Lisa in Cape May County, NJ

You’re right, there are a whole lot of pet owners out there who are in the dark when it comes to even the IDEA that they can question veterinarian (or MD or pediatric for that matter) practices to create a situation where they are able to make more informed decisions. The USA is full of “stethoscope worshipers” as it sounds like is also the case in Australia.

I don’t want to speak for someone like Gina; she’s one of the most intelligent and informed bloggers I’ve ever read and she certainly knows better than me about these issues. But I THINK what she’s saying is that its not fair to make sweeping statements that imply ALL veterinarians should be distrusted.

I trust my veterinarian, I do. But its not a blind trust. Its a trust that has been built over time from a lot of talking and a lot of listening. And even with that, there are times we disagree. But ultimately I win every time because its MY dog and MYself I have to live with if I make a bad decision. And ultimately, my veterinarian can’t force me to allow something done to my pets that I don’t want done.

I guess I just don’t see it as a big conspiracy as much as a big pharma/food-driven mess of misunderstanding and misinformation. And I can’t wrap my mind around blaming all veterinarians or accusing them of knowingly running a worlwide scam meant to kill our pets. I think a lot of vets are just as poorly informed as the average pet owner.

Sure, its true that not all veterinarians are innocently out there trying to create healthier pets for their clients. In fact, in the US the vast majority of DVMs are employed by pet food makers and vaccine makers; most of which, in my opinion, are unscrupulous at best. But there ARE great veterinarians with great hearts and even greater minds who are making a world of difference for pets. A lot of those veterinarians are on the same page as you when it comes to demanding transparency, accountability and protocol change. …I’m rambling but…all I’m saying is, they’re not all the enemy, ya know?

I haven’t had time to analyse the VMD’s Position Paper in detail yet. A quick read-through indicates it’s a backside covering exercise, with some challengeable material. However, there’s lots of interesting information in this document and it merits a close and critical reading by those interested in this topic…

So, the Australian and British government regulators have now, albeit grudgingly, publicly acknowledged the unnecessary vaccination problem. How is the Center for Veterinary Biologics going on the vaccine product labelling issue? I gather this has been limping along for years? See for example this correspondence:

- United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Center for Veterinary Biologics Notice Draft No. 327 on the subject of “Studies to Support Label Claims of Duration of Immunity: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/anim.....aft327.pdf

- American Veterinary Medical Association letter, re Center for Veterinary Biologics Notice Draft No. 327: Studies to Support Label Claims of Duration of Immunity dated October 27 2008: http://www.avma.org/advocacy/f.....ty_ltr.pdf

We’ve been mainly focussing on unnecessary vaccination in Australia, but we followed up with the CVB a little while ago on the US labelling issue, and there didn’t seem to have been much progress. I also made enquiries to the CVB to try and find out how to access vaccine product labels electronically, but my emails were ignored… I might try again later when I have time. Or does anybody on this blog know how to access US vaccine labels via the internet? We have a system called PUBCRIS in Australia.

You’ve had the benefit of evolving dog and cat vaccination guidelines in the US for years, yet vets in countries such as Australia and Britain failed to acknowledge these guidelines. The WSAVA guidelines were actually launched here in Australia, at the WSAVA Congress held in Sydney in 2007, but most Australian vets just ignored them, and failed to pass on important information in these international guidelines to pet owners for their consideration.
Link to WSAVA guidelines: http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VGG_09_2007.pdf

I didn’t have the faintest clue about the international over-vaccination scam before September 2008, when my dogs were last unnecessarily revaccinated. I completely trusted the vet when he sent his annual vaccination reminder letter, cutely addressed to my pets, saying they needed repeated vaccination to ‘stay healthy’. I was badly misled. My dogs were needlessly put at risk with this unnecessary intervention, and I am very angry about it, particularly as my eldest dog suffered cruelly after her last unnecessary vaccination and was subsequently put down. I strongly suspect unnecessary vaccination was implicated in her illness.

