
> 
> Even vets who don't agree with annual vacs for everything agree that Lepto needs annual vacs - it will last the year and it will be effective for that period but it's not going to work for the latest Lepto mutations which will be along shortly after that.


I can understand and do agree with what you're saying

however I just don't like to inject my animals with things that aren't vital. . .I have known friends' rabbits die after having their boosters and the dog my parents had when I was young became very unwell from having a booster jab.

I don't vaccinate myself yearly or 3 yearly against anything and everything. . . only "at risk" people have flu vaccinations and yes as a nurse I have had hepatitis jabs to make sure I don't get that from any patients' blood buuuuuuuuuuuuut the average person only has vaccinations as a child and then as and when they need them e.g. when going on holiday
surely it should be the same for our pets?


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Nico0laGouldsmith said:


> only "at risk" people have flu vaccinations ...


Really? I'm not 'at risk' but I have one every year to make sure that I don't need to take time off work with flu. A lot of companies I know offer them to staff for that reason.



> and yes as a nurse I have had hepatitis jabs to make sure I don't get that from any patients' blood buuuuuuuuuuuuut the average person only has vaccinations as a child and then as and when they need them e.g. when going on holiday
> surely it should be the same for our pets?


If you were likely to come into contact with Cholera, Yellow fever, etc then you'd vaccinate regularly. The less vaccination there is the more likely there will be of an outbreak of a disease and vacs for humans tend to be free. Even so there was an outbreak of measles not long ago in (as I recall) South Wales because people hadn't vaccinated their children.

So, when your pet comes into contact with another animal that wasn't vaccinated and which has picked up one of the transmittable diseases the chances are that not only will your pet get it but it will transmit it to other animals.

As a nurse you should know that certain vaccinations last for particular times. For example, tetanus is 10 years. The exact same thing is true with pets.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> The chances are that all those healthy dogs who have never been vaccinated have never come into contact with a disease carrier. If they had there's a pretty fair chance that the owner's post would be saying "I wish I'd had my dog vaccinated. Dying from xxxxx isn't a nice thing to see".
> 
> Can you 'over-vaccinate'? Not really. You simply boost your dog's immune system - if it's immune system is OK for that particular disease then it won't need vaccinating but the titre test simply isn't reliable as an indicator. (This has been beaten to death on this forum before).
> 
> Even vets who don't agree with annual vacs for everything agree that Lepto needs annual vacs - it will last the year and it will be effective for that period but it's not going to work for the latest Lepto mutations which will be along shortly after that.


I beg to differ - my dogs do not even have puppy jabs - I travel the LENGTH and the BREDTH of the UK [and sometimes Ireland]

Example so far this year I have atended 25 Championship shows and 3 Open shows, where a many as 14,000 dogs can attend each show over the period of 3 days. In addition we may camp 3 or 4 times a year and visit many places other dogs go. Also our dogs are walked in places where other people go, we even know one local who innocenly told us his dog had recently had Parvo!

We are surrounded by farm barns etc and know there are plenty of rats around, yet I have only ever heard of young newly vaccinated pups dying of lepto

I was under the impression that Lepto is only good for 8-10months

Vaccines do not boost the immune system at all if anything vaccines contribute to destroying the immune system and breaking *some* peoples hearts when the in all innocence believe their puppys are _'protected'_ following the puppy jabs only to have thier lovely puppy die at 8 months old


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

*"Vaccines are responsible for autoimmune, cancer, Type I-IV reactions, allergies, asthma, atopy anaphylaxis, eczema, organ failure, neurological, behavioral disease and death."*

*How Vaccines Dysregulate The Immune System and Impact Genetic Control Over Disease Expression*
by Patricia Jordan, DVM, CVA, CTCVH, & Herbology]

The evolution of the immune system is a direct consequence of pathogen-exerted selection pressure. It is particularly those qualities like progressive development of humoral and cellular adoptive immunity, Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC), variable class I and class II genes, precise mechanisms of immune recognition and long-term immune memory that reflect the fundamental evolutionary advancement of the vertebrate immune system. In evolution the survival advantage imposed by an extremely reactive immune system is jeopardized if that system turns against the host and causes "self" destruction.

Vaccination is an abnormal pathogen presented in an abnormal route (injection) and influences the entire immune system in an unnatural way, leading to unnatural evolutionary selection where the results are dys regulation of the immune system, disruption of TH1 bias, atrophy of mucosal, increased inflammation, loss of specification and control. Vaccination dysregulates the immune system and genetically impacts the HLA (MHC) leading to an abnormal expression of disease susceptibility. The vaccine is no more a reflection of the actual environmental challenges faced by those vaccinated than the now dysregulated immune system is a reflection of intelligent design or natural selection. Vaccines are genotoxic; corrupted genomes are leading to the loss of the organic self. Vaccine disease is the root of our dys regulated immune system and the dys regulated immune response.

The evolution of the immune system is a direct consequence of the pathogens the immune system was exposed to from the environment. The pathogens exert an evolutionary selection pressure which was in part responsible for the genotypes of the MHC (major histocompatibility complexes) that developed in tandem to handle the pathogens. The MHC determines the hosts immunopathology impact from the antigen and is responsible for the expression of clinical disease.

The MHC tissue markers are one of the major routes of tapping into the possible needs for survival via the immune response. Although not the only way, besides the MHC we have the major loci, minor loci and many other locations for gene expression to effect disease expression. We now see the complexity of immune system response pathways and still there are many factors that remain unknown. The MHC and the HLA and DLA (yes, dogs also have MHC sites like the humans) in fact all vertebrates have this important link of genetic expression of antigen reception and engagement. The groups of receptor sites not only engage with the pathogens, they are also responsible for a cascade of events that have evolved over time to express the organisms impact with a pathogen, reflecting in dis ease susceptibility and genetic expression.

_Vaccines lead to genetic mutations_. Genetic impact on MHC (HLA) is what dictates genetic expression of disease susceptibility. Vaccines rob the individual of natural evolutionary selection pressures based on natural antigen risks. Vaccines are altering gene sequences, inserting genes, affecting genome and destroying the organic immunologically determined susceptibility that evolved with natural selection. Determined susceptibility is genetically impacted ahead of disease expression by the antigens presented to or encountered by the individual. The immune system has evolved naturally to promote life and what is happening with unnatural antigen environment delivered in unnatural route to dysregulate the immune system is resulting in unnatural selection, immune system corruption and species distortion.

The genetic basis for susceptibility to disease is complex but well before man understood anything about the immune system and how it worked, he intruded on the evolved design with a hubris that is having collateral damage and unintended consequences of species de evolution.

The innate immune system was developed to provide the organism with an immediate response. The natural immune system is composed of three portions; the first line of defense is the mucosal immunity and works with the cell mediated immune system (Th1) to deal with the great majority of pathogens. Entry sites to the body via the skin, mucosal sites of the nasal/respiratory, oral/rectal, ocular, aural and urogenital is where the majority of trials for the immune system would have started. The mucosal immunity has antiseptic patches of secretory immunoglobulins (IgA) to respond first. If the mucosal surfaces were actually penetrated than the IgE immunoglobulins came forth for the defense.

_The cell mediated responders have evolved to provide the acute inflammation response which is necessary in properly maturing the bodys immune system. Without the majority of pathogens entering from these sites, the immune system does not reach maturity and therefore is unable to respond competently. The childhood xanthamatic diseases fulfill this purpose of immune system maturation. Denied the ability to mature the immune system, the organism is left with a dysfunctional immune response and genetic disease expression is altered._

Acute inflammation in the mature immune system can process and effectively clear the intruder. The hypothesis on how this takes place is via the dendritic cells instructions to TH1 polarity. Of course if the dendritic cells are damaged from the vaccine or the aluminum or the mercury in the vaccines, this is one way the vaccines dysregulate the polarity of the immune response. The body needs to be able to focus on the correct form of response as the body deals with the pathogen. Later, after the invasion by pathogen has been cleared, the body then engages the humoral immunity (Th2) to recognize the pathogen and produces antibody against it .This form of the immune system is the acquired immune response and is the arm for which vaccinations were meant to augment. The humoral immunity makes the specific recognizing antibody after the body is over the acute inflammation so as not to exhaust the individual and prevent recovery.

Humoral immunity (Th2) unskewed system is a much different system designed to deal with pathogens or agents that might penetrate the skin bypassing the mucosal immunity ex; venoms from snakebites, poisons or toxins from bites, stings or deep punctures and microbial injection into areas of low oxygenation .The humoral system is capable of handling toxin inactivation and antigen opsonization, dealing with intracellular pathogens and direction of recognition via antibody production. The natural immune system never evolved to see immune challenges enter the body like this. Rarely would a pathogen come into the immune systems pristine internal environment of the blood. Humoral immunity was not designed to handle a myriad of pathogens this route, rather the humoral immunity is an internal deeper acting immune system for a lesser number of directly injected pathogens. Parental presentation of the pathogens via vaccination was not good shepherding practice and instead has been responsible for the improper wiring, signaling and biochemical pathway disruptions that make up many disorders today. Again, the wrench thrown into the dynamics of an evolutionarily successful system by manual manipulations not based on evolutionary pressure but by medical hubris. Although pleased with this intervention, man has remained incapable of understanding the chaos they have created.

The complex immune system with the spread of genetic variability has served us well through the beginning of time. Unfortunately, about 300 years ago an adulteration and violation of the natural workings of the immune system took place. This adulteration was the unnatural injection of unnatural pathogens that were not from the natural environment but rather a concoction of ingredients made artificially and mixed with toxic chemicals. Early on the recipe included embalming agents, later with heavy and light metals, and eventually with genetically engineered chimeras, man made monsters of unnatural origin. Many of the viruses being injected into the bodies are genetically engineered and certainly not organic. The vaccine has never been a natural pathogen of the natural environment and never a natural route of introduction and penetration of the host immune system. Why would we not foresee the dys regulation, dysfunction and the accompanied corresponding genetic compromises and hybridization that explain the growing number of health issues that have run parallel with the rise in vaccine number and use?

The many ways the vaccines dysregulate the immune system and de construct health. First imposition of the vaccine is to affect genetic expression of disease by affording the unnatural engagement of the MHC, the major HLA then minor loci; cytokine genes, CD-encoding genes, T cell receptor genes, growth hormone and immunoglobulin genes any of the polygenes that cascade down to the intricacies of our many possible gene responses.

Second imposition of the vaccine is to skew the immune system and remove the balance of Th1 and Th2 between cell mediated immunity and humoral immunity. Total dysregulation, shifting of the poles of immunity which will include a combination of mutations, gene expression, biochemical pathway alterations, enzyme disruptions, hijacking the system dys regulation by up regulation of the IgE expression and a down regulation of the IgA, disruption of the cytokine profile and many, many other routes depending on the nature of the pathogen and toxins in the vaccine and the variable gene response of the individual.

_Expression of disease now, is a function of the unnatural exposure to unnatural pathogens and toxins and the expression of disease as varied as behavioral, Type I-IV Hypersensitivity; allergies, asthma, anaphylaxis, atopy, eczema, cancer, autoimmune, bacterial, viral, yeast, fungal, internal and external parasites and genetic diseases. The genetic expression of disease is predated by the link up of the pathogen and the individuals gene which are pathogen impact impressionable. The unnatural selection pressure on the species by the use of vaccines is unnaturally evolving or de evolving the species through genotoxicity and genetic disease increase. The genetic damage or genetic susceptibility is transferable to the next generation. The next generation when vaccinated, expresses easily the adverse events that vaccines are selecting for._

The type of immune response that occurs after pathogen binding is determined by cytokine messengers that are triggered by certain elements of the pathogen. The vaccine contains a multiple number of ways to affect this: contamination with unknown viruses and microbial components, unnatural pathogens, chimeras and other genetically engineered products, unfiltered genetic pieces like virions, prions, viruses from other species, aluminum, mercury which can directly lead to abnormal cytokine messengers being produced via pathogen alterations/adulterations/mutations. Modified live viruses or attenuated viruses allow live cells to migrate to and replicate onto the hosts tissues. Another act of hubris has occurred because playing with viruses all of these last 300 years, it was only recently that science has now discovered that viruses are not dead, they are not live, they are packets of genetic material that when in the presence of a susceptible and permissive living cell that has the necessary receptor can replicate and infect .We have to remember, the virus affects the appearance of antigen recognition sites in our MHC system which evolved as a type of ANTIVIRUS SOFTWEAR SYSTEM.

Sometimes, virus contamination in a vaccine can activate viruses in the human body 30-40 years after inoculation. The presence of unknown viruses, the contamination of viruses, the recombination and reassortment of viral genes and the introduction of xenotropic viruses, infective DNA viruses have all again - due to the hubris of man - introduced disease and pathology into organisms receiving the jab. The process of injecting unnatural substances into the body started well before the identification of the fist virus! The contamination continues today with the filtering process not finding virions and prions and other smaller genetic impacting contaminants. The viral and even microbial antigens are all players in the genetic expression of disease and disease susceptibility to every genome via the MHC and other still unidentified pathways.

Adjuvants additionally adulterate the intelligence of the innate immune response. Adjuvants add inflammation and pathogen distortion and therefore cell signaling adulterations, impingement upon the evolutionarily perfected system and result in a loss of order. In 1988, Dr. Ron Schultz spoke out in a roundtable discussion over his concerns of the random addition to anything into vaccines without understanding in the least the impact that the addition of for example interleukins into the vaccines. He framed the impact of the whole body or even just the immune system as a complete unknown yet the cavalier attitude from vaccine makers was that no caution was necessary.

We know now that including interleukin in the vaccines in the 1980s has now produced children born to vaccinated populations with the genetic disease of missing interleukins! The new auto inflammatory syndrome DIRA deficiency of interleukin 1 receptor agonist where children display a constellation of serious and potentially fatal systemic symptoms from birth are inherited mutations in IL IRN - a gene that encodes a protein known as interleukin 1 receptor antagonist. In 1999 the WHO through the IARC listed the aluminum in vaccines as a grade 3 out of 4 carcinogens. *aluminum will increase the permeability of the blood brain barrier and allow viruses (viruses that have an affinity for the central nervous system like measles) into the brain along with the mercury and aluminum - both metals that can act synergistically to mutate. *

Aluminum in the vaccines is also up regulating the IgE and compromising the IgA, therefore the presence of aluminum in the vaccines is a much involved gene impactor which causes vaccines to result in allergies, atopy, anaphylaxis, asthma and eczema expression. The natural immune system has a variety of defense tools to use in the protection of the organism however these systems are dys regulated when damaged pathways result from damaged pathogens or genetically engineered pathogens are artificially introduced.

_The effects of alum were never known even though the toxin has enjoyed a hierarchical rise in use and success. The amount used in vaccines is not a safe amount, it is only the amount they found necessary to exert its inflammatory effect as an adjuvant! _The lack of safety studies, lack of teratogenicity or carcinogenic studies or any long term effects signaling genetic defects from vaccines were never done.

Liability waivers put in force for the drug companies to escape prosecutorial litigation will not be upheld in the face of gross criminal action for failure to perform due diligence in the safety study or even of the efficacy studies that are lacking for vaccine use in the first place.

The highly polymorphic HLA/DLA antigen systems which are involved in antigen presentation clearly affects responses to vaccination and therefore this impact is unknown in any organism receiving the jab. This lack of knowing makes every vaccination: experimentation under the guise of health care delivery. Effects of vaccines on any individual are variable and therefore any expected result incalculable, the risk to any organism is therefore unknown.

*Administering a jab is not synonymous with conveying immunity. Antibody production is not equated to immunity and vaccination does not mean immunization. Damage from vaccines are cumulative, cell mediated immune suppression increases significantly with every jab. Multivalent vaccines are particularly damaging and immune disrupting.*

*Only vaccinated individuals were found to develop auto antibodies in a landmark study done at Perdue University. Auto antibodies are made with the vaccines from the viruses, from the microbial antigens, from the aluminum and mercury and other ingredients that would mutate or disrupt the pathogen. The increase of molecular mimicry increases with vaccines and these examples of pathways to increase the number of auto antibodies formed the trigger necessary to promote genetic expression of autoimmune disease. Certainly, autoimmune disease expression is one step closer to genetic disease and that handicap will transfer vertically to the next generation in many instances. The important understanding is that the adulteration of the genome came in via the injection of vaccine.*

Since not even a very heavy book could contain all the pathways to disease expression from genetic effects of the vaccine (the great immune adulterant), let us at least end this with the following understanding; vaccines have no environmental epidemiological studies to support the benefits over risks of vaccine administration, they are not safe nor innocuous and have not even been proven effective in conveying immunity which is the only reason one would consider their use in the first place. Vaccination use fits the definition of a medical assumption and according to Dr. Stephen Blake is certainly the biggest medical assumption ever made in the history of mankind and is directly responsible for more disease, death and disability than any other medical procedure or act.

For three centuries genotoxicity, immune dysregulation and immune dysfunctioning - even to immune deficiency and annihilation - has been de evolving the genomes of man and animals.

The attempt to violate the natural laws of evolution is impacting the species in a de-evolutionary format leading to increased genetic expression of disease and forcing those jabbed into a cycle of chronic disease management if not death first. Of course the same drug companies that make vaccines are usually the same ones that sell the medications to palliate and suppress said disease expression. This system of making disease and then making the medications to suppress and palliate the disease puts into the hands of the drug companies all the federal funds that sponsored the vaccines and then the money from the manipulated health care system treating the disease.

It is obvious that the unnatural vaccine has unnaturally selected for genes that do not reflect a natural exposure from the real environment and thusly resulted in unnatural selection of genes that have dys regulated the immune system and disrupted the inflammatory pathway and distorted the populations genetically.

*Vaccination is resulting in abnormal disease expression and the making of disease previously not encountered. Although it is popular to blame our external environment, this is not the main environment our immune system is being pressured by. In the madness, the species are being distorted and genomes are being corrupted. The rise of genetic susceptibility and genetic disease is a reflection of this distortion. Most of what we see today is Vaccine Disease, in that the dysregulation of the immune system by vaccines have altered the genetic susceptibility and expression of disease and is not evolving a better immune system and health but deconstructing the immune system and the genome towards doom.*


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

What utter nonsense!


> vaccines..... have not even been proven effective in conveying immunity


Please tell that to all those children who no longer run the risk of polio - or measles - or any of the other diseases that are routinely vaccinated against.

There's a report in today's papers that Universities are expecting an outbreak of measles amongst unvaccinated students. So, they are telling students to make sure they've had MMR vaccinations. Why is that? After all, there's no point in vaccinating (according to the drivel you've posted).

It's the sort of ludicrous stupidity in the article that you quoted that puts people - and animals - at serious risk.

Funny how that article writer seems to be the only person in the world with a qualification "CVCTH" and list 'Herbology' as a qualification. Does she have degrees in Witchcraft and Dowsing as well?

Who do I trust? Well qualified vets (yes, our own veterinary ruling body has made pronouncements on this) or a Herbologist? er, no contest.


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

All my dogs that i have ever owned have been vaccinated and the 2 i have now will continue to be,,, i know some have had probs with after effects but none of my dogs have, it worries me that there are so many unvaccinated dogs around, will it be in the near furure that all the terrible diseases will reappear,
On a note of vaccinations i have had my 2 done for kennel cough this week as there is an outbreak around the Southend-on-sea Essex area and a 10 mile radis from there.


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

As nurses we get offered vaccinations but don't have to have them. I turned down the swine flu vaccine despite being in contact with people who had it for the simple reason it made everyone i know very unwell! Its the same for the animal vaccines. I agreed to have puppy and kitten ones done but i felt the boosters did more harm than good. In the future i may well choose to have the boosters for any new pets but that depends on the research i do in the future


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> What utter nonsense!
> 
> Please tell that to all those children who no longer run the risk of polio - or measles - or any of the other diseases that are routinely vaccinated against.
> 
> ...


LOL what does DVM stand for? DOCTOR OF VETERINARY MEDICINE [here in the UK we call them MRCVS] you will see that at the start of her qualifications. CVA Commonwealth Veterinary Association follows DVA.

How Vaccines Dysregulate The Immune System and Impact Genetic Control Over Disease Expression
by Patricia Jordan, DVM, CVA, CTCVH, & Herbology]

Hmmm yes sounds like you know your stuff!

I have only been researching information on vaccines and thier history since 1993, I tend not to take my information from tabloids [Mass Media creates Mass Hysteria] But rather spend my time on more reliable resource material

Erm I think you will find Ceearott had the measle vaccination and still got the disease!

Outbreaks of polio are well know to occur in vaccinated populations and the same with other diseases. Infact one of the last big Polio programs was halted when those who receved the vaccine were dying or falling ill!

My own vet has been practising for 40 + years following qualifying as a vet further studies and qualifications were gained in other areas such as homeopathy - and SO???

If yu read and understand the article [its not rocket science] who is the stupid one and doesn't it explain why so many of our pets especially dogs are dying so young from cancer and suffering from so many autoimmune diseases etc


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> LOL what does DVM stand for? DOCTOR OF VETERINARY MEDICINE [here in the UK we call them MRCVS] you will see that at the start of her qualifications. CVA Commonwealth Veterinary Association follows DVA.
> 
> How Vaccines Dysregulate The Immune System and Impact Genetic Control Over Disease Expression
> by Patricia Jordan, DVM, CVA, CTCVH, & Herbology]


So what does CTCVH stand for? And WTF is 'Herbology'?



> I have only been researching information on vaccines and thier history since 1993, I tend not to take my information from tabloids [Mass Media creates Mass Hysteria] But rather spend my time on more reliable resource material


Obviously your 'reliable resource material' isn't. Try looking at the hundreds/thousands of research papers that support vaccination instead of ONE by some self-professed 'Herbologist'



> Erm I think you will find Ceearott had the measle vaccination and still got the disease!


I have no idea who (or what) Cearott is. I think you'll find that thousands of children have had measles vaccinations and never got measles. That's thousands to one.



> Outbreaks of polio are well know to occur in vaccinated populations and the same with other diseases. Infact one of the last big Polio programs was halted when those who receved the vaccine were dying or falling ill!


Please cite proof of that claim. The current UK polio programme has been going for at least 50 years without any form of interruption.

And the WHO states:

_Before a polio vaccine was developed, polio epidemics were common in the United States. For example, in the immediate pre-vaccine era (i.e., early 1950s), between 13,000 and 20,000 paralytic cases were reported each year. After the development of the inactivated (Salk) injectable vaccine in 1955 and the live (Sabin) oral vaccine in 1961, the number of polio cases dropped dramatically. In 1960, there were 2,525 paralytic cases reported, but by 1965 this number had fallen to 61.

