Pedigree dogs-many health problems are genetic, despite what some say.

 A short video well worth watching if you are not familiar with the problems associated with breed standards and the inbreeding allowed and even encouraged by the large kennel clubs. Unfortunately, many breeders do not understand these problems well enough either and often blame (often with the encouragement of holistic vets) vaccines, ill defined "toxins", commercial dog food, and sometimes the owners for problems that quite clearly have strong genetic components, even when not entirely genetic diseases. These problems have not really received enough attention from organized and science and evidence-based veterinarians, but the alternative and integrative veterinarians seem to be exploiting them without any mention of the responsibility the kennel clubs and breeders hold for creating so many health problems in the first place.

An Anti-vaccine Veterinarian-an interesting mix of pseudoscience, faith, and nonsense.

A particularly egregious example of an anti-vaccine veterinarian was brought to my attention recently (hat tip to Terrierman). Dr.Patricia Jordan has published online a poster she presented at the 5th annual joint North American Homeopathic Conference this year. Her personal website (titled "Mark of The Beast-hidden in plain sight-the case against vaccinations" by which she appears to mean that vaccinations are the mark of the beast) also reveals similar ideas which add up to an interesting mix of misinterpreted and misrepresented science, what appears to be the influence of evangelical style christian creationism, big-pharma and government conspiracy theories, and just plain making things up to suit her ideology. This type of ridiculous reasoning is one of the things that makes me very skeptical of information coming from alternative medicine professional organizations such as the American Holistic Veterinary Medical Association or Homeopathic associations-all to often they seem to accept ideas such as Dr. Jordan's uncritically.

From the Curriculum Vitae page on her website, it would appear that Dr. Jordan had a distinguished undergraduate and veterinary school career in the 1980's with several externships and even some type of award for epidemiology. Since the late 1990's it would seem that she has not found a variety of alternative medicine she does not like, including Reiki, homeopathy, acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine, spinal manipulation and "pulse diagnosis". The legitimate scientific veterinary conferences and seminars she has attended in that time appear to consist mostly of vaccine related events, which she has apparently interpreted as evidence that vaccines are the cause of nearly all disease and some kind of spiritual menace. She conveniently ignores the fact that many vaccine preventable diseases in animals and humans have huge costs in mortality and morbidity by orders of magnitude over any evidence for adverse effects of vaccinations. It makes me wonder if she has ever seen a case of canine distemper, parvovirus or Rabies, or any of the other viruses we routinely prevent with vaccination.

To be fair, there has been a legitimate scientific debate over vaccination of pets over the last 10-20 years which has resulted in some significant changes in vaccination protocols for pets. All Rabies vaccines were changed to killed virus vaccines in the 1980's when it was found that the modified live virus vaccines could, in rare cases, cause rabies. In cats, this had the unintended result of causing malignant tumors in some cats (1). This can also happen in dogs, but is much more rare than it's incidence in cats, which has been reported between one in 1,000 to one in 10,000 cats. Other adverse effects of vaccination are primarily acute and delayed allergic reactions, with very little evidence that other diseases, such as autoimmune disease, other types of cancer, neurological or behavioral diseases are caused by vaccination. For a detailed analysis of these issues, visit The SkeptVet here. While vaccinations can trigger allergic reactions and on rare occasions various autoimmune diseases, this is not proof that the vaccination causes these problems. The greatly varying incidence of allergies and autoimmune disease among different breeds would suggest underlying genetic susceptibilities, and any naturally acquired infection or allergen exposure is as likely or more likely to trigger an outbreak as a vaccination is. As evidence has accumulated about the duration of immunity from vaccination, most veterinarians have switched from annual vaccination protocols to 3-4 year protocols for most vaccines, and I would not be surprised if some of these were extended even more as more evidence is accumulated for longer duration of immunity. Despite this active scientific evaluation of animal vaccination over the past decade or so, Dr. Jordan seems to have decided for ideological reasons that all vaccinations are bad.   Lets look at some of the claims she makes and compare them with the science.

This paragraph from Dr. Jordan's poster illustrates many of the distortions and errors which she makes;

Only vaccinated individuals were found to develop auto antibodies in a landmark study done at Perdue University. Auto antibodies are made with the vaccines from the viruses, from the microbial antigens, from the aluminum and mercury and other ingredients that would mutate or disrupt the pathogen. The increase of molecular mimicry increases with vaccines and these examples of pathways to increase the number of auto antibodies formed the trigger necessary to promote genetic expression of autoimmune disease. Certainly, autoimmune disease expression is one step closer to genetic disease and that handicap will transfer vertically to the next generation in many instances. The important understanding is that the adulteration of the genome came in via the injection of vaccine.

