SmartMoney is raising questions about over medicating animals that have long intrigued me.
In a recent article on “10-Things-Your-Veterinarian-Won’t-Tell-You”, several questions are raised, including whether vaccinating your pet may do more harm than good.
“For years the primary reason for seeing a veterinarian was to get your pet vaccinated against a host of diseases ranging from distemper to rabies, either with individual vaccinations or “combo wombo†shots that could cover seven separate conditions.
Indeed, annual vaccinations have been an economic bulwark for many vet practices. However, some veterinarians say they’re not only unnecessary but can actually be harmful in some cases. Marty Goldstein, a veterinarian in South Salem, N.Y., says he sees a range of vaccination-related reactions in animals, everything from cancerous sarcomas to epilepsy. Another reason to think twice about certain vaccines: The immunity provided by some of them can last well beyond a year and even as long as the pet’s lifetime, Goldstein says, negating the need for some annual shots.
Both the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and the American Animal Hospital Association now say vaccinations should be assessed yearly and tailored to an animal’s age, health, and lifestyle. For example, an indoor cat with limited exposure to some diseases may not ever need certain common vaccinations, says W. Jean Dodds, an immunologist and veterinarian with Hemopet in Garden Grove, Calif. Only a veterinarian who has access to your pet’s complete medical history can determine which vaccinations should be administered and how they’ll be most effective. Also, talk with your vet if you’re considering traveling with your pet.”
Similar Posts:
- Dr. Saria, Mobile Vet: Drug Reps Help Pets Of Homeless
- Live by the Scam, Get Vaccinated by the Scam
- Doctors In Connecticut And Elsewhere Are Firing Patients When Parents Refuse Vaccinations For Children
- Tiny Needles Available This Year For Flu Shots
- Controversial Study Linking Autism To Vaccines Withdrawn
- Dogs And Cancer: Some Breeds, Especially Goldens Are Prone To Cancer
Brought cat in to have nails clipped, shots, and matted hair shave 2 yrs ago. Needed to be sedated. The cat, not me. When I picked him up, the cat had been OVERgassed. He did not recover until late the next day. The cat had been taken to other vets before for similar procedure and turn around time for him to be out of a tranquilzed state was just… See More a few hours. This was frightening. Cat was wobbling and falling over until late into the next day. Cat is fine. But I think I needed sedation after the ordeal. And yes, they do knnow how to run up bills because they INSIST on bloodwork each time you bring the animal in.
Elle I am sorry that happened to you, but improper anesthesia dose has nothing to do with vaccinations or vets trying to make a buck – that is just an inexcusable mistake on the part of the vet or vet tech. Proper anesthesia administration is based upon an animal’s weight and is veterinary medicine 101. I would also like to clarify that any time anesthesia is going to be administered, bloodwork should be done prior to the surgery/procedure. Additionally, annual blood screens are a good idea but if your vet is recommending it EVERY time you go in without upcoming surgery and more than once a year, then that is sketchy and I would suggest you find a different vet.
I agree with LuvMyPets. Additionally, I have seen prices that some vet clinics charge and it amazes me that they have clients. I’ve been bringing my pets to the same vet practice for over 20 years. They are excellent in the care they provide, have never overcharged me and are very affordable. You might want to search for a new practice.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by ctwatchdog: Are Veterinarians Over Vaccinating Pets To Run Up Vet Bills? http://bit.ly/cRNGxL via @AddToAny…
It’s good that Watchdog has raised the so-called “over” vaccination issue. The ‘threat’ is overstated by the media, and in my opinion too little attention is paid to the good that has resulted in mostly eliminating the diseases we vaccinate for. It reminds me of the autism and vaccination myth that went on for years before being finally and totally discredited last year.
The public should also understand that veterinarians have plenty of opportunities to earn their living aside from vaccine administration. No one that I know in our profession would risk a pet’s health, or give something that was medically unnecessary to line their own pockets.
Vaccines are given for a genuine need and when given must be given at a dose and frequency according to manufacturers recommendations and FDA labeled requirements. Working outside those parameters leads to the veterinarian taking on him/herself liability for things that may go wrong, including the disease itself.Titer testing can be done to assess whether protection remains after the interval has passed, perhaps minimizing the risk of skipping a timely vaccination, however, the cost to perform titers must be balanced against the very small risk of vaccinating sooner than may be biologically required. That’s an individual pet owners decision to make, in concert with a veterinarian they trust. Indeed trust is what a doctor-client-patient relationship must be based on. If you don’t trust your veterinarian, find one you can trust, and then do so!
What every pet owner should know is that:
Vaccines are given to protect against known serious illnesses,
Vaccines may cause a range of mild to serious complications,
Mild complications are occasional while serious complications are extremely rare,
Consequences of having the diseases vaccinated for are always very serious and may be life threatening,
Rabies immunization is legally required and is given to pets primarily to protect people, not pets,
Other vaccines should be tailored to the particular pet’s lifestyle, which means disease exposure risks,
While vaccines are important, regular (and frequent) physical examinations are more important as infectious disease is not the only risk pets face.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Arnold L. Goldman DVM, MS
president, Connecticut Veterinary Medical Foundation
I appreciate Dr. Goldman’s response. I wonder if he would tell us how often cats kept indoors and dogs who spend most of their time in doors should be vaccinated so that pet owners will questions vets who suggest that every years pets be given vaccines while others say it only necessary every two or three years or others that say that for some, once a lifetime is enough.
