PARVOVIRUS, DISTEMPER AND HEPATITIS ANTIBODY LEVELS Lynn Harrison 2002 A pack of seven unneutered female Siberian Huskies formed the 2001 Study, their age range at blood sampling 1 year 6 months - 12 years 6 months; none were in season. All were closely related with common ancestors within three generations. Titres were read at University of Glasgow. Protection Recommendation  General recommendation by drug manufacturers for canines in the UK is to commence a vaccination programme for Parvovirus, Distemper, Hepatitis and Leptospirosis at approximately 8wks of age with yearly boosters throughout life. More recently an earlier start at 6wks is being promoted. It is implied that only multivalent (multi-dose) vaccines are available, but single dose can be acquired by request. A growing number of owners and veterinarians across the world believe that a much less frequent vaccination programme should be practised. Many of these people (as with some UK doctors and parents in respect of the MMR multivalent vaccination of children) further opine that vaccines should only be administered in single dose applications spanning several weeks, and this includes the Rabies vaccine. Another concern is toxic effects of vaccine preservatives. Diseases  CANINE PARVOVIRUS The virus is shed in the faeces of infected dogs. Canine Parvovirus is very resistant and can spread on shoes, clothing and on the coat and pads of dogs. Severe haemorragic gastro-enteritis is the main sign. This can appear quickly and include dehydration, severe vomiting, refusal of food and water, abdominal pain and profuse smelly, bloody diarrhoea. CANINE DISTEMPER This virus is relatively fragile and the main source of infection is by inhalation during close dog to dog contact. Signs can take up to three weeks to appear. They include runny nose and eyes and lack of appetite, followed by coughing, tiredness and diarrhoea. In surviving dogs, nervous signs such as fits and twitching can appear later on. INFECTIOUS CANINE HEPATITIS The virus is usually contracted by direct contact with infected animals, or their urine or faeces. Signs include lack of appetite, high temperature, pale gums and conjunctiva, vomiting, diarrhoea and abdominal pain. The dog may develop jaundice. LEPTOSPIROSIS Caused by bacteria spread in the urine of infected animals. Two main forms of the disease exist including one contracted from rats and wildlife and the other is contracted from the infected urine of other dogs. Can be spread by humans. Signs include high temperature, severe thirst, lethargy, abdominal pain, vomiting, bloody diarrhoea and jaundice. Death can occur in a few hours in severe cases. U of G advised that Leptospirosis vaccine does not provide antibodies, so could not be included in this Study. Supposedly, Leptospirosis vaccine is only considered of benefit if it has been applied at the time of exposure to the disease with a questionable protection period. Four Year Husbandry  The Siberian Husky family pack of the Study had been fed a (raw) species appropriate diet - 70-80% meaty bones; offal, muscle meat, crushed vegetables, fruit; and occasional cold pressed oils/seeds/various vitamin supplements (no grain or dairy products). Liquid intake was tap water, with electrolite once per week during winter months. Previously, dry dog food and tap water formed their diet. Vaccination had been withheld, but previously practised with puppy multivalent vaccination and yearly booster multivalent vaccination, for Canine Parvovirus, Canine Distemper, Infectious Canine Hepatitis and Leptospirosis. A yearly homoeopathic liquid nosode regime for the four diseases was maintained; the Study conducted in a nosode rest period. No worming treatments were necessary, confirmed by occasional faecal examination; the exception being the two youngest in the Study who required worming as puppies in the nest but not thereafter. Previously, puppy + annual wormings were maintained. All were working (sled) dogs travelling across the country in competition during the winter months; living communally in the home during the day and in outside kennelling at night. Only one illness was recorded - a local virus affecting all the dogs in the Study and kennel (as well as in the highly-vaccinated suburban neighbourhood) some five months prior to titre reading, but requiring no medication. Vaccine Profile  Females A through E were each vaccinated against Leptospirosis at age 7wks; Distemper, Hepatitis, Leptospirosis and Parvovirus at age 11wks; boostered DHL & P at 15mths; thereafter boostered L & P yearly and D & H every other year. Female  A , aged 12yrs 6mths, had received seven yearly boosters. Female  B , aged 11yrs 3mths, had received six yearly boosters. Female  C , aged 9yrs 7mths, had received five yearly boosters. (Daughter of A) Female  D , aged 5yrs 6mths, had received one yearly booster. (Daughter of B) Female  E , aged 4yrs 11mths, had received one yearly booster. (Daughter of C) Females  F  and  G , littersisters aged 1yr 6mths, were totally unvaccinated. (Daughters of C, granddaughters of B.) Results GROUP DOG PARVOVIRUS DISTEMPER HEPATITIS 1 A 4096 128 91 B 2048 128 128   C 1024 256 362 2 D 2048 362 256 E 4196 1448 512 3 F 8 8 128 G 8 8 8192 Summary  Dogs  A ,  B  and  C , who had received puppy vaccinations and at least five yearly boosters, had titre results showing moderate to high levels of antibodies for all diseases. Dogs  D  and  E , who had