Due to a concentrated effort to eradicate polio from the world, there have been no cases of "wild" (i.e., natural) polio acquired in the United States since 1979, and no cases of wild polio acquired in the entire Western Hemisphere since 1991.

In 1988, the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted the goal of global polio eradication. Although the initial target date of 2000 was not met, substantial progress has been made. In 1988, there were estimated to be 350,000 reported cases of polio in the world; in 2001, just 483 cases were reported. Unfortunately, rumors about the safety of polio vaccine in 2003, and subsequent refusal of vaccine by many parents in Nigeria, led to an increase in cases and spread of the virus to nearby countries that had previously been polio free. In 2003, there were 784 reported cases; in 2004, there were 1,255 reported cases._

Now, please show me that vaccines don't work.



> My own vet has been practising for 40 + years following qualifying as a vet further studies and qualifications were gained in other areas such as homeopathy - and SO???


So what? My vet is also a homoeopathic vet - she's actually on the board for veterinary homoeopathy. But she advises us to vaccinate.



> If yu read and understand the article [its not rocket science] who is the stupid one and doesn't it explain why so many of our pets especially dogs are dying so young from cancer and suffering from so many autoimmune diseases etc


I read the article. It's drivel. You start talking about cancer - why? There's no link between vaccination and cancer. There is, AFAIK, no statistics showing a vast increase in cancer in pets nor is there any proven link between cancer and vaccination.

When articles claim stuff like vaccination "influences the entire immune system in an unnatural way" you know this woman is out of her tree. Vaccination triggers specific antibodies - not the 'entire immune system'. The only 'unnatural' part is that the vaccination contains a very, very small dose of the illness being vaccinated against - often in a 'dead' form - simply to get the appropriate antibodies existing immune system to increase their defences.

If that's the best you can come up with having researched since 1993 then I really, seriously, suggest that you need to do a whole lot more research that considers the whole field of immunology rather than rely on this paper which, while full of medical terminology, actually is just a load of disjointed non-sequiturs.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> So what does CTCVH stand for? And WTF is 'Herbology'?
> 
> Obviously your 'reliable resource material' isn't. Try looking at the hundreds/thousands of research papers that support vaccination instead of ONE by some self-professed 'Herbologist'
> 
> ...


Oh deary me !

Who do you think peer reviews all those thousands of papers in support of vaccination? Probably the same people that support the promotion of kibble diets for dogs and the carb laden junk food that make the Western population so 'healthy'

I have no doubt the article may appear disjointed, I had to cut a lot of it out to fit it into one post but the crux of it is relative.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> Oh deary me !
> 
> Who do you think peer reviews all those thousands of papers in support of vaccination? Probably the same people that support the promotion of kibble diets for dogs and the carb laden junk food that make the Western population so 'healthy'
> 
> I have no doubt the article may appear disjointed, I had to cut a lot of it out to fit it into one post but the crux of it is relative.


You obviously have an agenda of your own which is totally contradicted by the vast majority of medical evidence and veterinary research. I note you don't reply to things like being caught out on your totally false claims about polio - or indeed about any of the other misinformation you've posted.

There's no point continuing this. You have no sensible argument - just blind prejudice. I just hope that your pets will be forgiving if they ever get anything you could have vaccinated against. But I doubt they'd live long enough.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Vets, just like GP's are visited by drug company sales reps and are rewarded for using certain drugs, just as vets are for promting Hills crap plan!

Childhood vacs are NOT given yearly because they don't have to be and neither do dog vacs. Just drug co's and vets making money as per and very dangerous to our dogs as it would be to our kids to over vaccinate!


----------



## Manoy Moneelil (Sep 1, 2011)

More dogs die becaused of disease X than vacinations for disease X. 

The injection site and care taken or not when giving the injection matters more than is given credit to. 

Nay saying vacinations is just plain backward thinking.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Most people are not nay-saying vaccinations altogether, just questioning the frequency recommended. It's healthy to question what you are told and not just sit back and accept it.



> More dogs die becaused of disease X than vacinations for disease X


How do you know? How do you know that dogs are not dying daily due to compromises to their immune systems caused by over-vaccination?


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Then you go on with your head stuck firmly in the sand til one day you're proved wrong. 

Tell me how Zoe Lewsley's (Dogmatic managing director) Champion Doberman was struck down with paralysis just 30 mins after having a Lepto booster, eventually having to be pts with the vaccine manufacturer held responsible.

With titer testing there is absolutely no need to vaccinate and fill our dogs systems with disease when they are already immune to it. It begger's belief how people are still so naive when it comes to vets and the way they make money out of our pets.

It's a matter of personal choice of course but why would you believe that it's necessary to vaccinate our pets annually against some diseases when we don't have the same criteria for human diseases. Dogs Today magazine are calling on the BVA to stop annual vacs, replacing them with three yearly vacs instead because of the risks now known to be involved with over vaccination. If it has been shown that Parvo vac will keep a dog safe for a number of years in the future, some studies have show for over seven years by titer testing, why would anyone think it would be different with an other dog - ever? It is a disease and as such has a certain life span, the vaccination will work just the same from dog to dog, as say a measles vac does in a child.

If any one of my dogs die of cancer at least I will know I didn't cause it by over vaccinating as many studies are now showing.
Revaccination

I'll listen to people like Dr Ronald Schultz, Chairman of Pathobiological Sciences at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine, who has dedicated his life to research and not to some vet who is out to make money from my pet.

Dogs Today article.
Untitled Document

At least we can all decide what we feel is best but in ten years time, most likely sooner, those of us who don't annually vaccinate will definitely be proved right!


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Malmum said:


> Then you go on with your head stuck firmly in the sand til one day you're proved wrong.
> 
> Tell me how Zoe Lewsley's (Dogmatic managing director) Champion Doberman was struck down with paralysis just 30 mins after having a Lepto booster, eventually having to be pts with the vaccine manufacturer held responsible.


Very sad. But one dog out of how many hundreds/thousands?



> With titer testing there is absolutely no need to vaccinate and fill our dogs systems with disease when they are already immune to it. It begger's belief how people are still so naive when it comes to vets and the way they make money out of our pets.


It beggars belief that you put your faith in titre testing. All the evidence shows that titre testing can only show you a result on the day. It doesn't give ANY indication of how long protection will last for.



> It's a matter of personal choice of course but why would you believe that it's necessary to vaccinate our pets annually against some diseases when we don't have the same criteria for human diseases. Dogs Today magazine are calling on the BVA to stop annual vacs, replacing them with three yearly vacs instead because of the risks now known to be involved with over vaccination. If it has been shown that Parvo vac will keep a dog safe for a number of years in the future, some studies have show for over seven years by titer testing, why would anyone think it would be different with an other dog - ever? It is a disease and as such has a certain life span, the vaccination will work just the same from dog to dog, as say a measles vac does in a child.


Which is why most vaccinations are now recommended for 2/3 year boosters. Except for Lepto which, as I'm sure you are aware, mutates annually and needs an annual protection. All manufacturers give a statement about the period of protection that can be expected. Most are 2 years, some are 3. I don't know of any that go beyond that.



> If any one of my dogs die of cancer at least I will know I didn't cause it by over vaccinating as many studies are now showing.
> Revaccination
> 
> I'll listen to people like Dr Ronald Schultz, Chairman of Pathobiological Sciences at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine, who has dedicated his life to research and not to some vet who is out to make money from my pet.


And will you be happy that the very, very small chance of cancer (which isn't proven to be linked BTW) that you've protected your dog from is vastly outweighed by the chances of it getting one of the common killers?

I'll listen to the vast majority of proven research - not a few noise makers.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I don't put all my faith in titer testing I put it in 40 odd years of dog ownership and NEVER ONCE having parvo or any other vaccinated disease purely by only having puppy jabs. Lived in busy area's in Lodon and rural in that time. Long lived healthy dogs all of them which can't be just luck!

As I said I would rather listen to people who actually research and write papers on vaccines than a primary care vet who is in the pocket of a sales rep!


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

can I just point out that most vaccinations do not actually make you immune to the illness. . . there is just a small possibility your body MIGHT be able to fight it off better after having the vaccination

it's the same with human ones. . .the TB jab that they give to every child. . .does not make you immune. . .in SOME PEOPLE it makes your chances of fighting it off a little bit better if you do get it. . . .so you still end up with TB and still end up in hospital extremely unwell. . . 

the flu vaccine. . .you still get flu. ..you might just have it for a couple of days less. . .if the vaccine actually helped you to fight it off. . . .it might not. . .it might not even do anything

my TB jab did bugger all. . . I do not have any form of reaction when I have the mantoux test to test whether it worked. . . .which means that it didn't. . .a lot of vaccinations have absolutely no effect.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Nico0laGouldsmith said:


> can I just point out that most vaccinations do not actually make you immune to the illness. . . there is just a small possibility your body MIGHT be able to fight it off better after having the vaccination


Incorrect. There's a huge possibility that you'll fight off the illness. See the information above about polio.

I really don't know where all this sadly misinformed information comes from.

Simple fact - immunisation is safer than catching the disease.
Simple fact - immunisation prevents the vast majority of those immunised against catching the disease.
Simple fact - titre testing only shows the level of immunisation present at the time of testing. It does NOT show that the level of protection will carry on for any defined period of time. A good result today could mean your animal is at risk tomorrow.
Simple fact - the vast majority of pets are immunised - the number having an adverse reaction to any vaccine is tiny (and, BTW, in a lot of cases the link with immunisation and subsequent illness has been found to be purely coincidental but owners blame the vaccination anyway).

Now, all those things are highly documented and accepted by the veterinary profession (who collectively know a damn sight more about animal health than any one pet owner).

But, sadly, there are always people who get a bee in their bonnets about things and go out of their way to try and prove black is white. I don't know why. They aren't doing anyone any favours - least of all themselves - when they argue that natural immunity is enough. It isn't. Live with it.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Just thought I would pop this link in for anyone interested 

Horrors of Vaccination Exposed

If the link doesnt work, as sometimes it doesnt as the book is rather large to upload, just google its title and you will find it. Horrors Of Vaccination Exposed. It was written way back in the 1920's.


----------



## hyper Springer (Jan 8, 2010)

mines gets his plus the kennel cough one up the nose

i have to as he goes in Kennles twice a year when i go on hols


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Just a couple excerpts from of dozens of scientific articles I have on SV40 & Cancer

Science 10 May 2002: 
Vol. 296 no. 5570 pp. 1012-1015 
DOI: 10.1126/science.296.5570.1012 
News Focus
VIROLOGY
VIROLOGY
Monkey Virus Link to Cancer Grows Stronger
Dan Ferber
Summary
A monkey virus called SV40 that contaminated early batches of polio vaccine and was soon found to cause four types of tumors in hamsters was deemed safe decades ago, but it keeps turning up in human tumors. Now researchers are figuring out how the virus might imperil cells and are searching for ways to stop it. 

and

An unknown proportion of formalin-inactivated poliovirus vaccine lots administered to millions of US residents between 1955 and 1963 was contaminated with small amounts of infectious simian virus 40 (SV40), a polyomavirus of the rhesus macaque. It has been reported that mesothelioma, brain tumors, osteosarcoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) contain SV40 DNA sequences and that SV40 infection introduced into humans by the vaccine probably contributed to the development of these cancers. 


Population-based Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, Histology, and Medical History among Human Immunodeficiency Virus-negative Participants in San Francisco 
Am J Epidemiol 15 August 2003: 316-327.

Simian Virus 40 Sequences and Expression of the Viral Large T Antigen Oncoprotein in Human Pleomorphic Adenomas of Parotid Glands 
Am. J. Pathol. 1 October 2002: 1127-1133.


Merk have very recently admitted they knew about SV40 contamination - well even Salk and Sabine had their concerns in the first place


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> Incorrect. There's a huge possibility that you'll fight off the illness. See the information above about polio.
> 
> I really don't know where all this sadly misinformed information comes from.
> 
> ...


Ignore any spelling errors. Blame predictive text please 
Simple fact - immunisation does not PREVENT anyone from CATCHING a disease. Immunisations exposes your body to a weak verrsion or a dead version of the disease so your body can produce antibodies against it and is therefore prepared in the future. If you looked into it you would find that your animal would be immunised against ONE Subtype of the illness and there may be 2000 different strains of it so they only vaccinate against one and your pet will come into contact with a different one.

In humans the nhs picks which strain of flu they THINK is likely to be the most common. THere are lots of different strains of normal seasonal flu not including things like swine flu. If they immunised people still come into contact with a different strain they still get flu. They can't immunise against every strain of every illness or your pet would have to have a million injections.


----------



## Jasper's Bloke (Oct 30, 2009)

I think it is extremely naive for anyone to blindly follow the advice of one single vet, no matter what council or committee they may sit on. Let us not forget, trusted as they may be, our vets are there first and foremost to make a living and annual vax do provide a guaranteed income, cynical maybe, but a fact nonetheless. Whether they are necessary or not is another matter, but the very fact that some vets advise every year, while others are saying three years should in itself, lead people to question the facts.There is a wealth of research available on the web and if people are so concerned about it they should take the time to read for themselves. This may however still be inconclusive due to the sheer weight of evidence both for and against annual vaccination, in which case it is down to the individual to make their own personal choice.

Obviously there is risk, don't vaccinate frequently enough and you risk disease, vaccinate too frequently and you risk not only an adverse reaction, but also contribution to the decline of the effectiveness of the vaccines. Exactly the same thing has happened with human medicines, the over prescription of antibiotics such as penicillin has led to the development of entirely new viruses and bacteria that are now resistant to such drugs, MRSA being the case in point. 

Immunisations are not a cure, they are a prevention, and most involve administering a tiny amount of the relevant disease itself so that the immune system can generate the necessary antibodies to destroy it, the next time the immune system encounters the same disease, it then knows how to deal with it. But, if the disease mutates as it must in order to survive, there will come a point when it has mutated far enough from the original for the antibodies to become ineffective, a simple but effective case of evolution. If we over-vaccinate, then we unwittingly speed up this process.

The definitive answer then is that there is no definitive answer, each must weigh the risks and act as they believe is best for their own pet, which incidentally, they should be entitled to do without some of the rude and self-righteous comments they have been subjected to so far on this thread. There is a difference between disagreeing with someone and insulting them, come on guys, play fair.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

I cant speak for other breeds but everyday across breed forums we read YET ANOTHER Rottweiler has been diagnosed with Osteosarcoma or another form of cancer. Lameness is another big issue.

When you look at all the contaminants known to to have been found in vaccines its little wonder as well as bacterial and viral contaminants, there are the adjuvants... sorry but in my lifetime of only ever vaccinating one dog the risks of vaccination far exceeds the risks of not vaccinating

I have no doubt we will see an _new emerging disease_ that will scare people into vaccinating but it wont be a natural outbreak.

*Mycoplasmas *are considered benign microorganisms however when they penetrate into blood vessels and colonise in major organs certain species can cause acute and chronic illness with a broad spectrum of diseases

*Adjuvants are known as the 'dirty little secrets' of vaccine manufacturers. *They are ingredients added to vaccines to agitate a response, in addition there are common vaccine contaminants which include Mycoplasmas, fungi, bacteria, yeast and viruses that have evaded screening.

The use of contaminated cells for vaccine production results in contaminated vaccines which can lead to seroconversion or disease in vaccinate animals, contaminated serum or cell cultures can interfere with diagnosis of viral infections

A study by DH Thorton found veterinary vaccines from 6 sources for use in dogs and cats were contaminated with Mycoplasma. In one study 87% of vaccines were found to be contaminated with mycoplasma alone

Mycoplasmas are endowed with sophisticated genetic machinery for altering their surface attributes which play a key role in enabling evasion of host defences

Mycoplasmas are of great importance because of the deleterious effects they have upon the infected hosts cells. It is not unusual t find a combination of mycoplasma species involved in arthritic infections

Adjuvant Arthritis is an induced arthritis, relapsing in nature and an erosive form of synovitis. Mycoplasma arthritis may occur with other infections, as well as swelling and heat in the joints, further examination will show cartilage erosion which may be replaced with granulation tissue

Parvovirus and mycoplasmas mirror each other. Both cause arthritis, false-negative results and both mimic other illnesses. Parvovirus is found in the synovial membrane and mycoplasmas are found in the synovial fluid

Mycoplasmas have been known to have a complex relationship with the immune system. They are very effective at evading host immune responses and their synergism with other infective agents has been seen, although many signs and symptoms that they cause are non-specific, they seem to be related to immunological and auto immunological responses

There is increasing evidence that mycoplasmas play a role in certain forms of arthritis and autoimmune disease in the pathogenesis of certain chronic diseases, but little is known as to if it is the causal agent, a cofactor or a secondary super infection in those with immune disturbances. It is known though that they are able to induce immune dysfunctions and autoimmune reactions

Non-specific interactions between mycoplasma and B-lymphocytes have been implicated in disease pathogenesis possibly leading to immune reactions, modulation of immunity and/or promotion of lesion development and are an important factor or cofactor in various joint diseases

Mycoplasmas can produce a variety of effects on host cells and tissues. Besides affecting cell growth and morphology, mycoplasmas are able to alter metabolic, immunological and biochemical functions.

There seems to be a complex relationship between mycoplasma infections and the immune system of the host. For example, Mycoplasma Arthritidis related super antigens are known to compromise T-cells and trigger and exacerbate autoimmune arthritis in animals

Mycoplasmal infections lead to increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin 1,2,4 and 6 further increasing the possibility of M. Arthritidis and other mycoplasmal species are responsible in, at least part of certain types of arthritis and inflammatory disease

Mycoplasmal infections have been associated with various inflammatory diseases such as endocarditis, percarditis, encephalomyelitis etc where immunological or autoimmune phenomenas coexist

I came across this article in the link below several years ago when I was looking into vaccines & arthritis in dogs and discovered mycoplasmas were vaccine contaminants.

The Linking Pathogen in Neurosystemic Diseases

...Several strains of mycoplasma have been "engineered" to become more dangerous.

see

MYCOPLASMA The Linking Pathogen in Neurosystemic Diseases----Donald W. Scott MA, MSc. 2001

At the bottom of the link page is a further Mycoplasma link to more articles


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

People who have had a flu vaccine would still get the type of flu they were vaccinated against they may just fight it off  any may not even notice.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Barbara McClintock, the 1983 Nobel laureate Corn Lady, was the first to discover genetic mobility in the so-called jumping genes in the 1930s. For over 50 years she pursued solitary research with corn, uncovering some of natures inner most secrets about life.

McClintock studied maize, a form of Indian corn, where distribution of red kernels and yellow kernels is genetically determined. What she perceived was that some of the genes were moving from one place to another on the cells chromosomes (the floating threads on which genes are lined like beads on a string). Then she saw patterns in the movements, with sharply differing results in the colored kernels, and realized that some genes, once moved into position, switched other genes on or off. It followed that, while most genes were workers, others were controllers or managers of genes.

According to an article in World Medicine (September 22, 1971, pp 69-72; New Medical Journals, Clareville House, Oxendon St., London), scientists at the University of Geneva have made the startling discovery that biological substances entering directly into the blood stream may truly become a part of us and even a part of our genetic material. The article stated in part:

When Japanese bacteriologists discovered that bacteria of one species transferred their own highly specific antibiotic resistance to bacteria of an entirely different species, they seemed to hit on a unique if not startling phenomenon. Dr. Maurice Stroun and Dr. Pilippe Anker, with colleagues in the Department of Plant Physiology at the University of Geneva, have now accumulated a wealth of evidence that the transfer of genetic information is not confined to bacteria but also can occur between bacteria and higher plants and animals.

The Geneva scientists are convinced that normal animal and plant cells also shed DNA and that this DNA is also taken up by other cells in the organism. If they are right, the consequences to virtually every aspect of a cells metabolism would be considerable. The growth and development, diseases, and even the evolution of an organism would be affected. 

Dr. Maurice Stroun and his colleagues did most of their research on plants but have now turned to animals. In their latest set of experiments they used the isolated auricles of frogs hearts. 

There is no question about the results. They found a high percentage of RNA-DNA (ribonucleic-deoxyribonucleic) hybridization between bacterial DNA extracted from bacteria of the same species as that used in the experiment and titrated RNA extracted from auricles which has been dipped in the bacterial suspension. (DNA, the characteristic nucleic acid of the nucleus in all cells, is the fundamental substance which carries the genetic code within the cells of the body). 

Since we know that no bacteria got into the frog auricles, we can only conclude that the bacterial DNA must have been exuded from the bacteria and absorbed by the animal cells, says Stroun.

This transfer phenomenon, or transcession, as Dr. Anker called it, is very probably a general one, otherwise, he and Dr. Stroun would hardly have succeeded first go, in getting bacterial RNA synthesized by animal tissues

The implications of this work on transcession are enormous, for the Geneva work suggests that this phenomenon is going on the whole time  even in our own bodiesCould, for example, the heart damage that can follow after rheumatic fever and similar bacterial infections be the result of the bodys immunological system reacting to its own cells producing an alien RNA?

Subsequent studies by Anker and Stroun further confirmed observations in the above report.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Genetic Hybridization

As purely genetic material, it would be expected that viruses are more prone to the process of jumping genes than other microorganisms. The following publication tends to support this hypothesis: In a study of 24 passages of a nuclear polyhedrosis virus through cell cultures there were both insertions and deletions in the virus, appearing to suggest that the virus both donated genetic material to and received genetic material from the cells in which it was cultured, therefore also suggesting the possibility of similar viral exchanges in the human system (our interpretation). 

As another possible complication of viral infections (presumably also viral vaccines) similarities have been found between certain viral proteins and proteins related to myelin sheaths of the brain and nervous system. As a result of this protein mimicry between viral proteins and homologous areas of the nervous system, immunological cross reactions may take place resulting in post-infectious or post-vaccinal encephalitis, myelitis, or neuritis. These viruses include measles, Epstein-Barr, influenza A and B, and others that cause upper respiratory infections. 