Indoor cats have minimal infectious disease risk, unless they (occasionally) get out, contact cats through window screens or other cats or certain wildlife get in. A cat in a NYC high rise, for example, could have Rabies immunization alone, as long as a cat from down the hall that was a shelter cat last year doesn’t run down the hall one day and get in. A cat in a suburban CT house, even indoors, should have Rabies as well as the multivalent “feline distemper” (FVRCP) vaccine, just to be on the safe side. If the cat goes out at all it should also have FeLV vaccine. Anything else could be considered optional and risk specific. This corresponds to the AAFP (American Association of Feline Practitioners ) recommended best practices.
Dogs are another story as they (mostly) must eliminate outside, adjacent to the so called “suburban or urban-wildland interface”, essentially the edge of the woods. Rabies and DHPP are core vaccines and at a minimum are essential. Leptospirosis vaccine, a cause of many mild to moderate post vaccine reactions like swollen faces, lethargy or 1 day of vomiting is meant to protect against a serious disease spread in wildlife urine. There are many subtypes of leptospirosis and the vaccine brands do not protect against them all. That alone makes its use controversial. On the other hand, the disease leptospirosis causes kidney failure. Incomplete as this vaccine may be, I use it in my 4 dogs and they are mostly indoors: never loose in a yard unless I’m present. Lyme disease vaccine is perhaps 85% effective in preventing active Lyme disease bacteria (Borrellia burgdorfei) infection. Common in CT, my dogs also get it though I use a tick prevention product too. Not worth the disease consequences to avoid the small vaccine risk here.
Vaccines are tested by manufacturers for effectiveness for a defined period. testing beyond that is possible but costly. Many pets may well be protected longer than label claims indicate, but using a schedule of one’s choosing puts the onus on the veterinarian. Every time I vaccinate I know that a reaction may occur and I warn my clients. This aside, not vaccinating risks disease and the opposite question: “Why didn’t you better advise me on what had to be done to protect my dog?” That, in my opinion, and that of the vast majority of my colleagues, is a worse question to have to answer.
There are a few, including a very few in academia, who allege they know better. I cannot claim to know better but can claim to know that preventing disease where I can is what I must focus on. Treating it more often, which is what would happen if large numbers of people stopped immunizing their animals, is so much less effective and would not serve my clients and their animals as well.
Think of immunizing as a “population treatment.” For most diseases, prevention occurs because there are few susceptible individuals. It’s as true of people as of pets. For example, people my age had the smallpox vaccine as babies and have the left shoulder scar to prove it. Many younger people born after 1985 may not have had it and that’s why CDC has been very nervous in recent years. While no one has smallpox in the US today, the virus would be a potent bioterrorism agent if it
fell into malicious hands. Now I’m not suggesting pets have a risk like that, but if vaccination lessened, outbreaks of canine parvovirus, Canine distemper feline panleukopenia, feline parainfluenza and others would inevitably occur. The risks do not balance evenly. Thus my indoor cats get Rabies and also FVRCP.
The first thing that struck me as out of place in this blogger’s article is the fact that the referenced article is actually from May of 2009, not “recently” as he stated. Veterinarians and veterinary researchers have been studying the duration of immunity to vaccines for more than 15 years now and, as you correctly pointed out, the major veterinary organizations and veterinary teaching hospitals have changed their recommendations to a less rigourous vaccine schedule.
The biggest problem that I see in articles such as this one is the loose use of the term vaccines. It is true that we know understand that SOME vaccines create immunity in most animals for longer than a year. These vaccines are often for diseases like canine distemper and canine parvovirus…viral type of diseases. What is left unsaid is that other “vaccines” (technically called bacterins) for some diseases, like Bordetella and Leptospirosis, do need routine boosters on a roughly annual basis (the duration of immunity to bacterial types of diseases is often much less than viral diseases). So…it is important, as the author has pointed out, to discuss risk factors and your pet’s individual needs at annual visits with your veterinarian.
Also, without knowing all the facts about vaccines, some pet owners avoid vaccinating altogether which can lead to a lessening of herd immunity and then an increase in disease prevalence.
Finally, as Dr. Goldman has pointed out, veterinarians have relied upon the research and science of vaccine manufacturers in order to know the correct interval for boostering vaccines. For many decades, one year was thought to be optimal simply because we didn’t have the science to know otherwise. Now that we do, veterinarians are doing what’s best for the individual patient and looking at environment and lifestyle in order to recommend the optimal care for that unique pet.
I guess what bothers me most is your title…Overvaccinating to Run up the Bill? I know hundreds of veterinarians across the US and Canada and this title does not do justice to any of them. Most spend far too many hours working for a fraction of what other health professionals make and their only desire is to see a pet get healthy or stay healthy.
For those who believe that veterinarians are overcharging…I would recommend that you work in a veterinary hospital for 6-8 weeks and see the true cost of high quality care. Personally, I think it’s great that veterinarians and their teams can often bring “human quality” care to our pets at a fraction of what the price would be for a person undergoing the exact same procedure.
I appreciate the chance to comment and share my opinions.
Thomas F. Dock, CVJ
Veterinary News Network
I am curious as to what a certified veterinary journalist is? I have never heard of anyone certifying journalists??????????????????
A Certified Veterinary Journalist is an individual who has been granted credntials from the American Society of Veterinary Journalism (ASVJ). Applicants must pass a written examination encompassing various forms of media in addition to a review of their veterinary credentials and evaluation of media work that they have done.
The mission of ASVJ is to improve the quality of animal health information that is provided to pet owners through public media.
I hope that helps…
I’m more concerned about veterinarians that perform cat declawing as well as ear cropping and tail docking in dogs when it is not medically necessary. This is mutilation for purely aesthetic purposes and individuals that don’t want kitty clawing their new couch. It’s sick and there are so many animal clinics that do it. THAT is where they make their money. Convincing un-knowing pet owners that it is the right thing to do, they make it part of a package deal when performing spay/neuter.