# Kris L. Christine -- Introduction



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

Greetings! 

My name is Kris L. Christine. I live in Maine and am the Founder and Co-Trustee with Dr. W. Jean Dodds of *THE RABIES CHALLENGE FUND* (*www.RabiesChallengeFund.org*). My precious canine companion, Meadow, developed a malignant mast cell tumor directly on the site of his rabies shot at the age of 6 (syringe hole still visible in the tumor) and died in July 2007 after repeated surgeries failed to yield clean margins and the cancer metasticized throughout his body.

It is my goal to make available to all dog owners the scientific data on the known durations of immunity for canine vaccines and the adverse reactions associated with them so that they can make informed vaccine decisions for their beloved companions. In 2004 I launched a successful effort to change Maine's rabies immunization regulations for dogs from 2 to 3 years and insert a medical exemption clause; later that year Representative Peter Rines introduced the nation's first pet vaccine disclosure legislation on my behalf. Working with local pet owners in my capacity as Founder of the RCF, we've had successful efforts to change state/municipal rabies laws to the 3 year national standard in Cheyenne, Wyoming; Wichita, Kanasas; and the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Maine, Rhode Island, and West Virginia. Currently I am helping to get medical exemption legislation passed in the 37 states which do not have them. 

The Rabies Challenge Fund has a page on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Rabies-Challenge-Fund/119106981159?v=wall&ref=ts where regular updates on rabies vaccine legislation is posted and information on canine vaccines is published under the "Discussions" section for anyone who is interested.

Below are links to excellent information on veterinary vaccines from authoritative sources:

*Duration of Immunity to Canine Vaccines: What We Know and Don't Know*, Dr. Ronald Schultz http://www.cedarbayvet.com/duration_of_immunity.htm 

*What Everyone Needs to Know about Canine Vaccines,* Dr. Ronald Schultz 
http://www.puliclub.org/CHF/AKC2007Conf/What Everyone Needs to Know About Canine Vaccines.htm 

*Age and Long-term Protective Immunity in Dogs and Cats*, Dr. Ronald Schultz et als., _Journal of Comparative Pathology_ January 2010 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WHW-4XVBB71-1&_user=10&_coverDate=01%2F31%2F2010&_rdoc=17&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%236861%232010%23998579999.8998%231578454%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=6861&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=24&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=fb57fe5e84a086c6b1fa65abea55dbd8 

*Genetically Engineered and Modified Live Virus Vaccines;Public Health and Animal Welfare Concerns* by Michael W. Fox BVetMed,PhD,DSc.MRCVS 
http://www.twobitdog.com/drfox/specialreport_Article.aspx?ID=273f53f4-bcdc-474f-a189-cca1d1a81c38

*Vaccination: An Overview* Dr. Melissa Kennedy, DVM360 http://veterinarycalendar.dvm360.com/avhc/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=568351

*World Small Animal Veterinary Association 2007 Vaccine Guidelines* http://www.wsava.org/SAC.htm Scroll down to Vaccine Guidelines 2007 (PDF) 

The *2003 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines *are accessible online at http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm .

The *2006 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines *are downloadable in PDF format at 
http://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocuments/VaccineGuidelines06Revised.pdf

Veterinarian, Dr. Robert Rogers,has an excellent presentation on veterinary vaccines at http://www.newvaccinationprotocols.com/

October 1, 2002 _DVM Newsletter_ article entitled,* AVMA, AAHA to Release Vaccine Positions*, http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=35171

July 1, 2003 _DVM Newsletter _article entitled, *What Do We Tell Our Clients?*, Developing thorough plan to educate staff on changing vaccine protocols essential for maintaining solid relationships with clients and ensuring quality care http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=61696

July 1, 2003, _DVM Newsletter _ article, *Developing Common Sense Strategies for Fiscal Responsibility: Using an interactive template to plan service protocol changes *http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=61694

_Animal Wellness Magazine_ Article Vol. 8 Issue 6, *How Often Does he REALLY Need A Rabies Shot* Animal Wellness Magazine - devoted to natural health in animals

*The Rabies Challenge* Animal Wise Radio Interview
Listen to Animal Wise (scroll down to The Rabies Challenge 12/9/07)

*The Vaccine Challenge * Animal Talk Naturally Online Radio Show » The Vaccine Challenge - Show #91

Rabies Prevention -- United States, 1991 Recommendations of the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP), *Center for Disease Control's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly* March 22, 1991 / 40(RR03);1-19 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00041987.htm *"A fully vaccinated dog or cat is unlikely to become infected with rabies, [/color]although rare cases have been reported (48). In a nationwide study of rabies among dogs and cats in 1988, only one dog and two cats that were vaccinated contracted rabies (49). All three of these animals had received only single doses of vaccine; no documented vaccine failures occurred among dogs or cats that had received two vaccinations. "[/color]*


----------



## sarahaf (Aug 17, 2009)

I am terribly sorry that you lost your pet in this way. 