  

It is true that several scientists at Purdue have done a lot of work evaluating the efficacy and potential adverse effects of vaccination in dogs (examples of their work in references 2, 3, and 4). However, auto antibodies are antibodies which react to normal tissues in the body, and may be formed by exposure to animal protein contaminants of vaccines, and occasionally from injuries to tissues such as the lens of the eye, not normally from viral or bacterial antigens, or by exposure to the small amounts of aluminum or mercury present in some vaccines. Let's see what they have to say from reference 3;

 To date, routine vaccination of these Beagles has not caused any overt signs of clinical disease.  However, the blood of all the vaccinated dogs contains significantly elevated concentrations of antibodies directed against proteins that are present in commercial vaccines as contaminants of the production process.  None of the unvaccinated control dogs has had a similar increase in these antibodies.  These proteins are typically of bovine origin since fetal calf serum is used to grow the viruses for vaccine production.  The close similarity in structure of the bovine proteins to dog proteins results in a situation whereby the antibodies produced by the vaccinated dogs may cross-react with dog tissue proteins in a process similar to autoimmunity. Experiments in other animal species suggest that these autoantibodies might eventually cause diseases in the vaccinated animals, but these
Beagle dogs will need to be followed longer to determine if this is the case.  In addition, the pattern of individual responses of the immune system to vaccination in this study suggests a possible genetic predisposition to autoimmunity.

(this paper appears to have been published online and is no longer available at Purdue's website-this extract was taken from a breeder's website). These results are much more preliminary than Dr. Jordan or some breeders make them out to be, and while they are cause for concern and may be reason to change vaccine production methods, there is no mention of the vaccine directly causing mutations. I have not been able to find any evidence that vaccines cause "adulteration of the genome" which is transferable to the next generation. Perhaps one of the most insidious results of this type of reasoning is that some breeders use it to blame problems caused by inbreeding on vaccination instead. The Purdue paper seems to be commonly misused in this way on many breeder's and "holistic" veterinarian's websites. Unfortunately Dr. Jordan and others are taking a legitimate scientific controversy and distorting it beyond all recognition and far beyond the actual evidence. This quote from Dr. Jordan's personal website's mission statement illustrates in her own words how she has abandoned evidence and science for the ideologically based view she prefers;

It was a decade out of medical school before I clearly saw that the beliefs of modern medicine were simply beliefs and not in alignment with the innate wisdom of the body. Vaccines and drugs are at odds with the intelligence of the almighty design and getting back to the garden means getting back to the natural form and using the optimal nutrition, energetic repair and right relationship of living.

There are many more examples of distorted ideas about evolution and the immune system in Dr. Jordan's poster and website. Since she does not list any references(there are no references on the poster and the references and resources pages on her website are blank), it is difficult to discover where she gets most of her ideas. Many probably come from her own head, and others are from sources I was unable to track down.
In any case, following ideas such as these would be extraordinarily dangerous for pets and humans, indeed far more dangerous than vaccinations have ever been. For an excellent discussion of the relative risks and consequences of antivaccine movements on the human side, see Prometheus' recent post here. It is sad that Dr. Jordan seems more interested in fear mongering and selling books than rationally evaluating the evidence.

References;

1.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

June 1, 2005, Vol. 226, No. 11, Pages 1821-1842

doi: 10.2460/javma.2005.226.1821

The current understanding and management of vaccine-associated sarcomas in cats

2.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

July 1, 2007, Vol. 231, No. 1, Pages 94-100

doi: 10.2460/javma.231.1.94

Adverse events after vaccine administration in cats: 2,560 cases (2002–2005)

George E. Moore, DVM, PhD, DACVPM, DACVIM; Andrea C. DeSantis-Kerr, DVM; Lynn F. Guptill, DVM, PhD, DACVIM; Nita W. Glickman, MPH, PhD; Hugh B. Lewis, BVMS, DACVP; Lawrence T. Glickman, VMD, DrPH 

3.Effects Of Vaccination On The Endocrine And Immune Systems of Dogs,  Phase II Purdue University, November 1, 1999 
Drs. Harm HogenEsch and Larry T. Glickman 

‌

4.J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2002 Aug 15;221(4):515-21.

Evaluation of antithyroglobulin antibodies after routine vaccination in pet and research dogs.

Scott-Moncrieff JC, Azcona-Olivera J, Glickman NW, Glickman LT, HogenEsch H.

Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.

 

Rabies vaccine fears and relative risk.

People are often not very good at assessing relative risks. This can be expressed as a fear of flying, even though the relative risk of dying in a car accident on the way to the airport is probably much higher than the risk of a commercial airline crash. Two papers published in the September 15th issue of JAVMA (Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2008, Blanton, et. al. and Rabies in vaccinated dogs and cats in the United States, 1997-2001, Murray, et. al.) and a post and discussion on Dolittler concerning these papers illustrates how the relative risk of side effects of a vaccine versus the risk of the disease and related consequences. The comments related to the post are particularly revealing, and I believe show how veterinarians and their clients sometimes approach an issue from different angles and can end up talking past each other, especially when a client may be mistaking the relative risks involved.

