• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Vaccine Overuse

Help Support Ranchers.net:

B

Ben H

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
1,738
Reaction score
0
Location
Gorham, ME
Yes, they're cheap, but are we using more then we need to?

My wife was talking to another horse person about vaccines. This other person happened to hear some recommendations from New Zealand.

Here is an example of a tetanus protocol from NZ
the first two vaccines are given four to six weeks apart, any time from three months of age. A booster is given a year later. This will provide excellent protection. Then a booster every five years will ensure this protection is maintained.
Click to expand...
http://www.horse-pony.co.nz/archive/2008/October/oct08-vet.html

Vets around here are getting people to vaccinate twice a year for tetanus.

Some reports are suggesting an animal properly vaccinated for rabies with a booster has sufficient protection for the lifetime without additional boosters.

This friend of my wife asked the salesperson from the catalog she was ordering from about this, she said she'd get back. She called back after talking to their pharmaceutical rep, they said they don't do any testing beyond a year.

Not all vaccines are going to act the same, but I got a feeling we're wasting money in some areas.

A Couple Articles
http://www.rainbowacrestables.com/horsehealtharticles/vaccineinfo.html
 
Quick answer is possibly in some instances. But there are some heated discussions among some very bright people.

Here is my take on vaccines. First, I am NOT an expert in epidemiology of cattle or horses.

However, on a larger basis concerning vaccines:

There is a lot of money spent on proving effectiveness and getting FDA approval for safety. To turn around and attempt to lengthen the effectiveness (after however many boosters that are or are not needed) on the label of a vaccine will cost millions more and will likely not be financially justified by the vaccine company.

Even if some funded studies start suggesting lengthening the intervals between boostering some vaccines, if it is not labeled for this, the company will not be forced to stand behind the recommendation and the veterinarian may be liable if a wreck occurs as it is off label.

In small animals, there has been a trend to prove further length of effectiveness on some newer vaccines, as they are being tested and produced. I may be wrong, but think this trend will follow in large animal as well (when possible).

Antibody production is different for various infectious agents. Protection from some viruses may only last 6 months to a year (especially antibodies that have to be secreted into the airways for protection). Some protection may last longer.

There are many reasons some vaccines may need multiple or yearly boosters. Titers may not consistently last. You can always measure titers on each animal, but even then- who knows what titer level cut off is actually protective for some agents?

At this point, I think it would be very wise to follow label recommendations until something more definitive is decided.

Not trying to be critical of whomever answered the question about rabies titers- but a sales rep from a catalog is not an educated individual (which is why they had to ask someone) and should point you to someone who is.

Rabies positive horses still show up at events and it is a mess when they do. I know off the top of my head in 08 a positive horse was at the Missouri state fair. Anyone touching that horse was exposed. I hate over regulation, but rabies is NOT treatable and is a big concern for human exposure. Preventing exposure judiciously is all that can be done.

Dogs and cats have had the Rabies vaccine spread out to 3 yrs in almost all areas, which is based on appropriate data. I don't think longer would be prudent based on the studies.

Your vet will be the best source for current information. And this field is continuously evolving.
 
Rabies in particular is the one I keep hearing the talk about. If animals are properly vaccinated initially, there is no scientific evidence that annual boosters are needed. Rules requiring annual boosters are brought on through lobbying by people who will profit from it, or from people influenced by those who will profit from it. This is especially true in the small animals.
 
Rabies in particular is the one I keep hearing the talk about. If animals are properly vaccinated initially, there is no scientific evidence that annual boosters are needed. Rules requiring annual boosters are brought on through lobbying by people who will profit from it, or from people influenced by those who will profit from it. This is especially true in the small animals. I agree there are vaccines that need to be boosted more frequently, but who profits from doing the research? It's kind of like input intensive ag as a whole, there's no money in doing research on low/no input systems.
 
In Rhodesia we had vaccination programs monitored by the state veterinary department, based on vaccines developed and tested by our government research department in partnership with the South African Ondesterpoort research and veterinary facility.
Rabies was an initial vaccination at weaning, the right ear was tattooed to prove the vaccination was given, the booster given at 18 months with the second tattoo was the final vaccination, in the event of a rabies outbreak livestock could be shot if behaviour was unusual, any non tattooed dog was shot outright, the vaccines were 100% effective with only two shots.
Tetanus protocol was similar to the New Zealand one in the origional post.
Most tick bourne diseases required annual boosters for exotic cattle, and all horses, native cattle were left so long as they were regularly challenged, African horse fever was essential as any unvaccinated horse would be susceptible.
 
There is NO vaccine 100% effective. It just doesn't happen. Show me the scientifically reviewed studies and data. Doesn't happen.

Some animals do not mount enough of a response to provide life long immunity. Which animal is which? The dog playing with your kid or the neighbors?

Titers drop over time. I have been vaccinated for rabies and boostered twice. The vaccine is not considered to give a guaranteed 100% life long immunity. I have to have my titers checked periodically. If low enough, I have to be re-boostered.

The issue with checking titers in animals is the cost. Rabies is a public health issue and so is regulated by the government- the local government. Each state, county, and city make their own ordinances. I haven't seen pfizer lobbying my city hall.

Andybob,

If the vaccines were so effective, why are there outbreaks and why are you having to shoot animals with unusual behavior?
 