Following this line of thought one step further, in an article entitled, Vaccination and autoimmunity-vaccinosis: a dangerous liaison?, the authors pointed to the potential problem of molecular mimicry in vaccines, in which a structural similarity existing between some viral antigen and a self-antigen could, by bringing about a slight modification of the antigenic character of tissues, cause it to appear foreign to the immune system and thus a fair target for antibody production (and autoimmunity) 

Endogenous and Exogenous Assaults on the Human Immune System  Stripping Away the Outer Defenses

With its series of immune defenses protecting our genetics, in health the human body can stand a great deal of abuse, toxic or otherwise, but when these outer defenses are stripped away leaving our genetics relatively unprotected, it is in this type of scenario where, theoretically, genetic damage could take place. Situations leading to this genetic vulnerability could include one or more of the following:

 At a conference a number of years ago, Dr. H.H. Fudenberg, world-renowned immunologist with hundreds of publications to his credit, made the following comments: One vaccine decreases cell-mediated immunity by 50%, two vaccines by 70%all triple vaccines (MMR, DTaP) markedly impair cell-mediated immunity, which predisposes to recurrent viral infections, especially otitis media, as well as yeast and fungi infections.

 Severe and/or prolonged stress raises both endogenous adrenalin and serum cortisol levels. It has long been known that cortisone medications tend to depress the immune system. Endogenous elevations of cortisone can do the same.

 Toxic chemicals, as in the Persian Gulf War Syndrome or toxic industrial waste sites, which have been associated with increases in chromosomal congenital anomalies in residents living near these sites. 

 Nutritional deficiencies, especially deficiencies in folic acid, which performs a critical function in making and repairing chromosomes. As reviewed in a monograph on folic acid by Sidney M Baker, M.D., precancerous chromosomal damage has been found in cell cultures when the culture medium contains low levels of folic acid. 

 As reviewed in standard pediatric textbooks, newborn babies and infants, having little immunity of their own, are largely dependent on antibodies received from their mother for about 6 months following birth, as indicated by their small lymph nodes, few plasma cells in their bone marrow, and very low rates of immunoglobulin synthesis. Normally about 6 years are required before various immune parameters are well established. At least theoretically, because of the immaturity of the immune system in infancy and early childhood, the childs genetics during these early ages would be more vulnerable to injury. 

Although final proof is as yet lacking, there is much indirect evidence that vaccines may be skewing the immune system away from cellular immune system, which is normally dominant in health, towards the weaker humoral system, which is associated with allergies and autoimmunity as well as increased vulnerability to viral and fungal infections. This conclusion can hardly be escaped because most if not all vaccines in current use are injected directly into the body and are directed at stimulating antibody production in the bone marrow. Bypassing the mucous membranes of the body as they do, the cellular immune system remains weak and relatively stunted due to lack of stimulation. As previously noted, once the humoral system attains dominance, as demonstrated in the following study, this dominance tends to be self-perpetuating. 

Each of the two systems has identifying markers called cytokines (peptides which act as messengers), and this is how they are identified. A study by Sudhir Gupta of 20 autistic children, a condition thought by growing numbers of parents and physicians to be largely vaccine-related, showed consistent elevations of humoral cytokines and lowering of cellular cytokines. Consequently, if vaccines are skewing infants immune systems by inducing a humoral-dominant system at a highly vulnerable time of life, they could be creating double-jeopardy from the standpoint of genetic mutations.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Stealth Viruses and the Work of John Martin, MD, PhD

A stealth virus is one that can establish a persistent infection in people over a period of years, while at the same time escaping detection by the human immune system because of its genetic fragmentation and polyglot mixture of genetic elements. The story begins years ago when Dr. Martin was serving as director of the viral oncology branch within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration when he found foreign DNA in the oral polio vaccine being manufactured at the time. He later learned that a Simian (monkey) cytomegalic virus (CMV) had been found in all of the eleven African green monkeys imported for production of the polio vaccine.

After leaving the FDA, Dr. Martin took a position as professor of pathology with the University of Southern California. There he tested blood samples from patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, autism, and other nervous system disorders. This work led to his discovery of unique cell-destroying viruses that were not recognized by the immune system. Termed stealth viruses, some of which he thought had clearly originated from the simian cytomegalic virus, these viruses were missing specific genes which, if expressed, would induce immune responses from the host. 

By way of explanation, the stealth virus, which, according to the work of Dr. Martin had its origins from a CMV contaminant of the oral polio vaccine, had become extremely fragile and unstable, possibly as a result of numerous serial passages through a variety of hosts in the commercial development of the vaccine. Being more unstable, it would theoretically be more prone to exchange nuclear material with its various hosts, in the end becoming somewhat like a genetic Rubik's cube with a polyglot of nuclear material. This polyglot mixture remains unidentifiable to the immune system of the infected human host. 

Martin has reported on finding the stealth virus of Simian-CMV-origin in chronic fatigue and in an autistic child. The findings of chromosomal changes by Urnovitz in studies of veterans suffering from Persian Gulf War Syndrome reported the findings of many enteroviral-similar segments in the abnormal chromosomes. It was also pointed out by Urnovitz that virtually all of the Gulf War veterans received the oral polio vaccine, the implication being that the polio vaccine with its CMV contaminant could have been a source of the enteroviral segments. (Polio is an enteric virus). 

Considering the possible consequences of these early findings of Dr. Martin, one wonders if there are plans for further investigation of these disturbing findings, or must this be left to future generations?


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

The Work of Howard B. Urnovitz and The Chronic Illness Foundation

Dr. Urnovitz and his colleagues have been studying the implications of vaccines in cancer, Persian Gulf War Syndrome, multiple sclerosis, and AIDS. Urnovitz, who holds doctorates in Immunology and Microbiology from the University of Michigan where he studied vaccines, has become one of the most vocal proponents for scientists to become aware of vaccine-associated genetic mutations. His work in this area has supported the concepts that:

I Our bodies have a genetic memory of foreign substances it encounters, including vaccines.

II There is a limit on how much foreign material our bodies can handle before genetic damage occurs and/or progresses into a chronic illness.

III Each person has their own unique genetic blueprint which responds to foreign substances differently.

Although Urnovitz did not elaborate further on the subject of genetic memory, his reference to it can be interpreted as an inference that the genetic blueprints we inherit from our parents are influenced and potentially changed in adaptation to environmental exposures during our lifetimes.

Perhaps Urnovitz and colleagues are best known for the work they have published on the Gulf War Syndrome (GWS), where they found evidence of genetic alterations in Chromosome 22q11.2, a known genetic hot spot for mutations, which appear to have a role in the pathogenesis of GWS. Even more striking is that when they sequenced their findings, many enteroviral-similar segments were found suggesting that this may have played a role in causing the changes in 22q11.2. As previously stated, most Gulf War veterans received the oral poliovirus vaccine, an enterovirus, presumably along with its Simian CMV contaminant. 

The work of Urnovitz places a serious light on the implications of vaccines in bringing about genetic alterations. Our parents provide our genetic blueprints at birth, but this raw genetic material now appears to be malleable to environmental influences, including toxic chemicals and vaccines. Based on the foregoing information it is both possible and plausible that genetic translocations are taking place as a result of vaccines. Surely this is a credible cause for concern.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Immunogenetics

The genetics of our immune system are not well understood by scientists. However, there are many studies which pose serious implications. As one example, MG Montinari and colleagues investigated the relationship between post-vaccine central nervous system (CNS) diseases and human leukocyte antigens (HLA), which essentially strips the bodys brain and nerve tissues of their outer myelin coating

By way of explanation, the HLA system is one which aids an individuals immune system to differentiate that which is self from that which is non-self. Although the mechanisms are complex, it is a system which, during embryonic life, learns to recognize healthy or normal cells of the body as self so that these cells will remain unmolested by the search and destroy mechanisms of the immune system, leaving the latter free to protect the body from foreign invaders. 

Of special concern is that the HLA system also carries an increased proneness to polymorphism (mutation), the mutations in turn possibly resulting in an impairment of self-recognition. This process may be the fundamental cause, or one of the primary causes of underlying autoimmune disorders in which the immune system attacks the cells within the body. The HLA system plays an integral part of this process. When the alleles of the HLA system are mutated, as sometimes seen in viral infections, viral vaccines, or environmental illness from toxic chemicals, the bodys immunogenetic memory is altered. The presentation of an antigen to the immune system is important, and interference with this presentation may cause the body to mistake normal tissue, such as brain and nerve myelin, and thus attack its own tissues (autoimmunity). 

Montinari found that certain alleles of HLA (A3 & DR7) were more frequent in patients with post vaccine-induced illness. This indicates an immunogenetic basis for such illnesses. What caused much concern was that Montinari implicated vaccine preservatives such as thimerosal as causing genetic mutations by modifying the amino acids in presenting antigen proteins, which may be responsible for confusing the body into autoimmune reactions.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Further Concerns of Vaccine-Induced Genetic Mutation

Many of us are aware of The Human Genome Project which is an attempt to map out the entire chromosomal locations of human genes. It is important to note that a technique for the mapping of genes actually fuses human and rat cells in tissue cultures. These cells, called human-rodent somatic cells, actually have both rat and human chromosomes combined. This hybridization of human and non-human cells is done by placing both in a tissue culture and put through repeated cell-cycle passage, where human chromosomes are lost. This allows for scientists to mark certain protein-expressing genes to individual human chromosomes.

Knowing that such hybridization occurs in laboratory processes and can be repeated, one must wonder if vaccines, which are contaminated and made with various human, animal, and non-human cells/DNA, can have the same effect in the human body.

Returning now to the subject of genetic contamination, and to the work of Anker and Stroun as well as to the human-rat cell fusion, we know that many vaccines use immortal cell lines which are actually cancerous types of cells with no limit on how many times they can divide. The most commonly known type of tissue used is of the human diploid variety extracted from aborted fetal tissue. It is possible that these cells could actually hybridize with our own. In fact, it is likely in light of what we know about human-rodent somatic cells.

As well, there is concern that these cell lines are easily contaminated with pathogens and spread cancer (mutation-promoting) material to humans.

Certain vaccines called recombinant, sub-unit, and naked DNA use methods of genetic engineering in their production. These techniques pose major concerns because of the unknown interaction of the vaccine and human proteins/DNA. The FDA actually acknowledges this concern where mutations take place through the activation of oncogenes or inactivation of tumor suppressor genes allowing cancers to thrive. Moreover they concede that free nucleic acids are easily taken up and integrated into a cells genome, thus potentially resulting in genetic mutations. *A detailed and technical report which details the many cancerous and genetic consequences of vaccine contamination notes that each vaccine dose is allowed 100,000,000 alllowable pieces of DNA, not including the DNA in the viral and viral-contaminated portions. *We believe that any allowable piece of DNA is a risk.

Summation

In a Letter-to-the-Editor of Science Magazine, October, 1967, Joshua Lederberg, Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, warned about live-virus vaccines:

In point of fact we (are practicing) biological engineering on a rather large scale by use of live viruses in mass immunization campaigns. . . . Crude virus preparations, such as some in common use at the present time, are also vulnerable to frightful mishaps of contamination and misidentification.

In a larger sense, the question about possible effects of vaccines in causing adverse genetic changes might be considered as the black hole of scientific knowledge. Even if it is taking place, do we have the technology to identify it, and if not, do we have the time to await the slow processes of science to prove such a relationship? Studies from Africa, England, Sweden, and New Zealand have consistently shown a greater incidence of allergic problems such as asthma and eczema, along with increasing patterns of sickness, among fully vaccinated children as compared to those with limited or no vaccines. It seems inconceivable to us that health could be one thing and genetics another, or that these patterns of deteriorating health would not be accompanied by corresponding genetic changes.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

From: Vaccines and Immune Suppression

Vaccines are immune suppressing; that is they depress the immune functions. The chemicals in the vaccines depress the immune system; the virus present depresses immune function, and the foreign DNA/RNA depresses immunity.

The medical thought is that we trade a small immune depression for an immunity to one disease. Now let me repeat, we are trading a total immune system depression (the only defense against all known disease - including millions of pathogens) for a temporary immunity against one disease. Therefore, the trade is not at all fair.

The trade-off is not worth the risk. We are risking getting many more diseases than we are "preventing" from getting. [Later we will see that there is literally no prevention.] Only nutrition can build and support a strong immune system, while vaccines help to tear immunity down. Vaccines have been linked to immuno-deficient disorders as well.

Vaccinations depress the bodys immune functions and that predisposes to developing many other diseases. Keeping up with fast mutating viruses can only be done by priming the immune system with good nutrition and keeping the conditions/environment for growth minimal.

Pathogenic viruses will not grow where the conditions will not allow it. It is the terrain which dictates health and not the germs/viruses themselves. Germs are pleiomorphic, meaning that they can change with their environment; rods become cocci, and vice-versa.

Vaccinations reduce the immunity in many important ways:

1) Vaccines contain many chemicals and heavy metals, like mercury and aluminum, which are in-themselves immuno-suppressing. Mercury actually causes changes in the lymphocyte activity and decreases lymphocyte viability.

2) Vaccines contain foreign tissues and foreign DNA/RNA which act to suppress the immune system via graft-vs-host rejection phenomena.

3) Vaccines alter t-cell helper/suppressor ratios

4) Vaccines alter the metabolic activity of PMNs and reduce their chemotaxic abilities. PMNs are the bodys defenses against pathogenic bacteria and viruses.

5) Vaccines suppress the immunity merely buy over-taxing the immune system with foreign material, heavy metals, pathogens and viruses. The heavy metals slow down the immune system, while the viruses set up shop to grow and divide.

6) Vaccines clog the lymphatic system and lymph nodes with large protein molecules which have not been adequately broken down by the digestive processes, since vaccines by pass digestion with injections. This is why vaccines are linked to allergies, because they contain large proteins which as circulating immune complexes (CICs) or "klinkers" which cause the body to become allergic.

7) Vaccines deplete the body of vital immune-enhancing nutrients, like vitamin C, A and zinc, which are needed for a strong immune system. It is nutrients like these that primes the immune system, feeds the white blood cells and macrophages and allows them to function optimally.

Vaccines are neurotoxic and slow the level of nervous transmission, and communications to the brain and other tissues. Some lymphocytes communicate directly with the brain through a complex set of neurotransmitters. Altering these factors will also depress the immunity.

Today more care is taken in vaccine production and there are better methods of locating and removing contaminant viruses, but vaccines are still dangerous from their humble beginning and set the stage for many other diseases to follow suit many years later.

True Immunity: Where Does it Come From? Nutrition

Science has glossed over the most valuable point of health, ... nutrition. What is it that boosts the immune system ... nutrition. What is the key factor for the recovery of disease? ... Nutrition. What is needed for the body to heal itself? ... Nutrition. What key factor prevents disease? ... Nutrition. What is missing from allopathic medicine today? ... Nutrition!

It is nutrition and only nutrition which boosts the immune system and helps the body defend itself from foreign pathogens but it is virtually ignored by medical science in favor of drugs (chemicals).

One can speculate many reasons why medical science has chosen to ignore this most important aspect of health. Medicine has shunned diet and nutrition as not having a place in scientific medicine.

Vaccines cause illnesses, many diseases, numerous disorders and set the stage for cancerous grow while depressing our bodys ability to fight off pathogens. Allopathy depresses important body functions, while making the body more toxic. Naturopathy helps the body eliminate toxins while supporting the bodys immune functions.

It is no secret anymore that proper nutrition builds good immunity, when the medical literature is full of studies on the intimate details of immunity as related to nutrients. The fact that nutrition plays a large role in health (and immune functions) can no longer be suppressed by prejudice.

Nutrition boosts the immune system like nothing else can. Field stated, "it is accepted that nutrition is important in the development and function of the immune system." Harbige noted that "Nutrition and nutritional status can have profound effects on immune functions, resistance to infection and auto-immunity in man and other animals." Scrimshaw and SanGiovanni state that "infections, ... have adverse effects on nutritional status. ... Conversely, almost any nutrient deficiency, if sufficiently severe, will impair resistance to infection." Chandra (Am J Clin Nutrition, 1997; 66(2):460s-463s) also noted, "Nutrition is a critical determinant of immune responses and malnutrition is the most common cause of immunodeficiency worldwide." Chandra and Chandra (Prog Food Nutrition Sci, 1986;10(1-2):1-65) stated that "the immune system plays a key role in the bodys ability to fight infection and reduce the risk of developing tumors, autoimmune and degenerative disease."

Profit of man-made chemicals came before the health of the patrons, many asked to suffer needlessly in the name of science when they could have been cured by a simple herbal remedy or a food. Nutrition has been down-played in the last 80 years in favor of patent-able drugs (man-made chemicals). Perhaps, the penicillin era was the greatest cause of the downfall of nutrition as a part of our health. The search for the magic bullet began with Paul Erlichs compound 606, and continues to this day. We think that cancer must be cured from without by a man-made chemical, while we ignore the inner terrain and the bodys natural innate abilities (to heal) within ... governed, of course, by nutrition. Hopefully within the next decade great strides will be taken in nutrition and health to make up for lost time.

Vaccines and Cancer

We dont usually associate vaccinations with cancer, but there are many citations in the medial literature where vaccines caused cancers. Sometimes cancer occurred at the site of injection and sometimes a lymphatic type of cancer would occur many years later in locations. Vaccines cause cancer. Yes, not every animal or person gets cancer after receiving a vaccine, but their body has been seeded with the ingredients for cancer to grow. Picture cancer as a window of opportunity. Once that window is opened, cancer can grow. It is the environment which allows cancer to grow in the first place, and vaccines create that environment. When the cancer is at the site of the vaccine injection, it is hard to deny a causal relationship.

The lymphatic system is designed to carry lymphocytes throughout the body and maintain control over cellular immunity. Therefore, the injection of large molecular sized proteins (foreign tissues in the vaccines) will clog lymph-nodes and create problems for the lymphatic system. Therefore, it is no mystery that vaccines and lymphatic diseases, like leukemias and lymphomas, are related.

Vaccines and Auto-Immune Disease - [The injection of foreign DNA/RNA.]

Auto-immune disease is common-place today, but were very rare just a few years ago. Does anybody wonder why one day we are healthy and the next day our body no longer recognizes our own cells as self? Could the injection of foreign animal DNA/RNA have anything to do with our epidemic rise in auto-immune disease today? Bart Classen, MD has done some remarkable research on vaccines and auto-immune diseases, especially Diabetes mellitus, which he sees as a marker disease for all auto-immune conditions. His research finds that the more that vaccinations are given the more diabetes (and auto-immune diseases) appears.

Dr Classens research found that this held true for many animal models; after receiving vaccines they experienced increases in diabetes. He found the more vaccines received the more was their incidence of diabetes (and auto-immune diseases).

Vaccines create the foundations for auto-immune disease when foreign tissues are injected into the blood stream. It alters genes ("jumping" genes) and creates havoc in the lymphatic system.

Auto-immune conditions are more common today than before massive vaccination programs began. If the body can not even recognize its own cells, then it has been tricked into thinking that those cells are no longer self. What about the myriad of neurological disorders, kidney disorders, blood disorders and the many diseases associated with vaccinations? When we are looking for excellent health, we need to avoid auto-immune disorders.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Natural Rearing Vs Survival Of The Fittest

A great site for those wishing to know more about Natural rearing, lot of articles and well written

A snippet from the 'Vaccine & Health concerns' section entitled

Natural Rearing Vs. Survival Of The Fittest

i]
During the years of raising my own dogs naturally and being an outspoken advocate against - the use of needless vaccines, the feeding of processed kibble dog foods and the use of chemicals and pesticides in the battle against worms, fleas and heartworm - the one reoccurring argument I hear offered as proof of the dangers of rearing a dog naturally is - Wolves in the wild die of disease all the time!

Yes, of course they do. Not only can they die from injuries, there have been reports of wolves found with heartworm and a litter of wolf pups dying from the parvovirus. However, offering this reasoning behind the idea that natural rearing for your own dog is unsafe and dangerous, is a very flawed theory indeed. The type of natural care that we can provide for our dogs every day of their lives can not be compared to the natural life that wolves live in the wild.

Life in nature is difficult at best; it really is survival of the fittest.

Everything in a wolfs life depends on the food it can locate, kill and consume. Throughout the worlds history of evolution the survival of every species has relied on their ability to find nourishment. Deprived of proper nutrition no living creature can survive let alone thrive. Take away sustenance and any living organism will die, either from direct starvation or the diseases/germs/viruses that are free to assault a body when the starved and weakened immune system can no longer protect it.

Germs  bacteria and viruses do not cause disease. Disease is the result of the terrain, an unhealthy and toxic body, which gives the virus or microzymas a chance to take hold. These microzymas or little bodies are present everywhere.

Depending upon the condition of the host, they can assume different forms, good or bad. Bad bacteria and viruses are the form assumed by the microzymas when there is already a condition of poor health. When a bodys cells are unhealthy and a weakened state of the immune system exists, the microzymas become a pathological bacteria or virus resulting in that particular infection or disease. In a healthy body these same microzymas form healthy cells. The environment is everything!

So what brings the body to a state of optimum health? It is very simple and it works the same for all living creatures  You are what you eat. And in todays polluted world that also includes toxins. The quality of the diet of any wolf or dog is the difference between life and death; the difference between minimally surviving or optimally thriving.

Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food. 
~ Hippocrates, the Father of Medicine

No truer words have ever been spoken.

Proper nutrition is natures ultimate protection against disease. Protection does not come in the form of scientifically formulated kibble dog foods, vaccines, heartworm pesticides, topical flea treatments and wormers.

These forms of protection are unnatural and have many adverse side-effects often resulting in chronic disease and sometimes death. A healthy immune system, which is fueled by the food that nature intended for it  in the case of your carnivore dog, a raw meat and bone diet - is well equipped to deal with these outside threats.

It is the same concept as a plant - when grown in nutritionally deficient soil, the plant itself is deficient. It then has a problem with pests and fungi. Our plants and crops are then sprayed with pesticides and fungicides, instead of enriching the soils that they are grown in to restore nature's balance. This becomes a constant battle that only accelerates as the years progress.

The wolf and dogs body works the same - when they are fed deficient and/or toxic foods, they in turn are deficient and toxic. For wolves it is a matter of the quantity of food required not being available to them. In the case of our dogs it is a matter of the wrong type of food - processed kibble - causing this deficiency and adding toxins to their system. In both instances of inadequate nutrition, the body is then open to invasion from pests, bacteria and viruses.

When provided with sufficient amounts of a nutritious species appropriate diet, your dogs body is a remarkable creation. Your dog was born to be healthy! You have the ability to make and keep your dog healthy without the use of toxic manufactured products. When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does is done with perfection. You can replicate this perfect form of living through natural rearing - giving your dog all the benefits of nature without the burden of everyday survival.

