Annual Vaccines

That is what I found in mine....it just wasn't necessary to "add" to what was already present so to speak...

 

If the antibodies are already present, any antigen that you add is going to be reacted to anyway, and any potential effects negated. That (if I'm not mistaken) is the reason vaccination is ineffective when maternal antibodies are still present.

 

I can only repeat what I have said here several times.
The veterinary profession, greatly to its credit, has voluntarily cut WAY back on vaccines to the point where we are giving about 20% of the vaccines we gave 20 years ago. Between the extended vaccine schedules and the concept of 'core' and 'optional' vaccines tailoring a schedule to an animal's specific needs, we are far removed from the 'every pet, every vaccine, every year' of the old days.
No one made us do this. Research showed we were overvaccinating, so we cut back regardless of economic considerations. Perhaps we are still overvaccinating, time will tell, but we are open minded about it.
Compare this to human medicine, where, I believe, children now get vaccinated for something like 26 things, all mandated by law so the decision is out of the physician's hands. No consideration of risk or exposure, and with major political input form both the AMA and the drug manufacturers.

 

I keep telling people this when discussing the way vaccination protocols have been handled by the medical profession. You are right: it is very much to the credit of the veterinary profession that they would cut back on one of their prime sources of income for the benefit of their patients.

I get the impression sometimes that no research is being done on the possible harmful effects of vaccines simply because there is now a broad consensus that they are perfectly harmless and that, at any rate, it would be counterproductive to find out that they caused any appreciable harm because it would lead to fewer people being vaccinated. Reminds me of a young woman who got into a car accident and was wondering what she was going to do. "Your insurance should take care of it," I said. "But I'm not sure that I have insurance!" she moaned. "I don't think I paid my bill on time!" I told her, "Just call them up and ask if the policy is still good." "I can't!" she cried. "Why not?" I asked. "Because ..." she wailed, "What if they tell me I'm not insured?"

 

The last time I refused a Distemper vaccine, my vet asked if I wanted to titer. I asked him, "have you looked up the prices of your titers?" "no, hold on... oh, $92? yeah, that's not worth it." Right.

I did finally just break down and give a dog a Lyme vaccine. He goes in for the second one in a couple of weeks.

 

The question of how long immunity to canine distemper, parvo, and rabies lasts after vaccination is a good one.
At my first job as a veterinarian in upstate NY, over 40 years ago,distemper was still occasionally seen in owned pets. My boss told me 'you see distemper in two kinds of dogs - puppies, and old dogs who were vaccinated as puppies and never got any boosters.' (These were different times- that was a large population.) And I respect the experience of a long time practitioner over untested theory.
Clearly the protection lasts well over three years. But apparently it does run out eventually. (Compare to tetanus in humans.)
So why don't they just find out? Sure, all you have to do si keep a colony of a couple hundred beagles at a university for 10 years for the sole purpose of drawing blood from them once a year. Of course, there are other experimental models, such as titering all dogs that come into a large group of hospitals and comparing titers to time since last vaccination, but these are similarly impractical. Not very many dogs come in from responsible owners who haven't had a vaccination in 6 years.
Add to this the fact that, in practical terms, if you set 'reminders' at much more than three years you may as well not have any boostering plan at all. People move, they change veterinarians, heck in 7 years most veterinarians have moved on for one reason or another. If you say 'We will booster this dogs vaccines every 7 years', you are saying 'We will not be boostering this dog's vaccines' for the majority of clients.
Putting that all together, it would appear that a three year schedule is reasonable, not onerous, not dangerous to the patient or overly costly, and a fair way to keep these horrendous diseases right where we want them... gone.

 

I work in pharmaceutical research. I can tell you that at least in humans, vaccines are being tested for safety all the time.

 

Yes, yes, and yes. I 100% agree.