Some animals aren't going to respond and there isn't anything you can do about it. I've done titer studies back in school vaccinating cattle and seen the data first hand regarding responses after first injection and then the booster. I think the 100% effective thing is probably for those that will respond. I also work for a biotech company where we boost goats with human antigens for anitbody production. We measure the titers every month. There are some that never respond well and aren't used for production.

Pfizer may not lobby your local government, but who is your local government getting the suggestion for the protocol from? What are the Veterinarians profit margin on giving a rabies shot? It can't hurt the animals to give it every year, but it's certainly very profitable.

Titers are not necessarily a good test for long term immunity. They are great for testing the response of a vaccine, but they are only testing for present antibodies. The serum is mixed with the antigen in the analyzer machine at the lab. My experience is with a Hitatchi 717 and 911. The body is not given a chance to react to the challenge with the memory cells with a titer test. Memory cells are for long term immunity, they are essentially at rest until challenged. Once challenged they will release the antibodies to destroy the challenge.

My wife just sent me this link:
http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/
 
Okfarmer; there is no way to vaccinate wild animals the main carriers were monkey, jackals and mongoos, though all wild animals are a potential host during an outbreak, wild animals behaving in a perculiar way are better shot and sent to the Gov vet lab. I know of no cases of the rabies vaccination failing, some of the tick bourne diseases such as anaplasmosis either occasionally fail or are improperly administered especially in large herds (2000+ cows)
During the 1978 anthrax outbreak only two head went down in commercial herds, possibly due to being missed when being vaccinated, the disease spred rapidly in the tribal herds which had not been vaccinated for a few years due to the war.
 
Andybob,

"in the event of a rabies outbreak livestock could be shot if behaviour was unusual"- Wildlife and livestock are different. I do understand that. You stated livestock. Wildlife can be vaccinated. And I do believe their is an oral vaccine for wildlife if you research enough, you will find it.

Ben,

I do know what memory cells are and you are correct in their purpose of assisting in mounting a response. Memory cells decrease in number overtime as well. And measuring antibodies is of value. Again, rabies is a human health issue. There is a difference between protecting an animal against distemper or parvo vs humans against rabies. There are no mulligans.

Veterinarians are not paying the rent with rabies vaccines. As soon as regulations allowed for increasing the intervals, it was put in practice very quickly by 95% of the practitioners. Texas was a little slower, but when you live next to a 3rd world county and rabid bats falling out of the sky periodically- I understand the slower transition.

Small animal/equine practices and large animal practices function very differently. I know because I am a consultant for many small animal practices. The small animal and equine practices charge for their services which is how they stay above water- not a 15 dollar vaccine that costs them half of that for initial purchase, money tied up in overhead, time discussing the regulations with clients, time discussing the potential adverse effects, biohazard costs, and cost of technical staff to administer. It won't keep the doors open. Large animal vets function on volume.

There are always going to be people out for a buck in less than above the table means in any profession (including ranchers), but I do not see common abuse. I live where I live, and I do think people are different across the county. I travel in OK, TX now, have been in KS, and CO in the past. It would surprise you the number of vets that are over protective of clients expenses and don't recommend things they should. My point is that rabies vaccine is not paying the bills and they are more than okay extending intervals when appropriate by evidence.

Vaccines can and do cause adverse effects- I've seen anaphylactic reaction in several species. Autoimmune hemolytic anemia is also a potential adverse event. Also, fibrosarcomas are associated at higher instances with some vaccines in cats. Because of this, most cats are actually receiving a 1 yr rabies vaccine called Purevax that has an adjuvant less likely to cause fibrosarcomas. But, the trade off is it is not as stimulating to the immune system. There is a huge push to extend vaccines in the veterinary community. The veterinary staffs genuinely care about the animals, not their financial compensation which isn't much. Otherwise, they would be doing something different- spend a day there cleaning up the diarrhea, vomit, lancing abscesses, and trying to keep from being bit by pets you don't know.

All medical decisions are based on risk vs benefit. I don't disagree in re-evaluating effectiveness continuously- and because there are potential adverse effects (though rare), I hope they can be extended. But, there needs to be solid evidence with something so serious as Rabies (that is my concern here). And like I said, some very intelligent epidemiologists have concerns extending this further at this time.

I think we have the same goals, but I am not ready to act without repeatable peer reviewed studies.
 
The reason why there were occasional outbreaks (last in 1963 in my area) was because the wildlife in the national parks and on our ranches were potential vectors, in the African context vaccinating game animals is impractical, many diseases were eradicated by using a cull/re stock protocol.
We only vaccinated dogs and cats, so livestock acting aggressive, unusually passive, or struggling to drink due to paralysis of the oesophagus (hydrophobia) would be euthanised and the brain submitted to the govt veterinary laboratory.
Between the govt vets, game department and city councils, the rabies program was well controlled.
 
I admit I really should be careful not to paint a broad brush stroke to include all or most veterinarians. The majority I have dealt with I don't think would try to get their customers to vaccinate more then necessary. Most are good honest people. But there are some I have run into that I have to question. I question the fact that farmers in some states aren't allowed to purchase rabies vaccine and administer it themselves. You don't need vets or vet techs giving vaccines when you have farmers/ranchers who have been through BQA training.
 

Latest posts

Top