Wolves do not have this luxury. They are not guaranteed a nutritious meal everyday. The pregnant and lactating dam is especially vulnerable to malnutrition. She requires 3  4 times the regular amount of food in order to supply proper nutrition to her pups, both in utero and in the den while nursing. If she is lacking, then her litter of pups will be lacking and vulnerable to worms and disease. There can be a high mortality rate among wolf pups if their dam is not getting sufficient nutrition.

For both adults and pups, prolonged periods of malnutrition can lead to an impaired immune system, ill health and ultimately disease. And when there is no human to offer care, death can follow. However, in times of plentiful food sources the wolf population will thrive, they are strong and healthy, able to deal with viruses, worms and bacteria that come their way. Nature has worked this way since the beginning of time.

There was much concern among wolf conservationists when the parvovirus was first recognized in 1978 and spread worldwide among canines during the next two years. What would happen to the population of the newly reintroduced wolf packs?

There have been no definite studies done on the impact of the parvovirus on the wolf in the wild. However, for the purpose of this article, one study which was conducted during a 5 year period from 1985  1990, provides a great deal of information. Blood serum samples were collected from captured wolves and analyzed for four of the main viruses effecting canines  Parvovirus, Distemper, Hepatitis and Lyme disease. 18 adult wolves from 8 different wolf packs extending from Northwestern Montana, USA to Southeastern B.C, Can, were tested for the titer antibody levels of each of the afore mentioned viruses. These wolves represented approximately ¼ of the total population of an estimated 72 wolves combined in these packs.

Titers were found for 3 of the viruses, the results were as follows 
65% of the wolves showed titers to Parvo;
29% to Distemper
36% to Hepatitis
0% to Lyme disease.

Even though only a few adults from each pack were captured and tested, the small sample sizes were considered adequate for evaluation, as pack members are always in close physical contact and viruses can spread easily throughout the pack. Ill concentrate on the results of the parvovirus titers, as they represented the highest percentage of wolves affected and the virus is the most common among canines. The titer results show that parvo has indeed spread to wild wolf packs; they have come into contact with the virus and survived without the use of vaccines or unnatural interventions.

It would be difficult to ascertain if any of the wolves showed any actual signs of the virus. The Merck Veterinary Dictionary, which is a vets bible, states regarding the Parvovirus - Infected dogs are often asymptomatic. (Showing no signs) Clinical disease may be triggered by stress (eg, boarding), and clinical signs may be exacerbated by concurrent infection with opportunistic enteric pathogens (eg, Salmonella, C perfringens , E coli , Campylobacter , coronavirus, and various parasites)

Its fairly safe to assume that either the wolves showed no signs at all or the symptoms were mild, as there would be no intervention from humans to nurse them through any resulting sickness. There were also no reported deaths among the adult wolves, during this period, as these family packs are closely monitored and a missing wolf or two would be duly noted.

If the parvovirus affected the mortality rate of the pups it is still unclear. During this 5 year period, 2 older wolf pups from a litter of 5 disappeared in Oct of 1986; what happened to them is unknown. In 1989 the decomposed carcasses of two, 2 week old pups were found in a den, but no determination was made as to the cause of death. The fact that this litter was very small and comprised of only these two pups should be an indication of the physical state of the dam during the period leading up to breeding as nutrition directly impacts the ability to reproduce.

During both these years the titer levels of adult wolves in these 2 packs were high, but no consideration was ever given to the supply of food sources available during these years and the strength of the immune systems in these packs.[/i]


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> I cant speak for other breeds but everyday across breed forums we read YET ANOTHER Rottweiler has been diagnosed with Osteosarcoma or another form of cancer. Lameness is another big issue.


OK - this has absolutely NOTHING to do with vaccinations. Here's the findings of the large USA study into Rottweiler Osteopsarcoma:

_Osteosarcoma was recognized as a cancer that Rottweilers appeared to have a predisposition to.* Evolution of tumors is due both to environmental factors and genetics*. Tumors are made up of heterogeneous cells populations making them difficult targets to treat. The clustering of specific cancers in breeds and families suggests that a hereditary component may be important in the development or progression of the disease. Unlike other heritable conditions, genetic susceptibility to cancer might not manifest in disease until a dog has reached middle age and long after it has achieved breeding potential. When present, this genetic susceptibility is most likely to be due to a process called loss of heterozygosity. At conception, individuals inherit 2 copies of each gene, one from each parent. Each of these gene copies is referred to as an allele. A family line or breed may have, through the course of time, lost a functional allele of a tumor suppressor gene through mutation. Tumor suppressor genes encode proteins that prevent or retard cell division. *The leading cause of cancer is loss of heterozygosity.*_

Have a look at Endogenous Gonadal Hormone Exposure and Bone Sarcoma Risk. That's a study which links Osteopsarcoma with sex hormones (like breast cancer).

There are no studies which, in any way, link this cancer with vaccinations. There are lots of studies that you'll find that link it with genetics - especially with sex hormone abnormality.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

NUTRITION AND HOLISTIC ANIMAL HEALTH

By Richard J. Holliday, DVM

In 1951 I had the good fortune to study the rudiments of soil science at the University of Missouri under the late Dr. William Albrecht. I must confess that at the time I took his course, I did not fully appreciate the correlation between soil fertility and animal health. I wanted to get on with the real veterinarians job of treating sick animals. It was only after I had completed my animal disease education in Veterinary school and began to receive my animal health education from some dedicated "organic farmer" clients that I came back to Albrechts work and finally began to understand his wisdom.

His book "*Soil Fertility and Animal Health*" 1 is still a classic, and should be required reading for anyone aspiring to be a holistic herdsman. As one could guess from the title, his premise is that it takes a fertile healthy soil to grow healthy nutritious crops to sustain healthy productive animals or people. Incidentally, soil vitality and crop or feed vitality, as well as animal vitality can be plotted on the "Vitality Chart" discussed in the previous issue.

Stated another way, an animal can only be as healthy as the feed it eats and the feed can only be as healthy as the soil upon which it was grown and the soil to be healthy must be highly fertile and biologically active. Within the broad framework of this concept, in this article I would like to illustrate four main points.

1. Good nutrition can prevent disease.
2. Good nutrition can cure disease.
3. Nature is a better judge of nutrition than nutritionists. 
4. Healthy production is the most profitable.

Good nutrition can prevent disease
... most of the time, but not always!

Another candidate for a required reading list is the book "An Agricultural Testament" by Sir Albert Howard, published in 1940. 2 Sir Albert was formerly the Director of the Institute of Plant Industry in Indore, India and the British Agricultural Advisor to States in Central India and Pajutana. This book is the summation of decades of his work to improve soil fertility and plant and animal health by composting agricultural residues and returning them to the soil. It is also reputed to be one of the sparks that inspired J. I. Rodale to begin publication of the great magazine "Organic Gardening and Farming".

Most of this work is related to soil fertility and the intricacies of composting, but I would like to quote one paragraph that forever changed the way I looked at animal health and disease.

_ "My work animals were most carefully selected and everything was done to provide them with suitable housing and with fresh green fodder, silage, and grain, all produced from fertile land. I was naturally intensely interested in watching the reaction of these well-chosen and well-fed oxen to diseases like rinderpest, septicaemia, and foot-and-mouth disease which frequently devastated the countryside. None of my animals were segregated; none were inoculated; they frequently came in contact with diseased stock. As my small farm-yard as Pusa was only separated by a low hedge from one of the large cattle-sheds on the Pusa estate, in which outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease often occurred, I have several time seen my oxen rubbing noses with foot-and-mouth cases. Nothing happened. The healthy well-fed animals reacted to this disease exactly as suitable varieties of crops, when properly grown, did to insect and fungus pest -- no infection took place."_

Once my mind was opened to the possibility that good nutrition could prevent disease I found evidence of it almost every place I looked.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

"The recommendation for annual re-vaccination is a practice that was officially started in 1978. This recommendation was made without any scientific validation of the need to booster immunity so frequently. *In fact the presence of good humoral antibody levels blocks the anamnestic response to vaccine boosters just as maternal antibody blocks the response in some young animals." *

The Science Has Been Done

References are provided to support the following

1. Duration of Immunity studies on large numbers of animals have been done.
2. Endogenous antibody interference with vaccines, blocks re-administered
vaccines from enhancing immunity.
3. Dogs over 8 weeks of age do not develop any disease from canine corona
virus
4. Dogs are at low risk of developing Leptospirosis in Texas.
5. We do not have Lyme disease in Texas.
6. Vaccines can cause Injection Site Fibrosarcomas, or Vaccine Associated
Sarcomas VAS. Non- Adjuvanted Vaccines are safer than adjuvanted
vaccines, in that they are less likely to cause VAS.
7. Titers do not accurately predict which dogs will respond to another
vaccination.
8. It is misrepresentation, a deceptive trade practice, for a Veterinarian to
recommend, charge for, or administer a vaccine, where there is no
scientifically proven benefit to the patient, or that a reasonable client would
not elect to purchase or have administered if given the information 
necessary to make an informed decision .

1. The duration of immunity for Rabies vaccine, Canine distemper
vaccine, Canine Parvovirus vaccine, Feline Panleukopenia
vaccine, Feline Rhinotracheitis, feline Calicivirus, have all been
demonstrated to be a minimum of 7 years by serology for rabies
and challenge studies for all others.

Schultz, Ronald D, Duration of Immunity to Canine Vaccines: What We Know and What We Dont Know, Proceedings  Canine Infectious Diseases: From Clinics to Molecular Pathogenesis, Ithaca, NY, 1999, 22.

Minimum Duration of Immunity for Canine Vaccines:

Distemper- 7 years by challenge/15 years by serology

Parvovirus  7 years by challenge/ 7 years by serology

Adenovirus - 7 years by challenge/ 9 years by serology

Canine rabies  3 years by challenge/ 7 years by serology

Fishman B & Scarnell J, Persistence of protection against infectious canine hepatis virus, Vet Rec, 99, 509. 1976

Scott FW, Geissinger C, Long-term immunity in cats vaccinated with an inactivated trivalent vaccine, Am J Vet Res, 60(5): 652-8, May 1999.

7.5 years DOI by challenge

Lappin M R, Andrews J, Simpson D, Jensen WA, Use of serologic tests to predict resistance to Feline Herpesvirus 1, Feline Calcivirus, and Feline Parvovirus infection in cats, J AVMA, 220(1): 38-42, Jan 1, 2002

3 years DOI by challenge.

Vaccines for diseases like distemper and canine parvovirus, once administered to adult animals, provide lifetime immunity.

Schultz, Ronald D., Are we vaccinating too much? JAVMA, No. 4, August 15, 1995, pg. 421.

Canine distemper and adenovirus 2 vaccines both provide lifelong immunity. (Schultz)

There is the mistaken assumption that if we recommend annual re-vaccination a greater percentage of the population will be vaccinated. It doesnt do any good to over vaccinate one segment of the population and not vaccinate the rest. (Macey)

With modified live virus vaccines like canine parvovirus, canine distemper and feline panleukopenia, calicivirus, and rhinotracheitis the virus in the vaccine must replicate to stimulate the immune system. In a patient that has been previously immunized, antibodies from the previous vaccine will block the replication of the new vaccinal virus. Antibody titers are not significantly boosted. Memory cell populations are not expanded. The immune status of the patient is not enhanced.

After the second rabies vaccination, re-administration of rabies vaccine does not enhance the immune status of the patient at one or two year intervals.

We do not know the interval at which re-administration of vaccines will enhance the immunity of a significant percentage of the pet population, but it is certainly not at one or two year intervals.

Tizard Ian, Yawei N, Use of serologic testing to assess immune status of companion animals, JAVMA, vol 213, No 1, July 1, 1998.

Modified live vaccines rely on the replication of the agent to trigger a protective immune response. When an animal has maternal or endogenous antibodies at the time of vaccination, the vaccine agent may be neutralized before it can replicate.  It may not be possible to stimulate an additional immune response in that animal.

HogenenEsch Harm, Dunham Anisa D, Scott-Moncrieff Catharine, Glickman Larry, DeBoer Douglas J, Effect of vaccination on serum concentrations of total and antigen-specific immunoglobulin E in dogs, AJVR, Vol 63, No. 4, April 2002, pg 611-616.

Dogs were injected with rabies vaccine at 16 weeks of age and then annually. Vaccination had no effect on serum concentrations of IgA, IgG and IgM as measured at 2 and 3 years of age. Dogs were vaccinated 5 times as puppies and then at 6-month intervals with multivalent (Vanguard 5 L, DAPPCL) vaccines. Such a protocol is rarely used in pet dogs and in kennels. There were no significant differences in the concentration of IgA and IgM at 2 years and 3 years of age

Gorham, J.R., Duration of vaccination immunity and the influence on subsequent prophylaxis JAVMA 149:699-704; 1966.

Larson L J, Sawchuck S, Bonds M D, Schultz RD, Comparison of Antibody Titers Among Dogs Vaccinated, One, Two, Three Years Previously, Proceedings of 80th Meeting of the Conference of Research Workers in Animal Diseases, CRWD, Chicago, IL, 1999.

Wolf, Alice M., Vaccinations-Whats right? Whats not? Compendium on Continuing Education, Schering-Plough Animal Health, 1999, pg. 32.

In studies Schultz performed at the Univ. of Wisconsin, 106 dogs vaccinated within the previous 1 to 4 years, were each given a canine parvovirus booster vaccination. Only one of the 106 dogs showed a significant increase in serum antibody titer following the booster. These results show that revaccination does not enhance antibody levels or improve immunity because the vaccine virus is neutralized before it can reach the memory T and B cells. The immunity provided by previous vaccination not only protects against the virulent disease but also prevents response to revaccination.

Wolf Alice, Vaccines of the Present and Future, Proceedings of the World Animal Veterinary Congress, Vancouver 2001.

The recommendation for annual re-vaccination is a practice that was officially started in 1978. This recommendation was made without any scientific validation of the need to booster immunity so frequently. In fact the presence of good humoral antibody levels blocks the anamnestic response to vaccine boosters just as maternal antibody blocks the response in some young animals.

Schultz, Ronald D., Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs, Veterinary Medicine, March 1998, pg. 243.

The patient receives no benefit and may be placed at serious risk when an unnecessary vaccine is given. Few or no scientific studies have demonstrated a need for cats or dogs to be revaccinated. Annual vaccination for diseases caused by CDV, CPV2, FPLP and FeLV has not been shown to provide a level of immunity any different from the immunity in an animal vaccinated and immunized at an early age and challenged years later. We have found that annual revaccination with the vaccines that provide long-term immunity provides no demonstrable benefit.

Schultz, Ronald D, The Vaccine Controversy: What Vaccines Do Cats and Dogs Really Need and How Often Do They Need To Be Vaccinated? Department of Pathobiological Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

There was never a scientific study performed to show that CDV, CAV, CPV, or rabies virus needs to be given annually to be effective, or that if they are given annually they are more effective. There is data available for the dog and cat to show that modified live CDV, CAV, and CPV given seven years previously and killed PLP, FeCV, and FeHV given seven years previously provided the same immunity as if these products had been given one year prior to challenge with virulent organisms.

Phillips, Tom R. and Schultz, Ronald D, Canine and Feline Vaccines, Current Veterinary Therapy XI, ed. Kirk and Bonagura, pg. 202, 205, WB Saunders Co, Philadelphia, PA 1992.

Almost without exception there is no immunologic requirement for annual re-vaccination. Immunity to viruses persists for years or for the life of the animal. Furthermore re-vaccination with most viral vaccines fails to stimulate the anamnestic response as a result of interference by existing antibody. The practice of annual vaccination in our opinion should be considered of questionable efficacy.

Klingborg Donald, Principles of Vaccination, AVMA Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents, Policy on Biologics, April 2002.

The one- year re-vaccination frequency recommendation found on many vaccine labels is based on historical precedent, and not on scientific data.

Re-vaccination of patients with sufficient immunity does not add measurably to their disease resistance, and may increase their risk of adverse post vaccination events.

Schultz, Ronald D., Are we vaccinating too much? JAVMA, no. 4, August 15, 1995, pg. 421.

Dr Schultz said The client is paying for something with no effect or the potential for an adverse reaction.

2. Dogs over 6 weeks of age do not develop disease from canine
corona virus.

Schultz, Ronald D., Are we vaccinating too much? JAVMA, No. 4, August 15, 1995, pg. 421.

Schultz, Ronald D., Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs, Veterinary Medicine, March 1998, pg. 251.

Wolf, Alice M., Vaccinations-whats right? Whats not? Compendium on CE, Schering-Plough Animal Health, 1999, pg. 32,33.

Paul, Michael A., Vaccinations-whats right? Whats not? Compendium on CE, Schering-Plough Animal Health, 1999, pg. 32,33.

3. In Texas, there are an average of twelve cases per year of
Leptospirosis in dogs testing positive at the Texas Veterinary
Medical Diagnostic Lab. It is estimated by the Texas
Department of Health that there are 6 million dogs in Texas.

*(Antec samples are all sent to the TVMDL, Idexx samples are sent to Michigan, consequently Texas results are not available.)

Angulo, A. B. DVM, MS, PhD, ACVM, Texas Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Lab, College Station, Texas, Personal phone conferences 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001.

Tizard, Ian R. Veterinary Immunology an Introduction, 6th Ed, Saunders 2000 pg ix

It serves no useful purpose to exaggerate the importance of an infection in order to sell vaccines.

Carter C, Angulo AB, Sneed L, Ronald N, Arvizo ER, 
A Diagnositic Laboratory Update On Leptospirosis in Texas, Texas Veterinarian, April 2003, pg 30-43.

4. Lyme disease is not found in Texas
Lyme disease is caused by a bacterial organism, Borrelia
burgdoferi. It is spread by the vector tick, Ixodes scapularis.

Propagation and Transmission requires a complex reservoir host relationship, whereby the vector tick nymphal stages feed on the reservoir deer mouse for two years. In Texas the Ixodes tick feed on lizards, which are not a reservoir for Lyme disease.

Ticks take two years to mature in the colder Northern climates where snow stays on the ground for prolonged periods of time in the winter. In southern climates the ticks mature in one year ,which would not allow for concentration of enough Borrelia organism to spread the disease.

The incubation period for Lyme disease is 5 months. Although a dog could become infected with Lyme disease while traveling to the New England area, Texas A&M University has not documented one case of Lyme disease in a dog that has lived exclusively in Texas.

Confusion and misdiagnosis of Lyme disease arises from the following:

1. Lyme disease is a vogue diagnosis, and is therefore potentially over-diagnosed.

2. Commonly used testing for Lyme disease will yield false positive test results for dogs with periodontal disease, Ehrlichia, and other tick borne rickettsial diseases, and rheumatoid arthritis.

3. In Texas we have a disease that look identical to Lyme disease. Southern Tick Associated Rash Illness or STARI, also called Masters Disease, is caused by Borrelia lonestari, and spread by the vector tick Amblyomma americanum, or the Lone Star Tick. Vaccination for Lyme disease will not protect against STARI.

Greene CE, Appel MJG, Straubinger RK, Lyme Borreliosis, Greene's Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat, 2nd ED, 1998, WB Saunders,P 282-292.

Schillhorn van Veen TW, Murphy AJ, Colmery B, False positive Borrelai burgdoferi antibody titers
associated with periodontal disease in dogs, Veterinary Record, 1993, 132, 512.

Little S, Southern tick-associated rash illness; A newly recognized tick-borne disease, DVM Best Practices, June 2003, pg 13-15.

5. Antibody Titers do not predict if a patient will respond to 
re-administration of a vaccine with enhanced immunity.

Titers dont take into effect cell mediated immunity, which is the most important aspect of disease protection for a number of diseases. Titers dont asses the ability of memory cells, B and T lymphocytes, which can live up to 20 years or more, to regenerate an immune response. You can have a negative titer and if the pet is exposed, memory cells can respond within hours to regenerate enough antibodies for protective immunity.

Paul M, Report of the American Animal Hospital Association Canine Task Force: 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines, Recommendations, and Supporting Literature, AAHA Foundation, March 2003.

2000 Report of American Association of Feline Practitioners and Academy of Feline Medicine Advisory Panel on Feline Vaccines, pg. 15 & 16.

Tizard Ian, Yawei N, Use of serologic testing to assess immune status of companion animals, JAVMA, vol 213, No 1, July 1, 1998.

Wolf, Alice M., Vaccinations-whats right? Whats not? Compendium on CE, Schering-Plough Animal Health, 1999, pg. 32,33.

Wolf Alice M, Just the Facts About Vaccs: Frequently Asked Questions About Current Vaccination Recommendations and Practice Guidelines, Proceedings from the North American Veterinary Conference, 13, 1999, pg 681.

Klingborg Donald, Principles of Vaccination, AVMA Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents, Policy on Biologics, April 2002.

Lappin M R, Andrews J, Simpson D, Jensen WA,
Use of serologic tests to predict resistance to
Feline Herpesvirus 1, Feline Calcivirus, and Feline
Parvovirus infection in cats, J AVMA, 220(1):38-
42, Jan 1, 2002

Read more: DOGBREEDER - Login


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Animal studies have demonstrated the ability of SV40 to integrate its DNA into that of the host cell and induce malignancy. Unfortunately, studies show that the virus retains these same properties in humans and is associated with increased rates of certain cancers. Integration and replication of SV40 has been documented in 13 percent to 43 percent of non-Hodgkin&#8217;s lymphomas, 47 percent to 83 percent of mesotheliomas (malignant tumors of the lining of the lungs), 11 percent to 90 percent of different types of brain tumors,50 percent of osteosarcomas, more than 33 percent of other types of bone tumors,and 28 percent of bronchopulmonary carcinomas.



Dr. Vera Schreibner, a world authority on immunizations and author of Vaccinations, had this to say: "Immunizations...not only did not prevent any infectious diseases, they caused more suffering and more deaths than any other human activity in the entire history of medical intervention." Having assembled the world's largest collection of data on immunizations, Dr. Schreibner concludes: "One hundred years of orthodox research shows that vaccines represent a medical assault on the immune system." Research by Dr. Schreibner and others continues to unveil the alarming truth about vaccinations; here are some further examples: Pertussis vaccinations have been followed by cases of "provocation polio." This kind of polio is well known to follow almost any vaccination, but especially pertussis and polio vaccinations. Measles is another case in point. Measles constantly occurs in vaccinated populations. In fact, there is even a new and especially vicious form of measles called 'atypical measles.' It affects only vaccinated populations and is apparently the result of a deranged immunological response caused by the vaccine.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

I'm sure you enjoy cutting and pasting all that waffle. No one will read it - it's a waste of your time because it's largely rehashing the works of a very small minority of people with their own axe to grind.