Since you have concluded that your pet became ill as a result of the rabies vaccination, and are now advocating a reduction in the frequency with which the vaccine is administered, anyone's decision to support you (as you know) is not just about your loss, but about a public health issue. Support of a change in the vaccination schedule should not be undertaken lightly because of the serious public health implications for humans as well as non-human animals. 

It would be important to know not only whether the rabies vaccine might be effective on a less frequent schedule, but also whether there is a credible scientific mechanism whereby the rabies vaccine could cause a malignant tumor to develop, and what peer-reviewed scientific studies have demonstrated an association (including any negative studies that failed to support the association).

I caution the forum membership not to support this position without consulting someone well qualified to interpret the scientific findings (when in doubt, by talking with your own vet, contacting the AVMA or the CDC). We live in a society where I'm afraid there is a growing mistrust toward scientific and medical professionals. The problem with this is, again, that only someone with a scientific knowledge base is qualified to interpret scientific findings. If you choose to make your own judgment, you risk making a grave error. Data from isolated studies can be taken out of context and misrepresented by non-scientists. 

I also do not give much weight to endorsement/support by a small minority of professionals of any practice that goes against the practices advocated by the majority of professionals in any field of medicine or veterinary medicine (what is known as the standard of care for the profession). The reason why I take this position is that there will always be a few people practicing in a field who take unscientific viewpoints, who simply do not understand the science, and/or who practice in unscientific, and sometimes even unethical, ways.* The standard of care should be changed not because a few people in the field advocate the idea, but because the majority of the scientific data (as interpreted by people well qualified to interpret that literature) supports such a change.

*I should clarify that I am NOT assuming this is true of any of the professionals who are involved in the effort Kris is discussing; this is a general-purpose caution not to reason by authority and assume that support/endorsement by an individual or individuals with a credential (such as a DVM) is automatically proof (in and of itself) of the validity of a position on a medical/scientific/public health issue. Again--look for the data, ask professionals and relevant professional organizations and public health agencies.


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

sarahaf said:


> Support of a change in the vaccination schedule should not be undertaken lightly because of the serious public health implications for humans as well as non-human animals.
> It would be important to know not only whether the rabies vaccine might be effective on a less frequent schedule, but also whether there is a credible scientific mechanism whereby the rabies vaccine could cause a malignant tumor to develop, and what peer-reviewed scientific studies have demonstrated an association (including any negative studies that failed to support the association).


Under the Health section, I have posted the abstract on the study published in the Journal of Veterinary Medicine documenting fibrosarcomas at the presumed injection sites of rabies vaccinations in dogs. The following quote is from the full study text: *"In both dogs and cats, the development of necrotizing panniculitis at sites of rabies vaccine administration was first observed by Hendrick & Dunagan (1992)."*

Vaccinal adverse reactions are becoming more recognized and acknowledged in the veterinary community -- in an August 1, 2008 article in _DVM360 _entitled *Vaccination: An Overview,* http://veterinarycalendar.dvm360.com/avhc/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=568351 Dr. Melissa Kennedy states that of the two types of vaccinal adverse reactions: 

Adverse reactions have also become a major concern in small animal medicine. .... These fall into two general categories. The first is immediate hypersensitivity. This may be a local or systemic response, and is due to pre-existing antibody to the agent. This is the classic "allergic reaction" to the vaccine and can be life-threatening. The second is a delayed response, requiring days of longer to develop. The vaccine, seen as foreign, elicits a significant inflammatory response and is especially true for adjuvanted vaccines. This response can manifest as a granuloma, *or more seriously, a fibrosarcoma .[/color]

Further, she reports that: The likelihood of adverse reactions in dogs has been found to correlate with the size of the dog and the number of inoculations given, with higher risk associated with small size and multiple inoculations.[/color]

As you are aware, the rabies, leptospira, and lyme vaccines are all killed, adjuvanted vaccines. In 1999, "The World Health Organization (WHO) in 1999 classified veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk,"[/color] (The actual reference is IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Volume 74, World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Feb 23-Mar 2, 1999, p 24, 305,310.)