received puppy vaccinations and only one yearly booster, had titre results showing overall higher levels of antibodies for all diseases. Titre results for dog  F , never vaccinated, showed that she had been exposed to all three disease insults during her lifetime with minimal antibody registry for Parvovirus and Distemper, and moderate for Hepatitis. Titre results for dog  G , never vaccinated, showed that she had been similarly exposed to Parvovirus and Distemper insults with resultant minimal antibody registry as her littersister  F , but had at least four times the antibody level for Hepatitis than any other dog in the Study. Antibody levels for Parvovirus read higher than Distemper and Hepatitis in all vaccinated dogs  A-E  irrespective of their vaccination profiles. Antibody levels for Hepatitis read higher than Parvovirus and Distemper in the unvaccinated dogs  F  and  G . The three paired Groups  1   (A & B) ,  2 (D & E) , and  3 (F & G) , of very similar age and vaccine profile, showed variable antibody levels - both within and between the groups. Conclusion  Group 1 , the most vaccinated, showed adequate and more than adequate antibody levels four years after booster vaccination had ceased at 8yrs and 7yrs of age. The lower levels of this Group for Distemper and Hepatitis may indicate a faster antibody waning in the older dog for these two diseases, but not necessarily for Parvovirus.  Group 2 , having just one booster to age 16mths, showed antibody levels after four years to be such that further protection against all the diseases was not recommended for at least another two years. It is possible that some degree of antibody level for Parvovirus, Distemper and Hepatitis was obtained from the nosodes as they were derived partly from traditional vaccines; particularly in respect of unvaccinated  Group 3  where Parvovirus and Distemper titres showed minimal and identical in both dogs and diseases at age 18mths. The highest antibody level for Hepatitis of the unvaccinated yearling  G is indicative that she conquered the disease at some time with no more help than the nosode regime and natural diet; likewise her littermate and constant companion  F  who had a much lower reading. Peculiarly, for an infectious disease, all dogs  A-F  were not so badly infected if at all at the time  G  was exposed to this disease, irrespective of their vaccine profile. The Parvovirus vaccine appeared to provide an overall higher and maintainable antibody level than the Distemper or Hepatitis vaccine. The results of this Study pose the obvious: Is the typical UK canine over-vaccinated and, if so, at what price it's immune and central nervous systems? Is the compulsory Rabies vaccine + yearly recommended multivalent vaccine of the Pets Passport scheme for overseas travel dictating a regime that could be seriously detrimental to the health of the individual; likewise admittance requirements to boarding kennels and competitions?  This Study certainly argues a case for titre reading to play a part in deciding an individual's vaccination requirements, and the ready availability of single dose vaccines. Comparison titre readings of this Siberian Husky pack is intended after a two year period, but there is an immediate need for more independent research into the general recommendation of vaccination in the UK. ************************************************************************************************************ PARVOVIRUS, DISTEMPER AND HEPATITIS ANTIBODY LEVELS (II) Lynn Harrison 2003 The same pack of seven female Siberian Huskies that participated in the first Study of 2001 formed this second Study in 2003, 22 months later. C and E had been spayed in the interim and  F had a 10-day-old litter at the time of blood sampling. An eighth female H (granddaughter of C ), unneutered and unvaccinated, joined the Study at age 2yrs 1mth. None were in season. Titres were read at the Animal Health Trust in Newmarket. Two Year Husbandry a) The pack had continued to be fed a (raw) species appropriate diet exclusively. b) Environment had remained the same. c) Vaccination had been withheld. d) The same yearly homoeopathic liquid nosode regime for the three diseases was maintained for unvaccinated F, G and H ; the Study conducted in a nosode rest period. e) No worming treatments were necessary, excepting for H as a small puppy. f)  A and B had retired as working sleddogs. g) No illnesses were recorded. Results GROUP DOG PARVOVIRUS DISTEMPER HEPATITIS 1 A 1024 181 128 B 512 512 64   C 256 512 362 2 D 2048 512 128 E 4096 2898 512 3 F 10 5 5 G 4 8 8   H 4 8 8 Titre Interpretation The profile consisted of: Canine Parvovirus haemagglutination inhibition antibody titre. Canine Distemper virus neutralising antibody titre. Canine Adenovirus-2 neutralising antibody titre. to 4 to 8 No significant antibody Parvovirus No significant antibody Distemper & Hepatitis 8-32 Low antibody titre 64-512 Moderate titre (immune) -1024+ High titre (immune) Summary A through E, who had all received various degrees of vaccination during their lifetime, still had a range of moderate to high antibody registry for all three diseases. A, B, C, E and G had reduced levels for Parvovirus, D  remained constant, and F increased (up a band to low registry from minimal). A through E had increased levels for Distemper, F reduced, and G remained constant. C and Eremained constant for Hepatitis, A increased, and B, D, F and G reduced; F