BTW I've had a PM from someone who you referenced - she says she doesn't support your views and would like you to leave her out of your arguments.

You obviously can't face the real world where vaccination is an effective disease preventer.

You waffle on about cancer - and it's got nothing to do with vaccination.

You deny polio vaccination has an effect (in fact one of the interminable posts you've made laughably says that polio can be caused by 'Pertussis vaccinations'). Yet the World Health Organisation has clear proof that polio vaccines not only work but that they've almost eradicated the disease.

You quote the work of Ronald Schultz, which has been disproved over and over.

You ask us to believe that a study in 1951 suggesting that all pets need is good nutrition should be enough. Read it - even the author says it's not.

In short, you are making a laughing stock out of yourself and your arguments. I now know why so many people have put you onto 'ignore' status in this forum.

In my opinion you are a danger to animals and shouldn't be allowed near them - let alone be allowed to own one.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> BTW I've had a PM from someone who you referenced - she says she doesn't support your views and would like you to leave her out of your arguments.


Follow the Dogbreeder link in one of the above posts it leads back to Cleo who is Cleo ? Ceearott Look on my Profile who is apologising for what! Erm I think you will find its me that doesn't agree with her views most of the time!


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> In my opinion you are a danger to animals and shouldn't be allowed near them - let alone be allowed to own one.


Thats your preogative

I own lots of very happy animals thank you, all extremely well feed and in rude health, all fit for function as their impeccable show records prove and no continuous drip feed of my money to the vets and I'm sure my animals wouldn't want it any other way

Heres an interesting quote made in 1958 by outgoing President of the Gerontological Society Dr A Lansang _''Finding a cure for cancer and heart disease would be a major financial disaster which would bankrupt the social security system and the insurance companies''_


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> You ask us to believe that a study in 1951 suggesting that all pets need is good nutrition should be enough. Read it - even the author says it's not.


LO Where do 'I' ask you to believe that good nutrition should be enough.

Granted good nutrition is a major factor along with several other things, such as not vaccinating, pure water lots of fresh air, exercise, metal stimulation ............

Whats this hang up with polio you have?

Polio Resurgence in Nigeria Traced to Mutating Vaccine
Polio in Nigeria Traced to Mutating Vaccine - New York Times

Heres an intersting factoid: Ethanol byproducts can contain enough sulphur to cause polio in cattle, also elevated sulphur levels in water in Western Missouri are high enough to cause polio.... all interesting stuff aint it!


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

National Security Council Document 20506: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests -

This 1974 memorandum drafted by Henry Kissinger led directly to the unleashing of experimental vaccines on the unsuspecting public. It sighted countries as targets for initial population reduction experimentation to be implemented around the year 2000″.

They identified India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia & Columbia for study. 3 million Filipinos ages 12-48 were given a test vaccine that ruined their health. North American Black & Native American Women were each given the same vaccine resulting in sterility rates of 25% & 35% respectively. The directive came from the WHO and was directly tied to Kissingers report.
Henry Kissinger Population Control Document
http://www.danielestulin.com/ver.php?id=160
http://www.danielestulin.com/ver.php?id=161

It followed a 1972 report (Bulletin #47) issued by the World Health Organization which referred to an immune virus requested which would selectively destroy the Human T Cell System, to be distributed in conjunction with a Nationwide vaccination program to observe the results.

Memo 1:http://drcarley.com/pdf/WHO_Memo_1_searchable.pdf
Memo 2:http://drcarley.com/pdf/WHO_Memo_2_Searchable.pdf


----------



## Devil-Dogz (Oct 4, 2009)

I have known of breeders lossing dogs from various vaccinations; - However all mine have had their puppy injections, and a first booster.

- The last I brought in was my show chap, his breeder does not agree with vacc'ing puppies after losing her akita pup after receiving its second pup vacc, tests did prove the cause of death to be the injections.

The pups I brought in from her was given nosodes an alternative to vaccinations - however his breeder was aware that I would carry out his full pup course, I have limited knowledge on the nosodes and only started looking into them when talking with my lads breeder about them..


----------



## jenniferx (Jan 23, 2009)

My dog is currently up to date with his boosters though I have to say I don't know where I stand with this all..... I'm going to need to research it more thoroughly before we go back again. 

My dog did have a bit of a reaction with his last booster- he experienced extreme pain about 3-4hours after the injection, wouldn't walk etc... Though within a few hours of that he was getting better and was normal by the next day.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Puppy Shots and Dog Vaccinations
By Michele Welton. Copyright © 2000-2010

People don't need yearly revaccinations. And veterinary immunological researchers now tell us: Neither do dogs and cats
.

Quote
"A practice that was started many years ago that lacks scientific validity or verification is annual revaccinations.

Almost without exception there is no immunologic requirement for annual revaccination. Immunity to viruses persists for years or for the life of the animal.

Only the immune response to TOXINS requires boosters (e.g. tetanus toxin booster, in humans, is recommended once every 7-10 years). NO toxin vaccines are currently used for dogs and cats."

Please read that again. Because it's important.

It's what Kirk's Current Veterinary Therapy XI -- the veterinarians' "bible" -- says. It was written by Dr. Ronald Schultz Ph.D. (immunologist and Chairman of the Department of Pathobiological Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine) and Dr. Tom Phillips D.V.M. Ph.D.

In plain English, it means . . .
. . . that the immune system has a "memory." Indeed, the immune system contains memory cells. Once those memory cells have been shown what to do against a particular disease (by one successful vaccination at 11-16 weeks old), those memory cells will produce antibodies against that disease whenever they encounter it -- for years and years, probably for life.

*Annual reminders are not needed.*

In fact, annual reminders are mostly useless
because . . .

The same article in *Kirk's Current Veterinary Therapy XI goes on to say*:

"Furthermore, revaccination fails to stimulate a secondary response as a result of interference by existing antibodies."

Again, in plain English, that means . . .
*. . . booster shots don't work when your dog's system ALREADY has antibodies from previous vaccinations. Those existing antibodies neutralize the booster shot.*

So why are vets vaccinating every year?

Dr. Phillips and Dr. Schultz end their article in Kirk's Current Veterinary Therapy XI with this bombshell -- the real reason why so many vets continue to insist that dogs require annual vaccinations:

"The practice of annual vaccination in our opinion should be considered of questionable efficacy unless it is used as a mechanism to provide an annual physical examination."

*In other words, your vet gets dogs into his office by declaring that they need yearly shots. Vaccinations account for a good-sized chunk of a veterinarian's income. Vets charge $15 to $50 for vaccines that cost them less than two dollars apiece. Plus you pay $25 to $35 for the office visit. It is in your vet's best financial interest that you bring your dog in every year.*

In fact, annual booster shots are harmful

Listen to what Dr. Charles Loops D.V.M. has to say about the power of vaccines:

"The first thing that must change is the myth that vaccines are harmless. Veterinarians and animal guardians have to realise that they are not protecting animals from disease by annual vaccinations, but in fact, are destroying the health and immune systems of these same animals they love and care for."

Read more at

Puppy Shots and Dog Vaccinations: Needed or Not?


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

And heres one by Ceearott [follow the link or join the dots...] 
Bill Gates: Use Vaccines To Lower Population

Microsoft founder Bill Gates told a recent TED conference, an organization which is sponsored by one of the largest toxic waste polluters on the planet, that vaccines need to be used to reduce world population figures in order to solve global warming and lower CO2 emissions.

Stating that the global population was heading towards 9 billion, Gates said, If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services (abortion), we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 per cent.

Quite how an improvement in health care and vaccines that supposedly save lives would lead to a lowering in global population is an oxymoron, unless Gates is referring to vaccines that sterilize people, which is precisely the same method advocated in White House science advisor John P. Holdrens 1977 textbook Ecoscience, which calls for a dictatorial planetary regime to enforce draconian measures of population reduction via all manner of oppressive techniques, including sterilization..........

Read more: DOGBREEDER - Login

Hmmmmmm

This same person who PM'd you also posted that she had lost 2 pups to the parvo vaccine althouh I could have sworn before I have seen it written elsewhere as rabies jabs?


----------



## Tarnus (Apr 5, 2011)

I admit that I'm not 100% sure what we will do when it comes time for Izzy to get her boosters, but what I will say is that my decision will be based on studies and not anecdotal evidence. I appreciate that some of you have owned dogs for many years, do not administer boosters and have never had a dog contract parvo etc, but the simple fact is that it does NOT prove your dog is protected from any of the diseases the booster is supposed to cover. 

I am in no doubt that parvo, distemper etc cases are lower now than in the past and that the puppy vaccs are largely behind this, but what this does mean is that the risk of a dog coming in contact with the disease out in the open is now lower, especially in the UK, and as such it is possible for your dog to go its entire life without coming in contact with it. Unfortunately there is simply no way of knowing if your dog ever has, unless you decide to go test every bit of urine your dog has sniffed on your walks!

Yes dogs can die from a reaction to the boosters, but dogs can die during a spay due to reactions to anaesthetic but does that mean we should stop spaying dogs? We know that the benefits outweigh the risks in that instance so we still do it. The actual benefit of the boosters, as far as I can tell, is massively up to debate and in depth studies are probably needed, but it's unlikely they will happen. Why? It costs a lot of money to potentially come to a conclusion that will hit company profits. Which is a real shame.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> Follow the Dogbreeder link in one of the above posts it leads back to Cleo who is Cleo ? Ceearott Look on my Profile who is apologising for what! Erm I think you will find its me that doesn't agree with her views most of the time!


I have no idea who Cleo is.



Kazastan said:


> Heres an interesting quote made in 1958 by outgoing President of the Gerontological Society Dr A Lansang _''Finding a cure for cancer and heart disease would be a major financial disaster which would bankrupt the social security system and the insurance companies''_


So interesting I fell asleep. So what? This thread is about vaccinations. I know you have some bizarre ideas about vaccinations which you are trying to foist on people but there is no link between cancer and vaccinations in dogs. You brought it up - but you don't like it when you are shown to be totally wrong.



Kazastan said:


> LO Where do 'I' ask you to believe that good nutrition should be enough.
> 
> Granted good nutrition is a major factor along with several other things, such as not vaccinating, pure water lots of fresh air, exercise, metal stimulation ............


You posted an article that says:
_1. Good nutrition can prevent disease.
2. Good nutrition can cure disease._
to support your increasingly off the wall arguments. Either you believe it or you don't.



> Whats this hang up with polio you have?
> 
> Polio Resurgence in Nigeria Traced to Mutating Vaccine
> Polio in Nigeria Traced to Mutating Vaccine - New York Times
> ...


In the first place you said vaccine wasn't effective - yet vaccination alone has virtually wiped out polio.*
In the second place polio in Nigeria rose because there were rumours abounding that the vaccine was dangerous and people stopped using it. (Source: World Health Organisation- rather better than New York Times)
In the third place you really show your ignorance: Polio has only one cause, which is an infection with the poliovirus. That's a simple medical fact. Sulphur levels don't produce viruses. So your 'interesting factoid' is simply an out and out lie. (Rather like a lot of the other stuff you've presented in support of your argument).

You keep quoting the discredited Dr Schulz as if he's some sort of world authority. He isn't. You go on to quote a Dr Loopy (I think that's his name) who has the mindless effrontery to say that vaccinations destroy the immune system. Whoops, that means my immune system is destroyed - I've had lots of vaccines (especially for travelling to places like Nigeria).

Stop ranting - and get yourself a first year university medical textbook. Doesn't have to be veterinary, human will do. Read what really happens rather than what happens on Planet Zog (or whichever planet you are currently on).

* And vaccination has completely eliminated smallpox worldwide. (But according to you it doesn't work)


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

right basically let's stop having this argument. . .people are not going to suddenly change their minds about vaccinations. . .I think it's just important to highlight that people should research fully before getting booster jabs and make up their own minds on whether they think they are beneficial or not

the main reason I don't give boosters is because numerous people I know have had problems with boosters

including the most recent being my OH's little sister's rabbit dying a few days after a booster because it made her so ill and my mum told me her friend at work had a dog that was about two who died recently a few days after a jab.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Nico0laGouldsmith said:


> .I think it's just important to highlight that people should research *fully* before getting booster jabs


That's exactly the point. Yet people rely on hearsay from others who claim, for example, that their pet had a reaction to a vaccination and died. In most cases the animal died from something else and it had no relation to the vaccination at all. But because it occurred close to vaccination it automatically gets assumed to be a 'reaction'.

My gripe isn't with the idea of checking out what's right - it's when there's a load of discredited and outright false information given to persuade people who don't know what to do. It happens every time there's a thread here about vaccinations.

I vaccinate my dogs annually against Lepto and bi-annually against the others. Why? Because that's the advice given by the RCVS. It's not about vets making money. That's a really stupid argument because they'll make lots more testing and trying cures on a sick animal than they ever will out of vaccinations. It's about following sound, tried, tested, veterinary experience. I get tired of amateurs claiming that they 'know what's right for my dog' when they have zero medical/veterinary knowledge and they never do any real research but listen to other amateurs and take their word as gospel.

It's dumb and it's dangerous.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Nico0laGouldsmith said:


> . . .people are not going to suddenly change their minds about vaccinations. . .*I think it's just important to highlight that people should research fully before getting booster jabs and make up their own minds on whether they think they are beneficial or not*
> the main reason I don't give boosters is because numerous people I know have had problems with boosters


You are dead right there. My freinds sister lost her Leonberger puppy after the Lepto jab. She managed to find a natural breeder in Jersey [think it was Jersy?]

Generally it is the people who have had dogs wih chronic conditions that have made their dogs life a misery that go looking for answers. If you look at the CHC stats its easy to see how lucrative a live dog with a chronic ailment can be.

Luckily there are lots of people prepared to do their own research and follow their own INSTINCT. They usually do this for a reason, often the same people start looking for a better diet too.

Tens of thousands of people across the world choose not do do boosters or vaccinate period who claim their dogs are healthier for it cant ALL be wrong, nor can all the vets that are anti booster all be stupid

The fact that there are more more breeders of all breeds in the UK going natural says a lot - they cant ALL be stupid surely - there are actually a few around that can boast 5 generations of completely unvaccinated lines.


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

I did actually get told by the vet that it was a reaction to the booster that killed the rabbit :/ but yeah not all deaths after vaccinations are related to them but some unfortunately are. You have to weigh up the risks of each individual vaccine whether the risk of them getting it is higher than the risk of a reaction to the vaccine.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> The fact that there are more more breeders of all breeds in the UK going natural says a lot - they cant ALL be stupid surely - there are actually a few around that can boast 5 generations of completely unvaccinated lines.


Yes, just like the idiot breeder who turned up to a show not long ago with her dog which she was treating 'naturally' for a stomach upset. Which then managed to pass on to ALL the other dogs being shown in the breed that same 'stomach upset'. Diarrhoea, vomiting,... It cost me over £100 in vets bills and the other breeders I know who were showing had similar experiences. Not only did it infect the dogs I had at the show it also infected my dogs at home (because it passed on before making itself observable). At another kennel it was caught by a pregnant bitch who gave birth early.

All this because the breeder thought that 'natural' was a much better idea than taking a sick animal to a vet. Stupid? Certainly was. If any of my dogs caught any of the immunisable ailments from a breeder's dog at a show I'd report that breeder to the KC, publicise his name and do my best to make sure they could never go anywhere near a dog show again. (Hopefully, as mine are vaccinated it would never happen). But when there are people who don't immunise they aren't just putting their own animals at risk - they are risking others too.

I fully accept that a very small proportion of animals will have reactions. To put the risks into perspective: The Veterinary Medicines Directorate, which monitors animal vaccines, report that the 80million-plus doses of vaccine since 1985 have generated fewer than 7,000 reports of side effects. Perhaps that should be compared with the huge numbers of dogs that used to die from distemper, hepatitis, parvovirus, leptospirosis and parainfluenza.

The Animal Health Trust did a study on 4,000 vaccinated dogs which showed that no evidence that dogs suffered any increased level of illness after vaccination; indeed, recently-vaccinated dogs were actually the healthiest.

If you choose not to vaccinate your dog and go the 'titre-testing' route (which is less than foolproof) then you'll be subjecting your dog to the additional stress of blood testing and probably it'll cost you more. And because titre testing is only valid for the time the test is given there's no guarantee that your animal won't be at risk on the following day.


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> Yes, just like the idiot breeder who turned up to a show not long ago with her dog which she was treating 'naturally' for a stomach upset. Which then managed to pass on to ALL the other dogs being shown in the breed that same 'stomach upset'. Diarrhoea, vomiting,... It cost me over £100 in vets bills and the other breeders I know who were showing had similar experiences. Not only did it infect the dogs I had at the show it also infected my dogs at home (because it passed on before making itself observable). At another kennel it was caught by a pregnant bitch who gave birth early.
> 
> All this because the breeder thought that 'natural' was a much better idea than taking a sick animal to a vet. Stupid? Certainly was. If any of my dogs caught any of the immunisable ailments from a breeder's dog at a show I'd report that breeder to the KC, publicise his name and do my best to make sure they could never go anywhere near a dog show again. (Hopefully, as mine are vaccinated it would never happen). But when there are people who don't immunise they aren't just putting their own animals at risk - they are risking others too.
> 
> ...


I can understand the point you're making but to be fair sickness and diarrhoea isn't an immunisable condition but the other breeder should not have taken an unwell dog to a dog show. . .that's just irresponsible and not fair on everyone else.
but yeah I can see why you would be mad if your dog got sick from something that could have been prevented (if it was a condition which the dog could have been immunised against)
but to be fair my dog meets about 3 other dogs (especially since my boy died last year of old age) so she doesn't go to big dog social events and therefore her risk is much much much lower than the risks you would be taking with a show dog.
she is supposed to be a show dog and maybe if I'd shown her I MAY have immunised her but only because of the sheer volume of other dogs she would have been in contact with. I would definitely have never taken her if I felt she was in any way showing signs of illness though.


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

All my dogs that i have ever owned have all had their vaccinations ,and any dog i ever have will be,,,, my dogs have never had problems with them, all my past dogs have led healthy happy lives to a rip age.


----------



## Nico0laGouldsmith (Apr 23, 2011)

hazel pritchard said:


> All my dogs that i have ever owned have all had their vaccinations ,and any dog i ever have will be,,,, my dogs have never had problems with them, all my past dogs have led healthy happy lives to a rip age.


yeah but my dogs have lived happy healthy lives to ripe old ages too :/

where is the line on what we vaccinate against? I can understand the reasoning behind vaccinations but i personally think that except for in circumstance like they're going into kennels. . .then enough time spent with their mum to receive what they need from her milk and get a good immune system plus puppy jabs should be enough :/

but like I said before each to their own really it's a personal decision and there's no right or wrong answer to it


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Here is some important information:
1.Vaccines contain dangerous carcinogens and disease causing chemicals such as mercury and formaldehyde.
2.Vaccines are sometimes made by infecting healthy laboratory animals, including dogs, cats and horses, which causes endless unnecessary suffering. To me it doesnt make sense to kill an animal to save another. When I was a student, I saw these poor souls locked in isolation for a lifetime, most often loosing their lives under torturous conditions.
3.I have observed time and again that early vaccination can neutralize natural maternal antibodies and leave your puppy unprotected.  In reality, puppies and kittens vaccinated at 8  12 weeks end up more vulnerable to the diseases.
4.Vaccines have the ability to cause symptoms similar to the disease they are trying to prevent.
5.Combination vaccines often overwhelm the body and cause immune system problems.
6.Repeated exposure to vaccines can create toxic build up and serious chronic disease or even cancer.

What can you do to keep your dog disease free?

1.Maternal antibodies protect puppies fully until around the age of 10  16 weeks.
2.When your puppy is 12 weeks old get an antibody titer test done that is available in most veterinary clinics.
3.The most concerning diseases are distemper, parvovirus and leptospirosis. Most clinics run just the first two tests.
4.If any antibody level is present, retest at the age of 5 months and socialize your puppy on a moderate basis with other dogs.  Your puppy will learn to communicate and interact with other dogs by being in their presence and contact with other dogs will stimulate the production of antibodies by being exposed while being protected by maternal antibodies. This is in fact natures way of vaccination.
5.From my perspective, any antibody presence is sufficient despite some labs claiming that there is a low (insufficient) antibody levels. I have not seen any dogs with antibody presence getting sick.
6.While no method can provide you with 100% guarantee, I have not seen any dogs who have got parvo or distemper since starting to use this protocol in the late 90s.

For more see

Have vaccine companies told you everything about vaccination? « Dr. Peter Dobias - holistic veterinary medicine


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> Here is some important information:
> 1.Vaccines contain dangerous carcinogens and disease causing chemicals such as mercury and formaldehyde.


Here you go again. It's not 'important'. Most of it is simply not true.

Vaccine production has several stages. First, the antigen itself is generated. Viruses are grown either on primary cells such as chicken eggs (e.g., for influenza), or on continuous cell lines such as cultured human cells (e.g., for hepatitis A). Bacteria are grown in bioreactors (e.g., Haemophilus influenzae type b). Alternatively, a recombinant protein derived from the viruses or bacteria can be generated in yeast, bacteria, or cell cultures. After the antigen is generated, it is isolated from the cells used to generate it. A virus may need to be inactivated, possibly with no further purification required. Recombinant proteins need many operations involving ultrafiltration and column chromatography. Finally, the vaccine is formulated by adding adjuvant, stabilizers, and preservatives as needed.

At no stage is mercury or formaldehyde added. Nor are carcinogens introduced. All are figments of your fevered imagination.



> 2.Vaccines are sometimes made by infecting healthy laboratory animals, including dogs, cats and horses, which causes endless unnecessary suffering. To me it doesnt make sense to kill an animal to save another. When I was a student, I saw these poor souls locked in isolation for a lifetime, most often loosing their lives under torturous conditions.


And you won't find a single example of that happening now.



> 3.I have observed time and again that early vaccination can neutralize natural maternal antibodies and leave your puppy unprotected.  In reality, puppies and kittens vaccinated at 8  12 weeks end up more vulnerable to the diseases.