In 1992, the results of a challenge study led by Michel Aubert demonstrating that dogs were immune to a rabies challenge 5 years after vaccination was published in Scientific Technical Review (Rev. sci.tech. Off. int. Epiz.) 1992, 11 (3), 735-760. The study is entitled, PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF RABIES ANTIBODIES IN CATS AND DOGS* AND RESULTS OF A SURVEY ON RABIES VACCINATION AND QUARANTINE FOR DOMESTIC CARNIVORA IN WESTERN EUROPE . If you would like a copy of the text, please e-mail me at [email protected]. 

Dr. Ronald Schultz's serological studies on the rabies vaccine have shown that dogs have antibody titer counts at levels known to confer immunity to rabies 7 years after vaccination. 

On page 13 of the 2003 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines http://leerburg.com/special_report.htm it states: The minimum DOI for killed rabies vaccine based on challenge studies is 3 years; based on antibody titers, it is considered to be up to 7 years (Table 2). [/color]

I absolutely agree that all pet owner should do their homework and read the scientific data on vaccines before choosing a schedule for their animals.*


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

Forgot to add one more piece of information regarding the duration of immunity of the canine rabies vaccine from the Center for Disease Control. In a nationwide study conducted on all confirmed cases of rabies in dogs and cats, there was not one incident of an animal which had received 2 properly administered rabies immunizations. This strongly suggests that 2 properly administered rabies vaccines confers a lifetime of immunity in animals which mount an immunological response to the vaccine.

Rabies Prevention -- United States, 1991 Recommendations of the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP), *Center for Disease Control's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly* March 22, 1991 / 40(RR03);1-19 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00041987.htm *"A fully vaccinated dog or cat is unlikely to become infected with rabies, [/color]*although rare cases have been reported (48). In a nationwide study of rabies among dogs and cats in 1988, only one dog and two cats that were vaccinated contracted rabies (49). All three of these animals had received only single doses of vaccine; *no documented vaccine failures occurred among dogs or cats that had received two vaccinations. "[/color]*


----------



## sarahaf (Aug 17, 2009)

Kris,

Thanks for the info. I'm familiar with IARC monographs--kind of dense to wade through, but I've done it before when similar questions have come up on various topics, so will definitely check out their data. Again, I'm so sorry that you came to this issue through hard experience. I think it's very worthwhile to consider adverse effects. My caution to the general readership is, again, that it of course (as you know) is a matter of carefully weighing the broader data concerning risks and benefits because rabies is such an important public health issue. With any vaccine, you are weighing not only the severity but the prevalence of adverse effects against the risks of reducing or eliminating vaccination (also considering both prevalence and severity of risk).

Sarah


----------



## sarahaf (Aug 17, 2009)

A couple of clarifications (correct me if I am misreading the literature): from what I can tell, the potential carcinogen in the rabies vaccine is only a known risk to cats, not dogs. The potential carcinogen is not the vaccine itself, but the adjuvant added to some (but not all) rabies vaccine products. Adjuvant is added to enhance the immune response (and, from what I can tell, extend the duration of immunity). Rabies vaccines with the adjuvant added last longer and are labeled for a longer re-vaccination interval of 3 years. Vaccinations which are free of this adjuvant are available, but are labeled for shorter interval of 1 year. 

You quote the IARC monographs as classifying veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk. Actually, class IV is the lowest risk. Class 3 is defined as "not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity in humans," and class 4 is defined as "probably not carcinogenic to humans." I copy below:

"Agents Classified by the IARC Monographs, Volumes 1–100

Group 1 Carcinogenic to humans 107 agents 
Group 2A Probably carcinogenic to humans 58 
Group 2B Possibly carcinogenic to humans 249 
Group 3 Not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans 512 
Group 4 Probably not carcinogenic to humans 1 "

In this case, the IARC concluded, "There is _limited evidence_ in _cats_ for the carcinogenicity of certain feline vaccines containing adjuvants" (italics mine)

You correctly quote the CDC as noting that there have been no documented cases of vaccine failure for animals that had received two vaccinations. However, because re-vaccination is currently required by law, I am not sure how many animals are really represented by this data, so I am not sure it is accurate to conclude that this strongly suggests that two properly administered vaccines confers a lifetime of immunity. 