and G's moderate and high levels (respectively) for Hepatitis dropping right down to minimal. H registered minimal for all three diseases. Conclusion Antibody levels obtained from vaccination (and perhaps certain nosodes) fluctuate up and down but had maintained a level of considered immunity in Groups 1 & 2  and female C . Group 2  (average age 7yrs 2mths) had an overall higher level of immunity than Group 1 (average age 13yrs 8mths) at this time, but the former was the least vaccinated (puppy + 1 booster). The antibody levels obtained from exposure to Hepatitis by unvaccinated Group 3 (with adequate immunity levels showing five months after their probable Hepatitis-related illness in early 2001), were lost within the succeeding 22mths. Levels for other diseases of unvaccinateds may follow suit. As both lactating F and maiden G littermates experienced the same drastic loss of Hepatitis antibodies, the state of pregnancy/whelping/lactation of F, was probably not contributory. A through E  had not received any vaccinations for six years but still had adequate antibody levels for all three diseases, irrespective of the extent of previous individual vaccination. No vaccination for a further period of two years was recommended for these females. For the youngest D and E , this would bring them to an age of 9+ years - considered a lifetime in some breeds. The Study would therefore suggest that puppy vaccination plus one booster for the three diseases was adequate to provide required titre levels to last a dog's lifetime. However, there was no Group in the Study that had only puppy vaccination (or one vaccination as adults), to indicate whether adequate immunity levels were maintainable without a booster. None of the vaccinated dogs had received split vaccines either. It is hoped to conduct a third study in two years time to investigate these points. This Study has given justifiable reason to seriously question the number of times a dog is recommended by the drugs manufacturers to be vaccinated in its lifetime. Titre reading is still the only logical, and truthful, way to avoid reactions/secondary disease from over-vaccination. The outstanding question remains: WHY HASN'T THERE BEEN ANY UNBIASED OR INDEPENDENT VACCINATION RESEARCH MADE AVAILABLE TO US? Could it be that monetary gains of the commerical concerns speak louder than good health... Note: Only the natural raw diet was fed for the six-year non-vaccination period, believed by the author to be the best possible for maintaining a healthy immune system. *********************************************************************************************************** JULY 2003 Very recently a leading vaccine manufacturer has publicly stated, "that over half of the dogs in Britain are at least four years behind with their vaccination." Whilst this company actually admits that we should look more closely at duration of immunity, it still recommends continuous vaccination throughout a dog's lifetime. As if by compromise, it is now promoting vaccination of parvovirus, distemper and hepatitis on a once every two years recommendation instead of the previous yearly regime. However, leptospirosis and parainfluenza vaccines, it says, must be administered on a yearly basis as before. If one person can conduct their own studies on the duration of immunity with significant results (using dogs that are six years 'behind' with their vaccination), why can't the drugs companies? Hard to believe they haven't, or that the results would be very different. Strange too, with more than half the dog population 'behind' with their vaccinations, that the various diseases aren't at epidemic proportions right this minute! Up until now, the Leptospirosis vaccine did not register antibody levels and was purported to only be effective for possibly three months. One must presume that no cover was available for the other nine months of the year therefore. So, why wasn't vaccination for such a potentially life-threatening disease recommended four times per year, especially as the aim of vaccination is supposed to be to avoid running the risk of major disease outbreaks? However, as more and more laymen ask questions, suddenly there has appeared a new leptospirosis vaccine which does provide antibody registry but, again, recommended on a yearly basis. THE TIME HAS COME FOR THE DRUGS COMPANIES TO STOP THEIR SPIN. ************************************************************************************************************ NOVEMBER 2003 The following is purported to be the guidelines under consideration by all 27 veterinary schools in North America concerning the change of vaccination protocol for dogs and cats, excepting for rabies where required by state law. "Dogs and cats immune systems mature fully at 6 months. If a modified live virus (MLV) vaccine is given after 6 months of age, it produces immunity, which is good for the life of the pet (i.e., canine distemper, parvo, feline distemper). If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralize the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. The titre is not 'boosted' nor are more memory cells induced. "Not only are annual boosters for parvo and distemper unnecessary, they subject the pet to potential risks of allergic reactions and immune-mediated hemolytic anemia. There is no scientific documentation to back up label claims for annual administration of MLV vaccines. Puppies receive antibodies