No, you haven't. The reverse is true. Maternal antibodies can destroy vaccines. That's why you give puppies 2 doses of vaccine - the second simply to make sure that maternal antibodies didn't kill all the first lot. This is basic immunology.



> 4.Vaccines have the ability to cause symptoms similar to the disease they are trying to prevent.


Get a dictionary - find out what 'symptom' means and then try again.



> 5.Combination vaccines often overwhelm the body and cause immune system problems.


No they don't. The amount of pathogen in a combination vaccine is so small it can't 'overwhelm' an immune system.



> 6.Repeated exposure to vaccines can create toxic build up and serious chronic disease or even cancer.


You obviously know far more about the causes of cancer than any oncologist on the planet. There are NO instances of vaccine build up that have ever caused cancer.



> What can you do to keep your dog disease free?
> 
> 1.Maternal antibodies protect puppies fully until around the age of 10  16 weeks.


Not necessarily. Depends on the dog.



> 2.When your puppy is 12 weeks old get an antibody titer test done that is available in most veterinary clinics.


Which will tell you IF certain antibodies are present. Those antibodies may be remnant of maternal antibodies and may be gone the following day. Titre tests are unreliable. They only give you a result for the day.



> 3.The most concerning diseases are distemper, parvovirus and leptospirosis. Most clinics run just the first two tests.


And the other diseases that your puppy may find fatal? (They don't test for lepto because it's pointless. Lepto needs annual vaccination.)



> 4.If any antibody level is present, retest at the age of 5 months and socialize your puppy on a moderate basis with other dogs.  Your puppy will learn to communicate and interact with other dogs by being in their presence and contact with other dogs will stimulate the production of antibodies by being exposed while being protected by maternal antibodies. This is in fact natures way of vaccination.


Yep. Take your unprotected puppy out to mix with other dogs who've been out in the general public areas who might be carrying any of the killer diseases even if they don't appear to have it themselves. That's "Nature's Way" of killing weak animals. Alternatively, it's quicker and easier, not to mention much less distressing, just to shoot your puppy. (BTW puppies need to be socialised much earlier than 5 months).



> 5.From my perspective, any antibody presence is sufficient despite some labs claiming that there is a low (insufficient) antibody levels. I have not seen any dogs with antibody presence getting sick.


Oh good. Your perspective is much to be valued over all the veterinary evidence.



> 6.While no method can provide you with 100% guarantee, I have not seen any dogs who have got parvo or distemper since starting to use this protocol in the late 90s.


100% guarantee? How about dogs that have been vaccinated according to veterinary practice? How many of those dogs have developed the disease after vaccination? Would that be nil?


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> *Oh good. Your perspective is much to be valued over all the veterinary evidence.*
> [/[/B]QUOTE]
> 
> What are you on? Follow the link I think you will find it was written by a veterinarian


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Haven't had time to read all the essays, but here's what the WSAVA have to say about the vaccinations we should be using, and how frequently:

http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf

The main paragraph for dogs from the executive summary reads....

_With this background in mind, the VGG has defined *core* vaccines which ALL dogs and cats, regardless of circumstances, should receive. Core vaccines protect animals from severe, life-threatening diseases that have global distribution. Core vaccines for dogs are those that protect from canine distemper virus (CDV), canine adenovirus (CAV) and canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2). _

Rhuna's just been for an initial vet check up and they were very keen to have her lepto done, here's what the report has to say about this particular jab, the one the vast majority of vets insist you do if not all the others:

_Non-core. Vaccination should be restricted to use in geographical areas where a significant risk of exposure has been established or for dogs whose lifestyle places them at significant risk. These dogs should be vaccinated at 12-16 weeks of age, with a second dose 3-4 weeks later, and then at intervals of 9-12 months until the risk has been reduced. This vaccine is the one least likely to provide adequate and prolonged protection, and therefore must be administered annually or more often for animals at high risk. Protection against infection with different serovars is variable. This product is associated with the greatest number of adverse reactions to any vaccine. In particular, veteranarians are advised of reports of acute anaphylaxis in toy breeds following administration of leptospirosis vaccines. Routine vaccination of toy breeds should only be considered in dogs known to have a very high risk of exposure_

I think I will be letting that one slide.......


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> Follow the link I think you will find it was written by a veterinarian


Yes, a veterinarian who stopped practising in 2008. I'm pleased you pointed out that it was his words, not your own, so that the impression of "_When I was a student, I saw these poor souls locked in isolation for a lifetime, most often loosing their lives under torturous conditions._" isn't yours at all but that of a man whose life work now consists of trying to get 1,000,000 people to sign a petition to allow animals to be carried in the passenger space of aircraft.

He throws in quite a lot of unsubstantiated stuff on his website (presumably you use a lot of his information for your 'research'). He, like you, proposes the dangers of formaldehyde in vaccines - but neglects to mention that the amount in any one vaccination is less that 1/70th of that already present in the animal, which means that there is zero problem. (A good biology textbook may allay your fears here - formaldehyde occurs naturally in living beings). _There is no evidence linking cancer to infrequent exposure to tiny amounts of formaldehyde via injection as occurs with vaccines._ Source The US Food and Drug Administration.

But, should you still believe in him, he's all for curing your animal's reaction to a vaccine (assuming yours is one of the 7,000 out of 80 million that reacts) by giving it a homoeopathic treatment. BTW if your pet does have a reaction you should only use a holistic vet like him - don't go to any 'ordinary' vet.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Haven't had time to read all the essays, but here's what the WSAVA have to say about the vaccinations we should be using, and how frequently:
> 
> http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf


Indeed, and what they say is the best advice - given the current knowledge of diseases that can be vaccinated for. Basically it's annually for lepto and 3 yearly for the main others BUT there are some 'non-core' diseases that require annual boosters if you live in an area where they are likely to be caught. Bordatella and Lyme disease are notable in this regard.

And they do point out that until further research is done the best plan is to go with the guidelines of the virus manufacturers.

They also point out that tha annual vaccination may differ from year to year depending on the mix of vaccines.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

The CHC (Canine Health Concern UK) released the results of an interesting study which analysed the histories of 3,800 dogs reported (many many more are never reported)

29% of dogs first became sick within 7 days of their vaccine jab, equating to a dog is 13 times more likely to become ill within 7 days of vaccination than at any other time. 49% of all illnesses reported in the survey occurred within 30 days of vaccination

64% developed hepatitis within 3 months of being vaccinated
50% developed influenza within 3 months of being vaccinated
69% developed parvovirus within 3 months of being vaccinated
56% developed distemper within 3 months of being vaccinated
100% developed Leptospirosis within 3 months of being vaccinated

69.2% of allergic dogs became allergic within 3 months of vaccination
55.8% of dogs with autoimmune disease developed the condition within 3 months of vaccination
65.9% of dogs with colitis developed the condition within 3 months of vaccination
70.2% of dogs with conjunctivitis developed the condition within 3 months of vaccination
73.1% of dogs with epilepsy developed the condition within 3 months of vaccination

Other conditions that were highly represented within 3 months of vaccination included cancer 35.1%, encephalitis 78.6% heart conditions 39.2% kidney damage 53.7% liver damage/failure 61.5% paralysis of the rear 69.2% Pancreas problems 54.2%

The study also showed that arthritis and CDRM - a degenerative disease of the spinal cord occurs in clusters 9 months after vaccination

The survey finishes with 'Our figures appear to demostrate that vaccines cause illness in one in every hundred dogs - which is considered a conservative estimate' given many adverse reaction are never reported


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Albertros you said somewhere that vaccines do not contain mercury [since a campaign in the early 2000's _most_ childrens vaccines no longer contain mercury]

The following quote is taken from the Pfizer Rabies vaccine DEFENSOR® 1; DEFENSOR® 3
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SECTION 13 - DISPOSAL INFORMATION

Disposal procedure - Observe all local and national regulations when disposing of this mixture.This product contains trace quantities of mercury and may qualify as a RCRA 
Hazardous Waste. Status should be confirmed using the EPA Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP).

So the empty vaccine vial needs to be disposed of as hazardous waste but this toxic substance is injected into your animals bloodstream and we think this will protect their health and not harm them

Mercury in vaccines is most commonlt known as Thimersol which is approx 50% mercury by weight

Mercury can alter the cytokine status and the Th1/Th2 balance leading to auto immune disease and a strong increase of IgE Th1 pathways can be transformed into Th2 dominance through depeletion of intracellular glutathione [important for sexhormones] Glutathione [GSH] is one of the most important antioxidants in the body working in the liver to detoxify carcinogens


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Kazastan said:


> Albertros you said somewhere that vaccines do not contain mercury [since a campaign in the early 2000's _most_ childrens vaccines no longer contain mercury]
> 
> The following quote is taken from the Pfizer Rabies vaccine DEFENSOR® 1; DEFENSOR® 3
> SAFETY DATA SHEET
> ...


Yawn. Lots of things can alter the Th1/Th2 balance - here's a little list: Processed, heated vegetable oils high in trans-fatty acids and linoleic acid (safflower, soy, canola, corn and sunflower), glucose (white sugar), asbestos, lead, pesticides, air and water pollutants, progesterone, prednisone, morphine, tobacco, cortisol (in high doses), HIV, candida albicans, HCV, E coli and many other pathogens, continuous stress, thalidomide, UV-B light, pregnancy, melatonin (conflicting research suggests that high levels induce Th2 cytokines while very small amounts induce Th1 cytokines), alcohol (animals studies show that ethanol definitely suppresses Th1 cytokines and induces Th2, streptococcus thermophilis (sometimes found in yoghurt), candidiasis, circulating immune complexes (CICs - caused by a combination of leaky gut syndrome and poor digestion of proteins due to a lack or HCl and digestive enzymes), sedentary lifestyle, negative attitudes, low body temperature, acid saliva pH, chronic insomnia, inability to dream, weight lifting, and steroids (for muscle gain).

The vast majority of those are much more likely to affect your animal than the faint possibility of mercury. BTW did you read what you posted? Did you notice 'may' and 'trace' in what you posted? Probably not. Just scaremongering tactics again.

However, to put your mind at rest - DEFENSOR isn't used in the UK.

And the CHC study (which seems more than slightly biased) directly contradicts the mass of evidence elsewhere that shows that vaccinated dogs are found to be healthier after vaccination. They claim their survey is 'the largest canine vaccine survey ever'. That's simply not true. It may be the largest survey carried out amongst people who think that vaccines caused a problem but there are many other, much larger surveys. And, surprise, surprise, they all contradict this one biased survey.

I'm not sure I put much faith in the findings of an organisation (well, a one-woman band) that amongst other crackpot ideas suggests feeding dogs garlic to ward off tick bites. Obviously no idea that consumption of any type of the Allium family (garlic, onions, leeks, etc.) is dangerous. In fact, rather than worrying about the very low risks associated with vaccines perhaps the CHC should be more worried about that as there is no specific antidote available for allium toxicosis.

But I doubt it - after all their 'survey' assumes that any illness occurring within 3 months of vaccination is caused by the vaccination - an argument so valueless that it would be laughed at by any sane person. It's like saying that someone had a cold and 3 months later was diagnosed with cancer, therefore the cold caused the cancer.

Where do you find all these misguided people from? (No, don't answer, I really don't want to know). I do note, however, that a lot of your previous rantings have been drawn from the people who have contributed to the CHC website. I do wonder what agenda you all have in common. It can't be the welfare and safeguarding of our pets because 99% of the 'information' you put out is totally against all trustworthy accepted medical evidence.

Perhaps you hanker after some mythical past, where vaccines were unknown. (Of course the fact that people had a much shorter lifespan plagued by chronic illness wouldn't affect your version of Nirvana.) It is a fact that smallpox has been eradicated by use of vaccines. It is a fact that polio has nearly been eradicated (and probably would have been by know if some misguided idiots hadn't spread false stories about the vaccine being dangerous). Sort of the same misinformation that you keep producing I suppose. Ever met anyone crippled by polio BTW? Not a nice thing to happen to them. But then, in countries where health care is minimal they die, so you wouldn't get the chance.

The simple, undeniable fact is that there is a tiny proportion of animals which are adversely affected by vaccination. There is a mind-bogglingly large number of animals that don't contract killer diseases because they've been vaccinated. It's also true that there are some people who care so little for their own and other people's animals that they want to try and stop vaccination happening - in the face of all the evidence. I can't understand why someone would want to expose animals to a preventable risk - but then I look after my animals and don't expose them to unnecessary risk.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> *The simple, undeniable fact is that there is a tiny proportion of animals which are adversely affected by vaccination. There is a mind-bogglingly large number of animals that don't contract killer diseases because they've been vaccinated. *It's also true that there are some people who care so little for their own and other people's animals that they want to try and stop vaccination happening - in the face of all the evidence. I can't understand why someone would want to expose animals to a preventable risk - but then I look after my animals and don't expose them to unnecessary risk.


I think this thread is in danger of veering off on a bit of a downward spiral, but can I just ask, how you know this for certain?

And btw, I think it's a bit insulting if that last bit is to all the people reading this thread, cost is most certainly not an issue as far as my dogs are concerned, their welfare IS an issue, and I'm not willing to just bung them through medical procedures for the sake of it, nor am I willing to agree with everything the vet tries to tell me. I like to think I'm slightly intelligent and can read up and make my own mind up, as I'm sure many other readers will be


----------



## OllieBob (Nov 28, 2010)

What I don't understand is why people consider something that happens weeks or months after a vaccination is due to the vaccination. Impossible. That is why there are no accurate figures out there. In paediatrics we considered it to be an adverse reaction if it happened within 3 days anything after was generally ignored. I suppose it comes down to the blame game, something must be to blame for illnesses/injuries etc they can't just happen. Sorry but they do.


----------



## stusawop (Oct 28, 2010)

Interesting......Untitled Document


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I think this thread is in danger of veering off on a bit of a downward spiral, but can I just ask, how you know this for certain?


80 million vaccinations. How many cases of the 'killer' diseases are there now?



> And btw, I think it's a bit insulting if that last bit is to all the people reading this thread, cost is most certainly not an issue as far as my dogs are concerned, their welfare IS an issue, and I'm not willing to just bung them through medical procedures for the sake of it, nor am I willing to agree with everything the vet tries to tell me. I like to think I'm slightly intelligent and can read up and make my own mind up, as I'm sure many other readers will be


No one suggests that you " bung them through medical procedures for the sake of it". The suggestion is that the tried, tested, peer-reviewed, published medical advice is correct and that vaccination of your dogs will protect them against major forms of deadly dog diseases.

You may not agree with what your vet tells you but I'd be pretty confident that your vet has a far greater medical knowledge about animals than you. Otherwise, why bother to use a vet at all?

It's not hard to research this yourself. There are lots of papers from the tried and trusted experts - mind you, there are also a lot of totally misinformed and off-the-wall other stuff.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

stusawop said:


> Interesting......Untitled Document


Yes, basically a rehash (or perhaps the source) of a lot of what Kazastan posted. It does contain some inaccuracies - like the 2003 report is quoted as being about cats and dogs whereas it's specifically only about cats. It also draws heavily on the discredited CHC website for its sources.

By and large the 'anti-vaccination' movement (such as it is) is fuelled by people who believe that their dogs had some sort of reaction to a vaccination which gave the dog either a life-threatening or fatal disease. The facts remain that only 7000 out of 80 million dogs were reported to have had any sort of serious reaction and reactions to vaccinations simply don't occur weeks or months later. They happen immediately (anaphylaxis type reaction) or within a few days. It doesn't happen months later (as claimed by CHC). Further, the mere fact that an animal falls ill after vaccination should not be automatically assumed to be a reaction. It is much more likely to be pure coincidence. It may even be down to the animal contracting an illness from another animal that happened to be in the vets at the same time.

Equally, the anti-vaccination argument ignores completely that vaccines are incredibly effective and prevent serious illness.

It should be noted, however, that a lot of the 'information' or 'evidence' that is produced to support the anti-vaccination argument is based on non-UK vaccination procedures. A great deal of it is specific to anti-rabies vaccinations, which are uncommon in the UK except for dogs travelling outside the country. However, all of the arguments proposed about such vaccinations (e.g. that they contain carcinogens etc.) tends to fall away when factually those vaccines have been superseded by vaccines that don't have those drawbacks. Further, where the older vaccines did have 'suspect' ingredients, usually added to make the vaccine work faster, the amounts were so small as to be fractional compared to the amounts of those materials already existing within the normal physiology of the animal. (Yes, you do have poisons like mercury and lead in your body - but, if you are reading this they haven't killed you yet).


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

My previous dog had an auto-immune disease, I did not think of it at the time but the symptoms did indeed start a few days after his annual boosters at age 2 years. He was then on immune suppressants for life - a vet still gave him the boosters at 3 years old. I trusted vets implicitly then and did not realise that a) only healthy animals should be vaccinated and b) there was no point vaccinating anyway when he was on immune suppressing medication. I therefore refused boosters for him in years 4 and 5. Should he therefore not have been a more likely candidate to catch parvo/distemper etc in the unvaccinated years?

My friends dog died at 1 year old, auto immune disease again (the one that affects the blood can't remember what its called). Yes it was a few days after her first years booster jabs.

So whilst I respect the pro views forgive me for being unconvinced


----------



## the melster (Mar 20, 2010)

Mine have the puppy vacs and the first annual booster and then that's it. I am then going to titre test and see how it goes. 

I believe I lost my last dog after a vaccination when she started having seisures. She spent all her life unvaccinated and I had her done to go in kennels for a few days.


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

Kazastan said:


> And heres one by Ceearott [follow the link or join the dots...]
> Bill Gates: Use Vaccines To Lower Population
> 
> Microsoft founder Bill Gates told a recent TED conference, an organization which is sponsored by one of the largest toxic waste polluters on the planet, that vaccines need to be used to reduce world population figures in order to solve global warming and lower CO2 emissions.
> ...


SERIOUSLY?!

This has nothing to do with dog vaccinations at all and is quite frankly slanderous. Do you really want to post information that can't see how improving health would lead to lower populations? There are numerous studies that show people have less children when they are more confident they will survive past the age of 5. No one is sterilising people by stealth using vaccinations.

Also Vera Schreibner is a *geologist* who has been widely discredited. She has no credibility or qualifications in the fields or epidemiology, immunology or virology.

I haven't read past this post but I just could not allow that to go unanswered.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Haven't read the 11 pages.. lol but I asked my vet, the parvo and stuff they put in the pups first vaccine - lasts 4 years. However the Lepto only lasts a year. So I asked about getting just his Lepto every year and having his parvo every 4 years but the company they get the boosters from charge the same for all the booster as they do for just the Lepto. 

However saying that. Sadie hasn't had her boosters for 5 years - without any issues. Benjie hasn't had any since they rescued him at 9 months..

Louie has had his first vaccs and his first booster..

Puppy vaccs don't always work because of the Mother's Milk - so some puppies aren't even protected until their boosters.. and some dogs die after contracting the disease from the vaccine itself.. but this isn't often so don't panic.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> 80 million vaccinations. How many cases of the 'killer' diseases are there now?
> 
> No one suggests that you " bung them through medical procedures for the sake of it". The suggestion is that the tried, tested, peer-reviewed, published medical advice is correct and that vaccination of your dogs will protect them against major forms of deadly dog diseases.
> 
> ...





AlbertRoss said:


> Yes, basically a rehash (or perhaps the source) of a lot of what Kazastan posted. It does contain some inaccuracies - like the 2003 report is quoted as being about cats and dogs whereas it's specifically only about cats. It also draws heavily on the discredited CHC website for its sources.
> 
> By and large the 'anti-vaccination' movement (such as it is) is fuelled by people who believe that their dogs had some sort of reaction to a vaccination which gave the dog either a life-threatening or fatal disease. The facts remain that only 7000 out of 80 million dogs were reported to have had any sort of serious reaction and reactions to vaccinations simply don't occur weeks or months later. They happen immediately (anaphylaxis type reaction) or within a few days. It doesn't happen months later (as claimed by CHC). Further, the mere fact that an animal falls ill after vaccination should not be automatically assumed to be a reaction. It is much more likely to be pure coincidence. It may even be down to the animal contracting an illness from another animal that happened to be in the vets at the same time.
> 
> ...


There's exactly the same amount of killer diseases now, as before vaccines were introduced, is it a trick question?

My problem with the lepto vaccination in particular is the bacteria is present in several forms, and the vaccination isn't always effective, and yet even though this is the one that dogs are most likely to react to it's the one vets insist is always given annually. As I understand it, it isn't even effective for 12 months, it's up to 12 months efficacy, so for part of the time you're gambling with lepto in any case.

Nice that you've got two neatly divided groups, anti's and pros 



DoodlesRule said:


> My previous dog had an auto-immune disease, I did not think of it at the time but the symptoms did indeed start a few days after his annual boosters at age 2 years. He was then on immune suppressants for life - a vet still gave him the boosters at 3 years old. I trusted vets implicitly then and did not realise that a) only healthy animals should be vaccinated and b) there was no point vaccinating anyway when he was on immune suppressing medication. I therefore refused boosters for him in years 4 and 5. Should he therefore not have been a more likely candidate to catch parvo/distemper etc in the unvaccinated years?
> 
> My friends dog died at 1 year old, auto immune disease again (the one that affects the blood can't remember what its called). Yes it was a few days after her first years booster jabs.
> 
> So whilst I respect the pro views forgive me for being unconvinced


Yes, the fact that canine papillomas are associated with revaccination and Indie just happened to have one develop on her nose following her last round of annual vaccinations is pure co-incidence, along with all the other dogs that develop canine papillomas following revaccination, we must be kidding outselves and just be *anti* vaccination for the wrong reasons 



SLB said:


> Haven't read the 11 pages.. lol but I asked my vet, the parvo and stuff they put in the pups first vaccine - lasts 4 years. However the Lepto only lasts a year. So I asked about getting just his Lepto every year and having his parvo every 4 years but the company they get the boosters from charge the same for all the booster as they do for just the Lepto.
> 
> However saying that. Sadie hasn't had her boosters for 5 years - without any issues. Benjie hasn't had any since they rescued him at 9 months..
> 
> ...


If you read the WSAVA report, the guidelines for vaccinations are global, not just US specific, and the fact that they don't have lepto as a core vaccination makes me question why we think it's required for all areas of the UK. It also gives some information on the resistance of some pups who inherit their dam's resistance to disease.