Moreover, the CDC currently recommends re-vaccination at the interval stipulated by the manufacturer of the vaccine. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5603a1.htm This is also the policy of the American Veterinary Medical Association. http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/rabies_control.asp


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

sarahaf said:


> A couple of clarifications (correct me if I am misreading the literature): from what I can tell, the potential carcinogen in the rabies vaccine is only a known risk to cats, not dogs.


Research published has indicated that dogs also develop fibrosarcomas at vaccination sites. Please see this link http://www.vizslaforums.com/index.php/topic,917.0.html . It may be that they do not develop them as frequently as felines, but they are still at risk of developing fibrosarcomas from overvaccinaton, as the quote from Dr. Kennedy above indicates.


> The potential carcinogen is not the vaccine itself, but the adjuvant added to some (but not all) rabies vaccine products.


 There are no non-adjuvanted rabies vaccines for dogs licensed in the US at this point, only for felines. Adjuvanted vaccines are the ones known for causing the most adverse reactions.



> You quote the IARC monographs as classifying veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk. Actually, class IV is the lowest risk.


 The quote is direct from the IARC monograph article cited and it states that Class IV is the highest risk. If you e-mail me at [email protected], I'd be happy to send you the page so you can see it for yourself. The entire paragraph is as follows:

*Vaccine-associated sarcoma (VAS): *The issue that galvanized the veterinary community and stimulated us to reassess vaccination practices, particularly in cats, has been the emergence of vaccine-associated sarcomas. This often fatal consequence of vaccination did not appear in cats in significant numbers until killed, adjuvanted rabies and feline leukemia virus vaccines were introduced. * The World Health Organization (WHO) in 1999 classified veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk. *Vaccine adjuvants can induce chronic inflammation at injection sites that can lead to sarcoma development in genetically predisposed cats. Aluminium is not the only component that is associated with VAS, however, aluminum serves as the "smoking gun" in injection-site tumors because it has been identified in macrophases in sarcomas and no other commonly used injectable agents contain this material. The histologic appearance of VAS is classical because they have a significant lymphocytic and plasmacytic infiltrate. The etiology can be further confirmed with immunohistochemical studies.[/color]



> CDC currently recommends re-vaccination at the interval stipulated by the manufacturer of the vaccine. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5603a1.htm This is also the policy of the American Veterinary Medical Association. http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/rabies_control.asp


 Yes, and studies indicate that the rabies vaccine conveys a longer DOI than 3 years. The USDA does *not* require rabies vaccine manufacturers to perform long-term duration of immunity studies on the rabies vaccine, they are only required to have challenge studies demonstrating that the vaccine confers immunity for the labeled booster interval. They also allow the 3 year vaccine to be relabeled for 1 year.


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

*Research Updates: Investigating the Impact of Vaccine Administration Site Changes in Cats* _DVM360_ October 1, 2009 by Erika Meler and Barrak Pressler http://veterinarymedicine.dvm360.co...f-vacci/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/632167

"The study's results also imply that the rabies vaccine may be the most oncogenic. After 1996, when specific locations could be associated with specific vaccines, the right rear limb, which is the recommended site of rabies vaccination, was the most common site of injection-site sarcomas. "[/color]

Oncogenic: Causing or tending to cause the formation and development of tumors.


----------



## sarahaf (Aug 17, 2009)

Kris said:


> [email protected][/email], I'd be happy to send you the page so you can see it for yourself. The entire paragraph is as follows:


I don't need a secondary source article, because I went directly to the IARC monograph that you referenced. Here is a link to the IARC classification of carcinogens:

http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classification/index.php

Here is what the World Health Organization has to say about rabies vaccination:

"*Safe* and effective vaccines are available to prevent rabies in animals, and in humans before and after suspected exposures. Vaccination of domestic animals (mostly dogs) and wildlife (such as foxes and raccoons) has led to reduced disease in several developed and developing countries. *However, recent increases in human rabies deaths in South America and parts of Africa and Asia evidence that rabies is re-emerging as a serious public health issue.*" (bolding mine)

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs099/en/index.html

Do we really want to scare people away from a safe and effective vaccine and have rabies re-emerge as a series public health issue here? Remember, the disease is always fatal unless the vaccine is given to the unfortunate exposed person before they develop symptoms.


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

sarahaf said:


> http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classification/index.php
> 
> *However, recent increases in human rabies deaths in South America and parts of Africa and Asia evidence that rabies is re-emerging as a serious public health issue.*" (bolding mine)
> Do we really want to scare people away from a safe and effective vaccine and have rabies re-emerge as a series public health issue here? Remember, the disease is always fatal unless the vaccine is given to the unfortunate exposed person before they develop symptoms.