through their mothers milk. This natural protection can last 8-14 weeks. Puppies and kittens should NOT be vaccinated at LESS than 8 weeks. Maternal immunity will neutralize the vaccine and little protection (0-38%) will be produced. "Vaccination at 6 weeks will, however, delay the timing of the first highly effective vaccine. Vaccinations given 2 weeks apart suppress rather than stimulate the immune system. A series of vaccinations is given starting at 8 weeks and given 3-4 weeks apart up to 16 weeks of age. Another vaccination given sometime after 6 months of age (usually at 1 year 4 months) will provide lifetime immunity." ************************************************************************************************************ APRIL 2004 Following the above findings of the American Animal Hospital Association Canine Vaccine Taskforce (JAAHA Vol 39 March/April 03), and a report from the American Veterinary Medical Association Committee early in 2004 stating that one-year vaccination protocol is not based on scientific data, 31 UK vets sent a letter to the editor of the Veterinary Times which was printed in January 2004. This group of vets wished to express their concerns over yearly vaccination "in the light of recent new evidence" and citing the veterinary surgeon oath "to help, or at least do no harm." The immediate knee-jerk response from the British Small Animal Veterinary Association and a leading vaccine manufacturer appears to be to discredit by way of pointing out that they are a minority group and some of them are additionally Homoeopathically qualified! However, whilst these 'rebel' vets state that they fully support the AAHA Taskforce (vaccination of puppies and kittens around 6 months of age will provide lifelong immunity) they deviate, by suggesting a 3-yearly protocol for core vaccines only. No justification is given for this magical "every 3 years." Could it be that they do not wish to totally upset their peers and almost wipe out their very lucrative source of income? After all, just how do you go about separating the conjoined twins - the veterinary profession and the drugs manufacturers... _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ X-RAYS Daily Mirror 30.1.04 "Around 700 people a year get cancer from X-rays, researchers claimed yesterday. Some 0.6 per cent of the 124,000 cancers diagnosed each year are in patients given radiation to detect other problems. In Japan, which uses X-rays more, three per cent of cancers are caused this way. In Britain, CT scans were responsible for the most cases, followed by barium enemas and hip and pelvis X-rays, Cancer Research UK and Oxford University found." ************************************************************************************************************ Extract from "What Doctors Don't Tell You", Vol 4 No 6 "How to protect yourself from unnecessary radiation before agreeing to an x-ray: 1. Cross-examine your doctor. Ask if the x-ray is really necessary. Are there alternatives - such as his taking a full medical history and doing a physical examination? What is he looking for? What is the likelihood of his finding it from the test? Will its findings have any effect on the treatment you'll be given? If absolutely necessary, is it possible to have ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging, which may be less harmful. 2. Avoid repeats. Tell your doctor if that part of your body has been x-rayed before. Keep a record of all your x-rays, what they were of, and where and when they were done. If you change your dentist or doctor, ask for your x-rays to be forwarded when you first make the change (many dentists destroy old x-rays after three years instead). 3. Be informed. The Royal College of Radiologists produces guidance on when x-rays are and are not likely to be justified. You can get hold of a copy of its booklet, "Making the best use of a Department of Clinical Radiology", for 3 from 38 Portland Place, London IN 3DG, 071-6364432. Put your doctor on the spot by asking him if he's following their guidelines. 4. Wait until you're certain you're not pregnant. If in any doubt, don't submit to an x-ray unless it's a matter of life and death. 5. Refuse all just-in-case x-rays if you've no symptoms, such as those offered in routine health check-ups or as required by a prospective employer. If you're satisfied the benefits of the x-ray outweigh its risk: 6. Check that the equipment to be used is modern and low-dose. When was it last serviced and its radiation levels checked? 7. Ask who will be doing the x-ray. Is he or she properly trained? 8. Follow instructions to the letter to avoid the possibility of having to have an x-ray done again. 9. Insist on proper shielding for your testes or ovaries. If necessary, buy your own lead apron and wear it every time you go along for an x-ray. 10. In How to Survive Medical Treatment (Century), Stephen Fulder suggests protecting your body from the radiation's most harmful effects by taking the following cocktail of supplements for several days before having a higher-dose x-ray: 500 milligrams of vitamin C, 3 to 4 times a day, plus bioflavonoids. 100-200 micrograms of selenium a day. 30 milligrams of vitamin B2 and B6, and 100 milligrams of BS (pantothenic acid) a day. 250 milligrams of the amino acid cysteine three to four times a day, taken with the vitamin C. Cysteine can be bought in healthfood shops and is found in eggs, onion and garlic."