Lots of folk who are *pro* vaccination, will tell you it's because rats are present in all parts of the UK, but it ain't as simple as that, the bacteria is also carried by cattle, and there are several types. It's actually more linked with water, and with humans it's referred to as Weils disease, something I very aware about as my work involves detailed examinations of culvers, where you obviously have rats and water together. So perhaps if I ever come across a shoot that requires sending my dogs through a culvert to retrieve a phessie, then I can say that the lepto vaccination they had was worth it (ps sarcasm there intended as the tone of some of the posts (not yours) is a bit ott) 

Anyway, I still haven't decided for or against (is there a fence group) so am still going to read up before I subject my dogs to vaccinations they may not need.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Lots of folk who are *pro* vaccination, will tell you it's because rats are present in all parts of the UK, but it ain't as simple as that, the bacteria is also carried by cattle, and there are several types. It's actually more linked with water, and with humans it's referred to as Weils disease, something I very aware about as my work involves detailed examinations of culvers, where you obviously have rats and water together. So perhaps if I ever come across a shoot that requires sending my dogs through a culvert to retrieve a phessie, then I can say that the lepto vaccination they had was worth it (ps sarcasm there intended as the tone of some of the posts (not yours) is a bit ott)
> 
> Anyway, I still haven't decided for or against (is there a fence group) so am still going to read up before I subject my dogs to vaccinations they may not need.


Slightly off topic, heard the other day that David Walliams is thought to have Weils disease after doing his Thames swim.

I need to join you on that fence if I may  I am at the moment a worried fence sitter. If Dougie was a dedictated swimmer then I would go and talk to the vet about that particular one, at least they should be able to tell you if there have been any confirmed cases in your area. I personally don't think its an easy decision to make either way and needs careful consideration


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Nope don't agree with regular vaccinations myself. I find a lot of people who are pro regular vaccines don't actually have very many of their facts straight.

What I find most interesting is manufacturers themselves saying the full course only every three years, but vets insisting on doing it annually. I don't get that whatsoever.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

DoodlesRule said:


> Slightly off topic, heard the other day that David Walliams is thought to have Weils disease after doing his Thames swim.
> 
> I need to join you on that fence if I may  I am at the moment a worried fence sitter. If Dougie was a dedictated swimmer then I would go and talk to the vet about that particular one, at least they should be able to tell you if there have been any confirmed cases in your area. * I personally don't think its an easy decision to make either way and needs careful consideration*


Completely agree, and yes, I think we should start our own fence sitting group, somewhere in the middle, who like to question and learn about these things, than blindly accept what the vet tells us!


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

GoldenShadow said:


> Nope don't agree with regular vaccinations myself. I find a lot of people who are pro regular vaccines don't actually have very many of their facts straight.
> 
> What I find most interesting is manufacturers themselves saying the full course only every three years, but vets insisting on doing it annually. I don't get that whatsoever.


After puppy vacs and first annual booster for vaccinations against viral infections, that's when the WSAVA recommends the once per three years, it's vaccinations against bacterial infections that's a bit more difficult, lepto is one of those, and it's not recommended as a core vaccination globally, yet vets in the UK seem to think it's endemic in all areas.


----------



## H0lly (Jan 31, 2010)

Oh Gosh , I have this decision to make shortly  Best get reading


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Fear of the Invisible
by Janine Roberts
isbn 0955917727, amazon.com

An Investigative Journey into a reckless and contaminated Medical Industry

This book takes its readers on a journey into the very heart of the hunt for viruses  to the key experiments performed to prove that these invisibly small particles cause diseases that often were previously blamed on toxins or bacteria. It sheds light on the extraordinary assumptions underlying much of this research into viruses  and the resulting vaccines and antiviral medicines. 

The author, an investigative journalist who researched and produced investigative films for the BBC, American and Australian television, was asked by parents with children severely ill after vaccination to discover if the medical authorities were hiding anything from them. She agreed, but had no idea how long this search would take or how it would change her ideas. She expected at best to uncover a small degree of contamination.

On the ensuing decade-long journey of discovery, she found top government scientists report alarmingly, at meetings between scientists, that it is impossible to purify vaccines. They stated that the childhood vaccines of today are contaminated with viruses from chickens, humans and monkeys, with RNA and DNA fragments, with "cellular degradation products," and possibly "oncogenes and prions."

They say they dare not tell the pubic about all this contamination - as they might demand a withdrawal of the vaccines. Thus the public is not told despite all the consequences of such contamination for long-term public health. A US court decision in 2008 has linked autism with vaccine contamination. The author cites her sources by name  and gives references and Internet links where they are available.

There is much research here that has not been reported elsewhere. She reveals, for example, that the World Health Organization (WHO) knows the MMR vaccine is contaminated with chicken leukosis virus, yet has decided not to tell the public and to continue to make the vaccine with eggs from contaminated chickens. She doubts the accuracy of their research, as it is based on discovering an enzyme, RT, not a virus, but they believe it is very dangerous to chickens and potentially to children. They stay silent because to confess this would reveal that they cannot purify the vaccines given to our children.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

"Papillomavirus, Herpesvirus, and Polyomavirus: Exploring the Etiology of Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcomas."
This project involves investigating possible viral causes of vaccine associated feline sarcomas. Immunohistochemistry and PCR are being used to detect papillomavirus, herpes-virus, and polyomavirus in the vaccine-associated tumors. *These three viruses have been linked with various tumors in cats or other species, including humans.*
The principal investigator is M. L. Jackson, DVM, MVetSc, PhD, University of Saskatchewan. Co-investigators are B. Kidney, DVM, MVetSc, D. Haines, DVM, MPhil, PhD, J. Ellis, DVM, PhD.

A basic principle of cancer is that it cannot occur without some interaction with the genetic material of the body DNA. The purpose of this project is to uncover the initial step in the causation of aggressive soft tissue cancers in cats that may be associated with routine administration of vaccines. Since vaccines often cause an inflammatory reaction at the site of injection, highly reactive oxygen-derived free radicals are generated locally that may in some way alter the DNA of certain cells. The investigators will vaccinate a group of cats with commercially available vaccines at three different sites, then determine the concentration of a DNA alteration known as 8-hydroxyguanine that develops at these sites. They will also study this alteration in client-owned cats that develop inflammatory reactions approximately 3 weeks after vaccination. *It is hoped that this work will lead to the development of a test to help determine which vaccine components may be causing vaccine-associated sarcomas. Re-formulation of vaccines may then prevent development of these cancers.*

The principal investigator is J. McHugh Law, DVM, PhD, DACVP, North Carolina State University. Co-investigators are M. Hauck and S. Price.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Scientific Citations Linking Vaccines and Cancer

This site documents scientific links between vaccines and cancer, including leukemia, lymphomas, chromosome changes leading to mutations, and links between the polio vaccine, a monkey virus (SV-40), and mesotheliomas, brain tumors, bone cancers, and more. 
Vaccines, Leukemia and Lymphomas:

Bichel, "Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis Developing into Hodgkins Disease", Acta Med Scand, 1976, Vol 199, p523-525. 
Stewart, AM, et al, "Aetiology of Childhood Leukaemia", Lancet, 16 Oct, 1965, 2:789-790. 
Glathe, H et al, "Evidence of Tumorigenic Activity of Candidate Cell Substrate in Vaccine Production by the Use of Anti-Lymphocyte Serum", Development Biol Std, 1977, 34:145-148. 
Bolognesi, DP, "Potential Leukemia Virus Subunit Vaccines: Discussion", Can Research, Feb 1976, 36(2 pt 2):655-656. 
Colon, VF, et al, "Vaccinia Necrosum as a Clue to Lymphatic Lymphoma", Geriatrics, Dec 1968, 23:81-82. 
Park-Dincsoy, H et al, "Lymphoid Depletion in a case of Vaccinia Gangrenosa", Laval Med, Jan 1968, 39:24-26. 
Hugoson, G et al, "The Occurrence of Bovine Leukosis Following the Introduction of Babesiosis Vaccination", Bibl Haemat, 1968, 30:157-161. 
Hartstock, , ""Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis: Hyperplasia of Lymphoid Tissue That Simulates Malignant Lymphomas", Apr 1968, Cancer, 21(4):632-649. 
Allerberger, F, "An Outbreak of Suppurative Lymphadenitis Connected with BCG Vaccination in Austria- 1990/1991," Am Rev Respir Disorder, Aug 1991, 144(2) 469. 
Omokoku B, Castells S, "Post-DPT inoculation cervical lymphadenitis in children." N Y State J Med 1981 Oct;81(11):1667-1668. 
Vaccines and Chromosome Changes Leading to Mutations:

Knuutila, S et al, "An Increased Frequency of Chromosomal Changes and SCEs in Cultured Lymphocytes of 12 Subjects Vaccinated Against Smallpox," Hum Genet, 1978 Feb 23; 41(1):89-96. 
Cherkeziia, SE, et al, "Disorders in the Murine Chromosome Apparatus Induced By Immunization with a Complex of Anti-viral Vaccines," Vopr Virusol, 1979 Sept Oct, (5):547-550. [SCE means sister chromatid exchange and is an indication that genetic mutations are occurring, which could possibly lead to cancer-causing mutations.]

The Polio Vaccine Has Been Linked to Cancer:

Shah, K and Nathanson, N. "Human exposure to SV40." American Journal of Epidemiology, 1976; 103: 1-12. 
Innis, M.D. "Oncogenesis and poliomyelitis vaccine." Nature, 1968; 219:972-73. 
Soriano, F., et al. "Simian virus 40 in a human cancer." Nature, 1974; 249:421-24. 
Weiss, A.F., et a;. "Simian virus 40-related antigens in three human meningiomas with defined chromosome loss." Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 1975; 72(2):609-13. 
Scherneck, S., et al. "Isolation of a SV-40-like papovavirus from a human glioblastoma." International Journal of Cancer 1979; 24:523-31. 
Stoian, M., et al. "Possible relation between viruses and oromaxillofacial tumors. II. Research on the presence of SV40 antigen and specific antibodies in patients with oromaxillofacial tumors." Virologie, 1987; 38:35-40. 
Stoian, M., et al. "Possible relation between viruses and oromaxillofacial tumors. II. Detection of SV40 antigen and of anti-SV40 antibodies in patients with parotid gland tumors." Virologie, 1987; 38:41-46. 
Bravo, M.P., et al. "Association between the occurrence of antibodies to simian vacuolating virus 40 and bladder cancer in male smokers." Neoplasma, 1988; 35:285-88. 
O'Connell, K., et al. "Endothelial cells transformed by SV40 T-antigen cause Kaposi's sarcoma-like tumors in nude mice." American Journal of Pathology, 1991; 139(4):743-49. 
Weiner, L.P., et al. "Isolation of virus related to SV40 from patients with progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy." New England Journal of Medicine, 1972; 286:385-90. 
Tabuchi, K. "Screening of human brain tumors for SV-40-related T-antigen." International Journal of Cancer 1978; 21:12-17. 
Meinke, W., et al. "Simian virus 40-related DNA sequences in a human brain tumor." Neurology 1979; 29:1590-94. 
Krieg, P., et al. "Episomal simian virus 40 genomes in human brain tumors." Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 1981; 78:6446-50. 
Krieg, P., et al. "Episomal Simian Virus 40 Genomes in Human Brain Tumors." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 1981, 78(10):6446-6450. 
Krieg, P., et al. "Cloning of SV40 genomes from human brain tumors." Virology 1984; 138:336-40. 
Geissler, E. "SV40 in human intracranial tumors: passenger virus or oncogenic 'hit-and-run' agent?" Z Klin Med, 1986; 41:493-95. 
Geissler, E. "SV40 and Human Brain Tumors." Progress in Medical Virology, 1990; 37:211-222. 
Bergsagel, D.J., et al. "DNA sequences similar to those of simian virus 40 in ependymomas and choroid plexus tumors of childhood." New England Journal of Medicine, 1992; 326:988-93. 
Martini, M., et al. "Human Brain Tumors and Simian Virus 40." Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1995, 87(17):1331. 
Lednicky, JA., et al. "Natural Simian Virus 40 Strains are Present in Human Choroid Plexus and Ependymoma Tumors." Virology, 1995, 212(2):710-17. 
Tognon, M., et al. "Large T Antigen Coding Sequence of Two DNA Tumor Viruses, BK and SV-40, and Nonrandom Chromosome Changes in Two Gioblastoma Cell Lines." Cancer Genetics and Cytogenics, 1996, 90(1): 17-23. 
Carbone, M., et al. "SV-40 Like Sequences in Human Bone Tumors." Oncogene, 1996, 13(3):527-35. 
Pass, HI, Carbone, M., et al. "Evidence For and Implications of SV-40 Like Sequences in Human Mesotheliomas." Important Advances in Oncology, 1996, pp. 89-108. 
Rock, Andrea. "The Lethal Dangers of the Billion Dollar Vaccine Business," Money, (December 1996), p. 161. [Article] 
Carlsen, William. "Rogue virus in the vaccine: Early polio vaccine harbored virus now feared to cause cancer in humans." San Francisco Chronicle (July 15, 2001), p. 7. [Article: Research by Susan Fisher, epidemiologist, Loyola University Medical Center.] 
Bookchin, D. and Schumacher J. "Tainted polio vaccine still carries its threat 40 years later." The Boston Globe (January 26, 1997). [Article] 
Rosa, FW., et al. "Absence of antibody response to simian virus 40 after inoculation with killed-poliovirus vaccine of mothers offspring with neurological tumors." New England Journal of Medicine, 1988; 318:1469. 
Rosa, FW., et al. Response to: "Neurological tumors in offspring after inoculation of mothers with killed poliovirus vaccine." New England Journal of Medicine, 1988, 319:1226. 
Martini, F., et al. "SV-40 Early Region and Large T Antigen in Human Brain Tumors, Peripheral Blood Cells, and Sperm Fluids from Healthy Individuals." Cancer Research, 1996, 56(20):4820-4825.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

_It is impossible to remove DNA contaminants from vaccines. Although weight limits for contaminating DNA were set by the FDA as far back as 1986, vaccine makers have never been able to reach that goal. The CDC decided to limit their weight recommendation to cancerous cell lines and then increase the other DNA contamination allowance one hundred-fold. However, these limits are only recommendations and, therefore, the FDA is unable to enforce them. Vaccine manufacturers continue to have the freedom to take scientific measures to reduce contaminants only if they wish. _

The meeting confirmed that a particular cell, which under many conditions is neoplastic [tumor causing] has been licensed for the production of both injectible and oral polio vaccines in the US, Thailand, Belgium and France. Therefore, these vaccines carry the high risk of containing cancer-causing oncogenes.

_ On the question whether or not mutation events could occur in children after vaccination, the answer was that Recombination among a variety of viruses [contaminant viruses] and cells co-infected in tissue culture is not uncommon. What this basically means is that because it is not uncommon for genetic codes of both contaminant viruses and living cells to recombine and create mutations in laboratory cultures, it can certainly occur in a childs body after vaccination. _

It was reconfirmed that vaccines are widely contaminated by viral and DNA genetic code fragments, many viruses and proteins. There was expressed concern that these may also contain prions (tiny proteins responsible for incurable diseases and neurological disorders in both humans and animals) and oncogenes (a gene that turns normal cells into cancerous ones). One attendee, Dr. Goldberg, stated, There are countless thousands of undiscovered viruses, proteins and similar particles. We have only identified a very small part of the microbial worldand we can only test for those we have identified. Thus the vaccine cultures could contain many unknown particles.

_a 2001 CDC report showing that RT investigative studies for both the ALV and EAV retroviruses were conducted in 100 patients receiving the MMR vaccine. They found undesirable RT activity in all measles vaccine lots from different manufacturers tested. Their conclusion is that this occurrence is not sporadic and that vaccine recipients may be universally exposed to these [chicken] retroviral particles. In a separate National Institutes of Health transcript of a meeting, Dr. Conroy of the World Health Organization stated that EAV viruses are found in all fertilized chicken eggs. There appears to be little change in the scientific protocol for making the influenza, MMR and yellow fever vaccines. The current release of intramuscular H1N1 vaccines for the global market relies on the use of fertilized chicken embryos_.

The other risk stated by the FDA official was the possibility of the ALV sequence merging with the measles virus, hence creating a completely new, mutant and dangerous virus. (This could also apply equally to the H1N1 swine flu and any other flu vaccines). As an aside, the world renown British geneticist Dr. Mae-Wan Ho from the Institute of Science in Society wrote that, Vaccines themselves can be dangerous, especially live, attenuated viral vaccines or the new recombinant nucleic acid vaccines, they have the potential to generate virulent viruses by recombination and the recombinant nucleic acids could cause autoimmune disease.

_As a side note, reverse transcriptase activity is one of the stalwarts of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis. An article, Serious Questions Regarding the Safety and Efficacy of the Influenza Vaccine published by Canadas Vaccine Risk Awareness Network reports that some studies, and even some vaccine package inserts, indicate that vaccinations increase HIV viral replication.(2) This means all vaccines stimulate a strong suppressive effect on the immune system. Under stress conditions, viruses turn hyperactive and increase their ability to replicate. _

Dr. Arifa Khan from the FDA confirmed:

The RT activity in the vaccine was associated with retrovirus particles from two separate viral strains: Avian Leuokosis Virus (ALV) and Equine Arteritis Virus (EAV). The former was especially disturbing because ALV is a leukemia cancer, and Dr. Khan stated: There was a theoretical possibility that the virus [ALV] could infect the [human] cell. In summary, this means the ALV genetic code could integrate with human DNA, hence causing some kind of cancer.

The FDAs reassurance that the ALV RT activity was safe is based on laboratory observations that there was no viral-human DNA merger activity for a full 48 hours. This kind of assurance is almost nonsensical and flies in the face of scientific reasoning since cancers can take years to develop


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> If you read the WSAVA report, the guidelines for vaccinations are global, not just US specific, and the fact that they don't have lepto as a core vaccination makes me question why we think it's required for all areas of the UK. It also gives some information on the resistance of some pups who inherit their dam's resistance to disease.
> 
> Lots of folk who are *pro* vaccination, will tell you it's because rats are present in all parts of the UK, but it ain't as simple as that, the bacteria is also carried by cattle, and there are several types. It's actually more linked with water, and with humans it's referred to as Weils disease, something I very aware about as my work involves detailed examinations of culvers, where you obviously have rats and water together. So perhaps if I ever come across a shoot that requires sending my dogs through a culvert to retrieve a phessie, then I can say that the lepto vaccination they had was worth it (ps sarcasm there intended as the tone of some of the posts (not yours) is a bit ott)
> 
> Anyway, I still haven't decided for or against (is there a fence group) so am still going to read up before I subject my dogs to vaccinations they may not need.


I'm just going on what I've been told. I live next to a river and have rabbits - no doubt there will be rats about due to food from the fields around etc, and the river runs into a lake where I walk the dogs around. I just decide when the reminder comes through whether or not to have him done. I had him done this year due to the puppy at class dying of parvo - and as you don't know if the milk from the mother has stopped it and I didn't know about titre testing at the time, I thought better safe than sorry.

Like you I am on the fence about it as my eldest have had very few vaccs in their lives but that doesn't mean Louie will be the same.. I also need to read up on it too..


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> There's exactly the same amount of killer diseases now, as before vaccines were introduced, is it a trick question?


I don't remember asking a question. Of course there's the same number of killer diseases - mostly spread by non vaccinated canines.



> Yes, the fact that canine papillomas are associated with revaccination and Indie just happened to have one develop on her nose following her last round of annual vaccinations is pure co-incidence, along with all the other dogs that develop canine papillomas following revaccination, we must be kidding outselves and just be *anti* vaccination for the wrong reasons


Canine papilloma is a virus. It's spread by direct infection from another dog. So, please do explain how it's "associated with revaccination". It isn't. It's associated with coming into contact with infected dogs. The human term for it is 'wart'.



> If you read the WSAVA report, the guidelines for vaccinations are global, not just US specific, and the fact that they don't have lepto as a core vaccination makes me question why we think it's required for all areas of the UK. It also gives some information on the resistance of some pups who inherit their dam's resistance to disease.
> 
> Lots of folk who are *pro* vaccination, will tell you it's because rats are present in all parts of the UK, but it ain't as simple as that, the bacteria is also carried by cattle, and there are several types. It's actually more linked with water, and with humans it's referred to as Weils disease, something I very aware about as my work involves detailed examinations of culvers, where you obviously have rats and water together. So perhaps if I ever come across a shoot that requires sending my dogs through a culvert to retrieve a phessie, then I can say that the lepto vaccination they had was worth it (ps sarcasm there intended as the tone of some of the posts (not yours) is a bit ott)
> 
> Anyway, I still haven't decided for or against (is there a fence group) so am still going to read up before I subject my dogs to vaccinations they may not need.


The WSAVA report has been refuted by the majority of the different country members. That is to say, they don't agree with it and have their own protocols. In many instances it's heavily 'American'.

Rats pee wherever they like. It is estimated that wherever you are in the UK you are within 7 feet of a rat. Rats with leptospirosis excrete leptospirosa in their urine. This may be washed by rainwater into puddles. Dogs inhaling contaminated water whether original urine or contaminated rainwater are at risk.

It's linked with poor sanitation in humans - most human cases are from sewage or similar in the UK but humans can catch it from an infected dog.


----------



## Sarahnya (Oct 27, 2008)

I've always just had the pup and first year vaccine, so far I've never had any problems and have had dogs all my life.

I think it's very likely that vets encourage you to have vaccinations every year as like someone already posted, it is their bread and butter. Also if over vaccinating were found to cause autoimmune problems, which is now being suspected, there is no chance of them being sued as if this were the case with humans.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> I don't remember asking a question. Of course there's the same number of killer diseases - mostly spread by non vaccinated canines.
> 
> Canine papilloma is a virus. It's spread by direct infection from another dog. So, please do explain how it's "associated with revaccination". It isn't. It's associated with coming into contact with infected dogs. The human term for it is 'wart'.
> 
> ...


The WSAVA report most vets I've come across refer to is the 2006 version, which is, of course out of date. Leptospirosis isn't one form of bacteria, it's many, and it's more associated with water than rats alone, hence my reluctance to vaccinate without researching first. It's also associated with cattle, so I'll make sure Rhuna never has to retrieve one of those 

When Indie got her canine papilloma, straight after her annual boosters, I immediately referred back to one of the most knowledgeable people within my breed to pick their brains. Their immediate response was to question whether she'd recently been revaccinated, because it is heavily associated with revaccination. If you choose not to believe that, then that's your business, but after reading a little more into it, then I do believe the two very much can be associated and I'm not sure I want my dog developing sudden lumps anywhere to be quite honest!!