This is the United States, and rabies in domestic animals is not re-emerging as a public health issue. Despite the fact that between 50% and 70% of pets are estimated to be unvaccinated in the U.S., rates of rabies in dogs has been steadily declining, as have the incidents of rabies in humans (the primary vector of which is bats in this country). In an article entitled *RABIES* by Margo B. Maloney, DVM, in _Versatile Hunting Dog_ February 2008 she states that: "Although it still remains a zoonotic (illness transmitted from animal to man) threat in the United States today, rabies in dometicated animals and humans has fallen to a very low level; from 1990 to 2005, there was an average of 3 human cases of rabies reported annually in the U.S. compared to an average of 22 cases in 1950."

Wild animals accounted for 92% of reported cases of rabies in 2006. Raccoons continued to be the most frequently reported rabid wildlife species (37.7% of all animal cases during 2006), followed by bats (24.4%), skunks (21.5%), foxes (6.2%), and other wild animals, including rodents and lagomorphs (0.6%).[/color] http://www.cdc.gov/rabies/epidemiology.html

Bats are and have been the major vector for human rabies transmission in the United States for years. Over the 13 years from 1995 thru 2008 there was not one case of human rabies transmitted by a domestic U.S. dog -- 30 of the 32 cases were transmitted by bats. Center for Disease Control _Cases of Rabies in Human Beings in the United States, by Circumstances of Exposure and Rabies Virus Variant, 1995-2008 _http://www.cdc.gov/rabies/location/usa/surveillance/human_rabies.html In this century, the number of human deaths in the United States attributed to rabies has declined from 100 or more each year to an average of 2 or 3 each year. Two programs have been responsible for this decline. First, animal control and vaccination programs begun in the 1940's and oral rabies vaccination programs in the 2000’s have eliminated domestic dogs as reservoirs of rabies in the United States.[/color]


----------



## sarahaf (Aug 17, 2009)

Right this is the United States. Right now, we have a good vaccination program (this is in relative terms). That could change. By the way, I consulted a veterinarian with some data on this issue who told me that there simply isn't enough data to know what the optimal vaccination interval is, meaning that lengthening the interval carries some risk. This is the last thing I will say on this issue, as I don't want to monopolize this forum. Unnecessary scare tactics at the level I am seeing (on the internet, I can scarcely find anything with a google search on "rabies vaccine" other than information on adverse effects from your advocacy group) WILL lead more people to be reluctant to vaccinate; some may become scared to vaccinate at all. When people get a lot of scary information about a potential risk (which may be so vanishingly unlikely in dogs as to be immeasurable at a population level), they will get tunnel vision about it and stop seeing the scary possibility of rabies itself. I am sure some on this forum and others have been scared, and their trust in their personal vet to give them accurate risk assessments may be weakened. Is that what you want?


----------



## Dubyajay (Apr 9, 2010)

Fear mongering is fun ain't it.


----------



## Big Rick (Apr 14, 2009)

Kris, I have to wonder why you joined our forum. This is a forum for Vizsla owners or potential Vizsla owners to discuss common issues with their dogs. In all the hundreds of words you have posted on the forum the only time the word vizsla was included was in a hypertext link to a page on this forum. 

Do you own or are you thinking of obtaining a Vizsla or are you just here to push the agenda of Dr. Jean Dodd, DVM?


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

Big said:


> Kris, I have to wonder why you joined our forum. This is a forum for Vizsla owners or potential Vizsla owners to discuss common issues with their dogs. In all the hundreds of words you have posted on the forum the only time the word vizsla was included was in a hypertext link to a page on this forum.


Big Rick, I joined this forum to share canine vaccine data -- canine vaccines are common issues with Vizslas, and there are many pet owners whose veterinarians do not give them full disclosure, and thus, some Vizsla owners may be inadvertently receiving more distemper, hepatitis, and parvo vaccines than their dogs need in order to maintain immunity.

Also, I joined to keep Vizsla owners posted on pending rabies legislation that may be affecting their state. For instance, in Florida, where you are listed as residing, state law calls for a 3 year booster protocol, but allows counties to impose stricter ordinances. Pet owners across the country are taking action to change annual ordinances as well as asking their legislators to file bills inserting medical exemption clauses into their laws, Vizsla owners may want to know about this activity which will impact their dogs.