So what are the risks of vaccination versus the risk of disease as illustrated by these two papers and the discussion on Dolittler?

Risks related to vaccination mostly involve adverse effects of vaccination. Adverse effects include allergic reactions, delayed reactions such as granulomas at the injection site and then the well-known and well-publicized vaccine associated sarcomas which occur mostly in cats, but can happen very rarely in dogs.
Most of these adverse effects are treatable and/or preventable (allergic reactions) and may happen a few times in 1,000 vaccinations. More serious life threatening reactions to vaccines are very rare, and many vets may see very few in their career. Vaccine associated sarcomas in cats may happen in one in 1000 cat to 1 in 10,000 cats over their lifetimes, depending on which study you would like to read. These sarcomas can be very difficult to remove depending on the location they form in, and can be caused by inflammation not related to vaccination. There are newer vaccines for cats that do not have the adjuvants suspected of causing sarcomas to form.
Some other serious diseases and problems such as generalized allergies, autoimmune diseases and "vaccinosis" (a general term for ill health blamed on vaccines that does not have any real meaning or definition) have never been clearly linked to vaccines and are probably not directly or specifically caused by vaccines.

What is the risk of any given pet being exposed to Rabies? This risk may be higher than most people think. The first Rabies surveillance paper shows that Rabies exists in wildlife in every state except Hawaii, and that various bat strains are the most widespread type. There are also regional variations-Raccoon rabies along the east coast, several skunk variants in the midwest, southwest and California, and fox variants in the southwest. A new strain of bat rabies has recently made the jump to skunks and foxes in Arizona. Canine rabies strains have been eradicated in the U.S. due to vaccination and animal control efforts, so all cases of rabies in domestic animals come from wildlife. Any animal that goes outside at all is at risk of being exposed to rabies. Since bat rabies is so widespread, it is possible for a pet to be exposed anywhere bats occur. Rabid bats have an annoying habit of turning up in strange places, including inside homes, so keeping cats indoors is no guarantee that they will never be exposed.

Another risk of having a pet that is not vaccinated against rabies or that is not current on rabies boosters is what could happen if the pet happens to bite someone or is exposed to a rabid animal.
Animal bites treated by doctors legally have to be reported to local health departments, so that appropriate follow up and rabies preventative treatment can be done in a timely manner. In the second JAVMA paper, reports from 20 states on dogs and cats tested for rabies between 1997 and 2001 are listed. There is no way to test a live animal for rabies infection, so all of these animals were euthanised because of a bite or died of neurologic disease that raised a suspicion of rabies. During that period these stated tested 78,669 dogs and 92,318 cats for rabies. 248 dogs (0.32%) and 685 cats (0.74%) tested positive. many of these animals may have been strays, but some of them were pets that were not vaccinated. 13 dogs and 22 cats had a history of rabies vaccination, but only 2 dogs and 3 cats were classified as currently vaccinated. As with any vaccine, failures can happen, but are very rare. This also indicates that one vaccine or an extended schedule of rabies booster does increase the risk for rabies infection.
If an unvaccinated pet bites someone, the local health department can have the pet euthanised and tested for rabies if they think they need to. This is a risk to the pet that is unrelated to the actual risk of rabies infection, as shown by this study-over 99% of dogs and cats tested for rabies were negative. Other states undoubtedly tested many animals as well, but did not agree to participate in this paper, so these numbers are probably even more dramatic across the entire country.

Some of the comments on Dollittler were common arguments many veterinarians hear. "My cats never go outside, they are always in the yard, etc." These papers show that rabies is common and widespread in wildlife, and that hundreds of unvaccinated and even a few vaccinated pets do get rabies, and tens of thousands of unvaccinated pets were killed for rabies testing over a five year period. This is the perspective veterinarians are coming from when they recommend rabies vaccines. The risk to pets and humans from rabies is real and the consequences of infection are severe. Some people who do not want to vaccinate their pets consider information like this fear-mongering, but failing to inform pet owners of these risks, along with a discussion of the rare but serious side effects of vaccines would constitute negligence on the veterinarians part.
Failing to keep a pet current on it's rabies vaccination can result in the death of the pet even if it does not get rabies. This is a result of the need to ensure that humans receive appropriate treatment in a timely manner when exposed to a potentially rabid animal and is a risk that most pet owners are not aware of. Just because a client thinks their pet will never bite anyone or will never get outside, does not mean that it will never happen. It does not mean that your vet thinks you are lying, but we understand the relative risks of vaccinating versus not vaccinating in a way that the pet owner may not.