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> When Indie got her canine papilloma, straight after her annual boosters, I immediately referred back to_ one of the most knowledgeable people within my breed _to pick their brains. Their immediate response was to question whether she'd recently been revaccinated, because it is heavily associated with revaccination. If you choose not to believe that, then that's your business, but after reading a little more into it, then I do believe the two very much can be associated and I'm not sure I want my dog developing sudden lumps anywhere to be quite honest!!


Firstly, 'a knowledgeable person within your breed' isn't necessarily a medical expert. In fact, the vast majority of such 'experts' aren't. They may be well meaning but they are usually amateurs relying on hearsay. Canine papilloma virus isn't, as you claim, heavily associated with vaccination. It's a contagious virus, period. It may be that your vet used a contaminated syringe (unlikely), or his surgery wasn't properly cleaned (possible) or (most likely) you allowed your dog to come into contact with another dog that had the virus whilst in the vets. More likely still is that your dog was in contact with a carrier dog somewhere else at around the same time.

The claim that it's associated with vaccination is preposterous. Unless, of course, your expert can show me that something about giving an injection can actually manufacture a virus out of thin air. A virus is something dogs catch - it isn't _caused_ by anything.

It's this sort of totally unfounded stuff that people argue for that stops other people having vaccinations and putting their dogs at risk.

There is NO WAY that a vaccination can create a virus. Therefore, there is NO WAY that vaccinating your dog can give it papilloma virus.

Please check this out. Ask your vet. Ask someone else's vet. But do ask someone with veterinary knowledge not just 'a breeder'.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> Firstly, 'a knowledgeable person within your breed' isn't necessarily a medical expert. In fact, the vast majority of such 'experts' aren't. They may be well meaning but they are usually amateurs relying on hearsay. Canine papilloma virus isn't, as you claim, heavily associated with vaccination. It's a contagious virus, period. It may be that your vet used a contaminated syringe (unlikely), or his surgery wasn't properly cleaned (possible) or (most likely) you allowed your dog to come into contact with another dog that had the virus whilst in the vets. More likely still is that your dog was in contact with a carrier dog somewhere else at around the same time.
> 
> The claim that it's associated with vaccination is preposterous. Unless, of course, your expert can show me that something about giving an injection can actually manufacture a virus out of thin air. A virus is something dogs catch - it isn't _caused_ by anything.
> 
> ...


Ummmm, trust me, this person knows their stuff and has been behind an awful lot of the development of health testing, for various breeds, along with many other folk. Your dismissal of them is quite arrogant considering you know nothing about them, nor have any idea of their knowledge of Labradors or any other breeds for that matter!!

You believe which reports and bits of knowledge you'd like to agree with, and I'll keep on researching and reading up thank you very much.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Ummmm, trust me, this person knows their stuff and has been behind an awful lot of the development of health testing, for various breeds, along with many other folk. Your dismissal of them is quite arrogant considering you know nothing about them, nor have any idea of their knowledge of Labradors or any other breeds for that matter!!
> 
> You believe which reports and bits of knowledge you'd like to agree with, and I'll keep on researching and reading up thank you very much.


You may consider my dismissal arrogant. Sadly, your 'friend' obviously has zero medical knowledge. If he/she does please get them to tell you and then you tell us how exactly giving an injection creates a virus. That would be Nobel prize winning stuff.

Frankly, it's absolute rubbish to even suggest it and I'm surprised you find it so easy to accept. But, it is the sort of really stupid argument which is aired by people who are against vaccination.

If you are going to 'keep reading up' perhaps you can find some evidence to support the claim that a virus has somehow been created by giving an injection. I can't wait to see it. Until then I'll continue to believe the current state of ALL medical knowledge on the subject - i.e. you can't just 'create' viruses.

Arrogant - no. Factual - yes.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> You may consider my dismissal arrogant. Sadly, your 'friend' obviously has zero medical knowledge. If he/she does please get them to tell you and then you tell us how exactly giving an injection creates a virus. That would be Nobel prize winning stuff.
> 
> Frankly, it's absolute rubbish to even suggest it and I'm surprised you find it so easy to accept. But, it is the sort of really stupid argument which is aired by people who are against vaccination.
> 
> ...


Wow, and I thought I was up myself at times when I got a bee under my bonnet 

As I said before, you choose what you want to believe, and let other folk get on without calling them names and making assumptions thank you.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

I really cant plough through all this and not sure if I had replied or not as we seem to have the same 'discussion' so frequently.

the only reason that people get off with not vaccinating is because most people do vaccinate. If ever the balance changes there will be lots of very dead dogs. I will continue vaccinating having seen for myself the results of undervaccinated (not unvaccinated) dogs dying of distemper because they no longer had any cover.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Wow, and I thought I was up myself at times when I got a bee under my bonnet
> 
> As I said before, you choose what you want to believe, and let other folk get on without calling them names and making assumptions thank you.


It's not a case of 'what I believe'. It's a straightforward scientific fact - you can't create a virus from having an injection.

Your insistence that I'm somehow wrong about this - or that I'm making assumptions - requires proof. If you prove to me that I am, in any way, wrong then I'll happily back down. In the interim I've asked you for proof that your knowledgeable friend/breeder backs up their statement. Please don't duck out - or try and deflect the question. If an injection can create a virus (which you claimed happened to you and your breeder can confirm it) please provide some reliable, documented proof.

Until that time I'll assume that your statement about your dog contracting a papilloma virus had absolutely nothing to do with his vaccination but was simply a sad coincidence.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> It's not a case of 'what I believe'. It's a straightforward scientific fact - you can't create a virus from having an injection.
> 
> Your insistence that I'm somehow wrong about this - or that I'm making assumptions - requires proof. If you prove to me that I am, in any way, wrong then I'll happily back down. In the interim I've asked you for proof that your knowledgeable friend/breeder backs up their statement. Please don't duck out - or try and deflect the question. If an injection can create a virus (which you claimed happened to you and your breeder can confirm it) please provide some reliable, documented proof.
> 
> Until that time I'll assume that your statement about your dog contracting a papilloma virus had absolutely nothing to do with his vaccination but was simply a sad coincidence.


You maybe need to read my posts again, and really think twice about replying in such an obtuse manner. I haven't said vaccinations are the cause of canine papillomas, nor have I said my friend who is very knowledgeable about health issues, has said so either. You've just put two and two together and made five, sad coincidence really 

I find it absolutely despicable that just because some people would like to do their research and do what's best for their dogs, that others, who feel they are in the 100% majority right, feel they have the God given right to look down their nose and post that what they believe is right, no matter what. I accept you have an opinion based on what you *know*, I don't agree with you, and I find your mannerisms quite rude actually.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Yes, the fact that canine papillomas are associated with revaccination and Indie just happened to have one develop on her nose following her last round of annual vaccinations is pure co-incidence, along with all the other dogs that develop canine papillomas following revaccination, we must be kidding outselves and just be *anti* vaccination for the wrong reasons





> When Indie got her canine papilloma, straight after her annual boosters, I immediately referred back to one of the most knowledgeable people within my breed to pick their brains. Their immediate response was to question whether she'd recently been revaccinated, because it is heavily associated with revaccination.





Sleeping_Lion said:


> You maybe need to read my posts again, and really think twice about replying in such an obtuse manner. I haven't said vaccinations are the cause of canine papillomas, nor have I said my friend who is very knowledgeable about health issues, has said so either.


Spot the disparity.

I have no interest at all in your opinion of my mannerisms. I do have real issues when you don't tell the truth. Especially as all the arguments you make (despite claiming to sit on the fence) are those that are on the side of persuading people that vaccinations cause problems when there's no proof of your assertions whatsoever.

Yet when you are caught out you try and deflect it by saying that I'm rude to you.

It is quite clear from the quotes above what you said. So, I've read them again and I'll ask you - again - to provide any sort of proof that there's a link.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> Spot the disparity.
> 
> I have no interest at all in your opinion of my mannerisms. I do have real issues when you don't tell the truth. Especially as all the arguments you make (despite claiming to sit on the fence) are those that are on the side of persuading people that vaccinations cause problems when there's no proof of your assertions whatsoever.
> 
> ...


I'd like to give you a lesson in reading and comprehension, let's just take the word associated for example, so, I had a bad experience with Indie, and because I'd read about other bad experiences, I associate this with her boosters.

Caused by: haven't posted that, perhaps you'd like to expand??

And yes, you are up yourself and I can't be bothered to be honest, I think you're another candidate for the ignore function. If you honestly had any positive input without trying to belittle people who happen to have different beliefs, you might be worth giving the time of day. Not the case for me I'm afraid. See ya!


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I'd like to give you a lesson in reading and comprehension, let's just take the word associated for example, so, I had a bad experience with Indie, and because I'd read about other bad experiences, I associate this with her boosters.
> 
> Caused by: haven't posted that, perhaps you'd like to expand??
> 
> And yes, you are up yourself and I can't be bothered to be honest, I think you're another candidate for the ignore function. If you honestly had any positive input without trying to belittle people who happen to have different beliefs, you might be worth giving the time of day. Not the case for me I'm afraid. See ya!


It's absolutely clear from your previous posts that you are saying that the papilloma virus is a result of vaccination. Trying to wheedle your way out by using semantics is risible. Why not be honest? All you have done is try and express some sort of danger association with vaccination that simply doesn't exist.

In what way is papilloma virus 'associated' with vaccination? There is no 'association'.

Your _beliefs_ are irrelevant. It's not about _belief_. It's about hard facts. You can_ believe_ all the other rubbish too - that vaccinations cause cancer, that dogs will automatically be immune to the major diseases because they inherit immunity from their mothers, or any of the other equally silly theories. But _beliefs_ don't alter the facts:

80 million dogs vaccinated. 7000 provable reactions.

Viruses are not caused by vaccinations. Nor is their any 'association' between the two.

Some viruses in the human population eliminated by vaccination programmes. So, yes, vaccination is effective.

Those are facts. The only fact on the non-vaccination side is that people who haven't done so may have been lucky enough to avoid the diseases - mostly because all of the dogs that have been vaccinated aren't passing on the disease.

However, as a matter of fact, yet again, where the human population is shunning vaccination there are outbreaks of some human diseases. Measles is now occurring in specific areas where there has been poor vaccine take up. It is likely that the dog population will follow the same pattern.

You can _believe_ what you want. But taking your_ beliefs_ against the weight of hard, verifiable evidence as an argument for non-vaccination, despite your outrage, is totally unconvincing.


----------



## Kazastan (Sep 2, 2011)

Extract from chapter of *Fear of the Invisible*

From official US transcripts of recent unreported meetings of US and UK vaccine safety scientists

All ways of making vaccines have their dangers. Dr Hayflick, a well-reputed scientist involved for many years with vaccines, described how the Primary Culture' method of taking cells from sacrificed animals' or bird embryos ran into problems when it became apparent that these cells contained many unwanted viruses, some of which were lethal to humans.' He noted: Latent viruses were such a problem with primary monkey kidney cells that a worldwide moratorium on the licensing of all polio virus vaccines was called in 1967 because of death and illnesses that occurred in monkey kidney workers and vaccine manufacturing facilities'. The contaminating virus then blamed was the deadly Ebola. This was most serious, but again I could find no record of the public being informed about this suspension or the Ebola.

The top UK government expert present at this conference, Dr Phil Minor of the National Institute of Biological Standards and Control, added that the polio vaccine had originally been so polluted that it's doses contained as much monkey virus as poliovirus! I had no idea that so much monkey virus was in this vaccine given to hundreds of millions of children. Then there was another shock for me. I had been assured two years earlier at the SV40 Workshop that the polio vaccine was no longer contaminated with SV40 - and consequently I had so assured the UK public in our resulting Channel 4 television documentary. Now I learnt I had been misled and consequently had seriously misinformed the public. Scientists reported to this meeting that SV40 sequences' remained in the poliovirus seed used for the current polio vaccines.

AND MMR

Dr Heyrick told of how the eminent Dr Maurice Hilleman, the scientist I had earlier interviewed about the MMR vaccine, had used what he thought was an intestine-based cell line' to make an adenovirus vaccine, only to discover to his horror that his cell line had been invaded and taken over by the aggressive cervical cancer virus known as HeLa.

I also learnt that DNA fragments contaminating vaccine lots might be from dead cells but nevertheless remained extremely active and dangerous. Dr Golding feared they might combine with other genetic codes contaminating the vaccine lots - and thus create a mutant viral strain that could even get in the individual doses of vaccine.

The removal of this contaminating DNA has proved impossible. The US government in 1986 recommended a weight limit for contaminating DNA of 100 picograms per vaccine dose. But the manufacturers could not meet this safety recommendation, as was explained at this Workshop. Their failure again led the government to relax its standards, applying the 100 picograms limit solely to vaccines produced from cancerous cells, and allowing one hundred times as much contaminating DNA (10 nanograms) in vaccines produced on other types of cells. But the meeting was told that vaccine manufacturers now admitted they could not meet even this lower standard of purity.' Thus high levels of hazardous DNA pollution remain in many vaccines.

This failure was a great concern to the meeting. Many of the doctors present worried that such a great amount of DNA fragments might cause viral mutations in the vaccines. Naked' DNA (with no protein coat) is known to be highly reactive. Dr. Phil Krause calculated; If there are 10 nanograms of residual DNA per dose, which is the current WHO recommendation, and if two doses were recommended per child, as is the case with MMR vaccine, and the infectivity of viral DNA in the vaccine were comparable to that of purified polyoma virus DNA, we can calculate the theoretical infectivity risk. ... For a vaccine that is universally administered to the 4 million children born in the US every year, this would represent about 500 infections per year, clearly an unacceptable rate.'

This shocked me. If he was right, and it seemed he was (none of the experts present questioned his calculations), this surely meant the current MMR vaccine is potentially very dangerous. Krause also had only added up the risk from the one vaccine. What when to it is added the contaminating DNA in all the other vaccines?

and later on at the vaccine safety meeting...

Dr Krause also stated: Of course, in the context of DNA vaccines, we are talking about injecting even larger quantities of DNA into people.' He was speaking here about the new DNA vaccines being developed as safer' than our current vaccines.

Another important safety issue was raised. What would this contaminating DNA do when it was injected into humans in vaccines? Could it change our own DNA? Could it cause cancers - or autoimmune diseases?' When you consider that almost everyone of these vaccines is injected right into the tissue that is the preferred site for DNA gene therapy ... I think you couldn't do much more to get the DNA expressed [to get contaminating DNA taken up by human cells] than to inject it into a muscle in the way it's being done.' Another speaker lamely admitted: I chaired the committee that licensed the chickenpox vaccine, and it [residual DNA] was actually an issue that we considered at that time. We looked among recipients of the vaccine for evidence of an autoimmune response associated with the DNA included in that vaccine.' He then added: Actually, we didn't look, we asked the company to look and they did not find one.'

Walid Heneine of the CDC asked: No one has mentioned how much DNA we now have in the licensed vaccines. I mean, how much are we being exposed to? Do we have any idea how much is in the viral vaccines, like yellow fever, measles, mumps vaccines? Do the regulators have an idea from the manufacturers, how much DNA there is?'

DR. Loewer replied: I have no idea. Nobody that I know has mentioned it.' Dr Becky Sheets from CBER then confirmed the suspicions of many when she responded. I think that the vast majority of licensed vaccines, U.S. licensed vaccines, have not been tested for residual DNA. The few that have been tested are the ones that have been licensed in the last few years, including varicella and Hepatitis A.'

She then added: I wanted to respond to an earlier question regarding how purified are live viral vaccines [like MMR] - [the answer is] minimally purified.'

These presentations made some of the experts very uneasy. Dr. Desrosiers stated: I don't worry so much about the agents that one can test for. I worry about the agents that you can't test for, that you don't know about. Dr Greenberg agreed, He said he was: worried also about the agents that aren't known'. He continued: There are still countless thousands of undiscovered viruses, proteins, and similar particles. We have only identified a very small part of the microbial world - and we can only test for those we have identified. Thus the vaccine cultures could contain many unknown particles.' Another doctor said: As time goes on, of course, new viruses are discovered and new problems arise. The foamy virus has been [recently] identified as one that we should be really sure is absent from these vaccines.'

The Chairman of the Workshop then asked Dr Maxine Linial: Maxine, does anybody know if vaccines have been checked for foamy virus contamination?'

She replied: As far as I know, no.'

You mean nobody has looked or as far as you know?

She responded; I don't know. There are very few reagents. I mean, there are reagents for the so-called human or chimp foamy virus, but as far as 1 know, there are no good antibody reagents.' In other words, they could not tell if the vaccines contained foamy viruses. (Reagents' are antibodies to known virus particles.)

The experts voiced other concerns. And I'll be honest and say that I'm surprised that primary African green monkey kidney cells continue to be used, and I'm a little bit disappointed that FDA and whoever is involved had not had a more serious effort to move away from primary African green monkey kidneys. We all know that there are a number of neurodegenerative conditions and other conditions where viral causes have been suspected for years and no viral agent identified. Maybe they're caused by viruses, but maybe they're not.'

Another doctor said: We need to consider again some of the issues of residual DNA. Is it oncogenic? We had a lot of experience with chicken leucosis viruses in chick embryo cells beginning back in 1960. And the thing about them is they are not easy to detect because they don't produce any pathogenic effect.'

An unnamed participant added; I have to express some bewilderment [at this talk of dangerous contamination], simply because, as I mentioned last night, the vero cell, which under many conditions is neoplastic [cancerous], has been licensed for the production of IPV and OPV [the common polio vaccines] in the United States, Thailand, Belgium and France.' The current polio vaccines thus run the risk of having oncogenes in them. Again this was news to me. I had no idea that the polio vaccine might be grown on cancer cells.

Dr. Rosenberg added, unreassuringly: When one uses neoplastic cells as substrates for vaccine development, one can inadvertently get virus to virus, or virus to cellular particle, interactions that could have unknown biological consequences.'

Dr. Tom Broker said we had to be concerned about papilloma virus infections' in the vaccine ... One of the more remarkable facts of this family of diseases is that since 1980 more people have died of HPV disease than have died of AIDS.'

Dr. Phil Minor, from the UK National Institute of Biological Standards and Control, told of another disaster. Hepatitis B was transmitted by yellow fever vaccine back in the 1940s. The hepatitis B actually came from the stabilizers of the albumin that was actually put in there to keep it stable'

He continued: For many years, rabies vaccines were produced in mouse brain or sheep brain. They have quite serious consequences, but not necessarily associated with adventitial agents. You can get encephalitis as a result of immune responses to the non-invasic protein.' Influenza is an actuated vaccine. Again, it's not made on SPF eggs, that is, specified pathogen-free eggs. They are avian leukosis virus free, but they are not free of all the other pathogens that you would choose to exclude from the measles vaccine production system.'

Dr Minor, the UK's top vaccine safety officer, then added: So even today then you have to bear in mind that a large amount of vaccine that's made is made on really quite crude materials, from an adventitious agent point of view. It's not a trivial usage. In fact, when consider what vaccines are actually made on these days, they are quite primitive in some respects.'

These warnings were coming from a doctor working for the UK government who asked me at a later meeting not to pass on vaccine information that would alarm parents.

He went on to discuss SV40 and the polio vaccine. It's a very common polyoma virus of old world monkeys, and particularly rhesus macaques. The difficulty with this was that, when the rhesus macaque monkeys are sacrificed and a primary monkey kidney culture made from him or her, as the case may be, a silent infection is set up. So there is evidence of infection [found] just by looking at the cultures. In fact, these cultures can throw out as much SV40 as they do polio [virus].' The problem was that the cell cultures didn't show any sign of having defects, when they were actually infected with SV40.'

It seemed that SV40, and its accompanying proteins and genetic codes, would never have got into so many humans if they had not contaminated the vaccine - and that they were only dangerous when moved into a species for which their presence was not natural - such as into humans and into cynomolgus (African Green) monkeys.

Dr Minor continued: Wild caught monkeys were being used extensively in vaccine production. Up to a half of the cultures would have been thrown away because of adventitious agent contamination, mainly foamy virus, but certainly other things as well.'

But, they could not be certain what viruses were present. They could be mistaking SV40 for other viruses. Why? He explained because antibody tests are used to test for its presence - and such tests are not all that accurate. Antibodies don't only react to a specific viral protein. They may cross-react' against other things. What you could also argue is that you are not picking up SV40 specific antibodies at all, and they could be other human polyomas [viruses] like the BK or the JC, and it's cross-reacting antibodies that we're picking up. I think that is still a thing that needs to be resolved.'

The point about this long story which I have just been telling you about SV40 is that SV40 was a problem between 1955 and 1962, and it's now 1999, and we still don't really know what was going on. So if you actually make a mistake, it's really quite serious. It may keep you occupied for the rest of your working life. 

Then Dr Minor made a still more alarming admission: Now the regulatory authorities in the room will be well aware of a large number of other examples of this type which don't actually get published. I think that's not so good. I think this stuff really should be out there in the public literature.

Another UK expert then took the stand. It was Dr. Robertson from NIBSC and, as he explained, for those of you who don't know, NIBSC is CBER's cousin from across the pond in the U.K.' In other words, it was the top UK vaccine safety monitoring body. He started off on a reassuring note: There is no evidence for any increase in the incidence of childhood cancers since the onset of measles, mumps vaccination.' But he then said: But, I think, as a scientific community, unless we do something at least for the future, we might be in a very difficult situation to defend certain issues. If I confronted some of the violent ideologically pure Greens in our country, [telling them what we have been discussing here]: I'm sure they would say: Shut it down because this is unsafe, totally unsafe.'

It was thus that I learnt that our vaccines are a veritable soup, made up not just of viruses that should or should not be there, but also thousands of bits of viruses and of cells, DNA and RNA genetic codes, proteins, enzymes, chemicals and perhaps oncogenes and prions. The vaccine was monitored for the presence of only a very few of these particles and vaccine lots are thrown away only if these are found.

In other words, the vaccines we give our children are liquids filled with a host of unknown particles, most of which came from the cells of non-humans: from chickens, monkeys, or even from cancer cells. Truly we do not know what we are doing or what are the long-term consequences.


----------