You were probably already aware that Florida has a medical exemption clause in their rabies law, but in case you weren't, it's below.

FLORIDA http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...te&Search_String=vaccine&URL=Ch0828/Sec30.HTM

(2) A dog, cat, or ferret is exempt from vaccination against rabies if a licensed veterinarian has examined the animal and has certified in writing that at the time vaccination would endanger the animal's health because of its age, infirmity, disability, illness, or other medical considerations. An exempt animal must be vaccinated against rabies as soon as its health permits.


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

sarahaf said:


> By the way, I consulted a veterinarian with some data on this issue who told me that there simply isn't enough data to know what the optimal vaccination interval is, meaning that lengthening the interval carries some risk.


Your veterinarian is not correct. There are *challenge studies* which have been conducted on the distemper, hepatitis, and parvo vaccine proving a *minimum* duration of immunity of 7 years http://www.cedarbayvet.com/duration_of_immunity.htm . For those who do not know what a challenge study is -- a challenge study is one in which dogs are vaccinated and kept in isolation (in order to prevent natural immunity to the disease against which they were vaccinated) for a number of years, and then they are injected with high doses of virulent virus to "challenge" their immunity. Challenge studies are considered the gold standard in veterinary vaccine research -- this type of research is not done on humans.

In 1992, the results of a challenge study led by Michel Aubert demonstrating that dogs were immune to a rabies challenge 5 years after vaccination was published in Scientific Technical Review (Rev. sci.tech. Off. int. Epiz.) 1992, 11 (3), 735-760. The study is entitled, _PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF RABIES ANTIBODIES IN CATS AND DOGS* AND RESULTS OF A SURVEY ON RABIES VACCINATION AND QUARANTINE FOR DOMESTIC CARNIVORA IN WESTERN EUROPE _. 

The _2003 American Animal Hospital Association Canine Vaccine Guidelines_ http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm state on Page 18 that: “We now know that booster injections are of no value in dogs already immune, and immunity from distemper infection and *vaccination lasts for a minimum of 7 years based on challenge studies* and up to 15 years (a lifetime) based on antibody titer.” [/color] They further state that hepatitis and parvovirus vaccines have been proven to protect for a minimum of 7 years by challenge and up to 9 and 10 years based on antibody count. 



> Unnecessary scare tactics at the level I am seeing (on the internet, I can scarcely find anything with a google search on "rabies vaccine" other than information on adverse effects from your advocacy group) WILL lead more people to be reluctant to vaccinate; some may become scared to vaccinate at all.


I don't believe that providing data and scientific research is a "scare tactic," and providing information so that Vizsla owners can make *informed* vaccinal choices with their veterinarian shouldn't lead to more people being reluctant to vaccinate, although they may reduce the frequency with which they vaccinate against distemper, hepatitis, and parvo. 



> I am sure some on this forum and others have been scared, and their trust in their personal vet to give them accurate risk assessments may be weakened.


 If anyone's trust in their personal vet has been weakened by the information I have posted, it is perhaps because their veterinarian has not given them full disclosure in the past and has been giving their dogs redundant vaccinations that they did not need.


----------



## scooby (Mar 23, 2009)

Sorry for your loss but I think you need another 'soap box' to preach from. I have to agree with Big Rick regarding your motivation for joining this forum, I'm sure everyone can sympathise with your loss (most of us have been there) but I'm sure no one wants an epidemic outbreak of Rabies either.
[


----------



## Kris L. Christine (Jul 11, 2010)

scooby said:


> I'm sure no one wants an epidemic outbreak of Rabies either.


Absolutely, and I am certainly not advocating *not* vaccinating against the core canine diseases of rabies, distemper, hepatitis, and parvo; rather, I am advocating against *over*vaccinating against those diseases -- a big difference.

While the threat of contracting rabies from a dog in the U.S. is very low, you should be more concerned about the estimated 50-70% of dogs and cats which are not vaccinated against rabies at all.

Pet owners should be aware of the risks associated with not vaccinating their animals as well as the risks of vaccinating them in order to make *informed* vaccinal choices for their animals. Unfortunately, too few veterinarians give pet owners full disclosure, and thus they end up paying for booster shots their animals do not need, which do not enhance their immunity, and which put them at needless risk of adverse events. Informed consent is a common practice with physicians, dentists, pediatricians, and other human medical care providers -- the same should hold true for the veterinary care community.


----------