Certainly, if I had known then what I know now, my dogs would not have been revaccinated. The vet concerned refused to consider my dog’s illness could have been an adverse reaction to vaccination. That’s a pretty effective way of keeping adverse reaction report numbers down…

When I started campaigning 18 months ago I was ignored. I wrote to the Australian Veterinary Association and most of the veterinary schools here to complain about vaccination practice and I just got the brush off.

I found other people who also strongly suspected their dogs had been adversely affected by unnecessary vaccination, and they generously shared with me the research they had gathered on this topic. Together we’ve worked very hard to get attention for this problem, but it hasn’t been easy. We’ve had to be persistent, and endure some very patronising attitudes from the veterinary profession.

Things are now slowly improving as the AVA has changed its vaccination policy and the government regulator, the APVMA, has acknowledged the problem of unnecessary vaccination, but this didn’t happen by magic. There’s still a long way to go to change the culture of over-vaccination here.

While you and I know what is going on, many pet owners are still in the dark and still trust their vet’s advice. That’s why it’s incumbent upon those of us ‘in the know’ to demand the veterinary profession update its practice. Obviously there are ‘good’ vets who are developing guidelines and adopting ‘best practice’, but these are mostly in the US, they’re pretty light on the ground in Australia and Britain.

This isn’t just about vaccination of pets. This is about broader issues related to professional responsibility, ethical behaviour, and abuse of authority, which are also relevant to other ‘self-regulated’ professions in which consumers place their trust.

Gina, I realise that you are a major contributor to Pet Connection Blog and I greatly appreciate the information your blog freely provides for pet owners. The internet is a powerful and democratising medium, and gives people the opportunity to discuss ideas and air concerns that are being ignored by the mainstream media. Thanks for allowing me to comment here.

Best wishes
Elizabeth

Respectfully, might I suggest that coming at your audience for “sitting back” and “allowing” unethical veterinarian practices is kind of off-putting.

I don’t “allow” vets to get away with unprofessional practices any more than I allow dog food makers to purchase melamine-laced gluten or the FDA to ignore the deadly side effects of some veterinary drugs.

Your fight is a good one but please, don’t blame others for the problem just because you feel they aren’t fighting as hard as you. You don’t know the half of what people on this board have and are doing to create transparency and demand accountability.

You have a lot to teach but remember, education is for the uneducated. Know your audience. I think a lot of people here agree with what you’re saying…but the approach is just a bit insulting. At least to me.

Comment by Elizabeth Hart — April 10, 2010

A couple points here:

What I was objecting to was your painting the veterinary profession with the broad brush of ignorance, greed and incompetence. And that’s neither fair nor true.

As for “sitting back and allowing” … well, you’ve picked the wrong people to use as a point of example, if you’re talking about us. Doubt it? Read back. We’ve challenged just about every orthodoxy there is.

Initially, I was trying to say that this was already the case; that ultimately the decisions DO rest with the pet owner. That if a pet owner does not agree with their veterinarian, they should actively seek a second (or third, forth, ..) opinion.

In reading your initial comments I was responding to what I thought was someone who felt they were already informed; someone who did not want to re-vaccinate but felt they were being forced/coerced to do it anyway.

After reading your latest post I realize you’re pointing out that the veterinary community is not always honest or transparent in what they know/suspect about the risks of over-vaccination. That too many pet owners cannot make informed decisions because that information isn’t being offered to them. And that the veterinary community needs to be held accountable for the doctors and vaccine makers who are refusing to share this information with pet owners….in that, I agree wholeheartedly.

At the same time I do believe strongly that pet owners, as consumers, have the power to influence change. The more we buy it (or buy into it) the more willing they’re going to be to continue selling us misinformation or, at best, partial information.

While others may be content to sit back and allow vets to continue to get away with unprofessional practices, (and leave others to bear the consequences…), those of us with a bit of backbone need to stand up and demand that the veterinary profession be brought to account.

For the past year, I have been struggling with my own issue involving veterinary care, transparancy in practice, the right way to expose poor practices, etc.

Still working on it.