# article on parvo vacc. advises against vacc at 6 or 8 weeks



## taem (Mar 5, 2011)

I posted this in a different forum too but I wanted to mention it here as well, for those like me who'd never heard this stuff before.

The woman who runs the raw pet food store in town is a real asset to the community, for example when she found out one of my neighbors was giving her dog cheap treats from the supermarket, she offered to give my neighbor free all natural treats from her store. She gives away a bimonthly magazine called "Dogs Naturally" to her regular customers, despite the $5.95 cover price. Current issue (Mar/Apr 2012) is about nutrition, but last issue had an article about parvo vaccinations I found fascinating.

Article is called "Parvovirus... Everything You Wanted to Know, and Some Things You Wish You Didn't". Authors are Patricia Jordan About The Author - Mark of the Beast, Catherine O'Driscoll Canine Health Concern - Putting your dog’s health first, and Dana Scott Fallriver Labrador Retrievers

Some of the tidbits:

1) 28% of vaccinated pups and 11% of vaccinated adult dogs will still get parvo.

2) For puppies who get parvo, the survival rate is 85%. Of the 15% fatality rate, the cause of death is not always parvo. Dogs who were not vaccinated against parvo have a higher survival rate if they do get parvo than dogs who were vaccinated, because the vacc generally suppresses the immune system permanently. 

3) The parvo vacc increases risk to a bunch of things, including cancer, Addison's, hyperthyroidism, Cushings, heart disease, goes on and on and on. Death rate from cancer far, far outpaces death rate from parvo.

4) My dogs' vets (not the current one, who is very good on this sort of thing, but past ones) always told me you need several rounds of shots for the immunity to take hold. I was told, first shot "primes" the system, the second shot creates the immunity. This is not true, it's a one shot deal, the vacc either works or it doesn't (the medical term is "seroconversion"). The presence of maternal antibodies from colostum linger for a variable period up to 26 weeks and inhibit seroconversion, so you do multiple shots so one of the applications will take hold. Vanguard's test showed that administering the vacc at 6 weeks worked 52% of the time; at 9 weeks 88%; at 12 weeks, 100%.

The authors' point here is that the early shots are seriously questionable, and they call parvo vacc at 6-8 weeks a "high risk, low value proposition." They also note that 8 weeks is a common time for pups to go to their new homes, and the resultant stress makes it less likely for the vaccine to take hold.

5) Not a parvo specific issue, but 160,000 cats a year develop terminal cancer at vaccination injection sites. An Italian study hypothesized a similar vaccine-induced cancer link in dogs. And we already knew the Salk Polio vaccine can create an inheritable cancer in humans.

6) There is a titer test that can determine whether the parvo vacc has taken hold. But it is more expensive than giving multiple applications of the vacc.

7) The fewer antigens there are in a single shot, the better the odds of the vacc taking hold. But there is no monovalent distemper vacc, so the best option you have is a parvo-distemper shot. (Schering-Plough is one commmonly used one.) 

So what do the authors recommend? They view not getting the shot at all and focusing on proper nutrition and especially keeping an eye open for parasitical infections such as giardia and coccidia, and treating those with something like diatomaceous earth, as a viable option.

If you do get the parvo vacc, wait until at least 9 weeks, and you'd be better off tightly controlling socialization and getting the vacc even later than that, say 12 weeks. The unequivocally advise against getting the parvo vacc at 6 or 8 weeks. And if you can afford it, rather than getting multiple applications of the vaccine, get one and run the titer test to see if you need another.


----------



## Apres Argent (Aug 9, 2010)

*Parvo*

I follow Dr. Dodds recommendations and pups stay with me till 12 weeks.


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

I also follow Jean Dodd's vaccine schedule, but I will tell you something, parvo is no small thing. I used to work at a vet hospital and parvo is deadly and tragic. It also lives in the environment for a very long time, at least a year if not longer. I would never risk not vaccinating for parvo at all, I think that is a dangerous recommendation personally.

That said, I recently did titers on my 2-year-old dog and his distemper and parvo antibodies were high. He hopefully won't be getting anymore vaccines during his lifetime (other than rabies which is required by law every three years).

I do feel that overvaccination is unnecessary and potentially harmful. I think it's a fine line between vaccinating enough to protect against disease and vaccinating so much you cause different disease.

I would like to know if the author of this article quoted any proof or studies that the parvo vaccine specifically causes cancer and all the other diseases mentioned as I have not heard any definitive proof of this.


----------



## taem (Mar 5, 2011)

PaddleAddict said:


> I will tell you something, parvo is no small thing. I used to work at a vet hospital and parvo is deadly and tragic. It also lives in the environment for a very long time, at least a year if not longer. I would never risk not vaccinating for parvo at all, I think that is a dangerous recommendation personally.


No doubt. I have to think hard about this but I will probably get the vacc, and then pay for a titer test to see if seroconversion has occurred rather than getting additional injections. That's the key takeaway for me, that you don't need these multiple injections and boosters, there is an alternative. You obviously knew about the titer test already, this is the first time I ever heard of it.

I really do wish I had the confidence and know-how to skip the vaccine and do it "naturally" though. The article also gets into non-pharmaceutical ways to treat parvo when it occurs.



> I would like to know if the author of this article quoted any proof or studies that the parvo vaccine specifically causes cancer and all the other diseases mentioned as I have not heard any definitive proof of this.


I think the authors' point is simply that it is known vaccines suppress the immune system generally, and this must increase risk for all those other things. That makes sense to me, although I do agree also with your skepticism since the increased risk must pass some threshold before it has an actual statistical impact.


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

There really is no treatment for parvo. You just support the body with IV fluids and try to deal with the diarrhea and pray that they make it. It's a terrible disease.

I really would not let this one article scare you off the parvo vaccine. Parvo is a serious disease.

The thing about the puppy vaccine series is timing. Puppies receive maternal antibodies when the nurse immediately following birth. These protect the puppy for their first weeks of life. The thing is, these maternal antibodies also render vaccines ineffective (they see the vaccine as a virus and destroy it). Long ago, vets used to advise vaccinating puppies at 4, 6, 8, 10, etc. weeks because they didn't know the right time. Now some studies have been done and it seems that most vaccines will be ineffective before 7 to 8 weeks of age. The problem is, the time it take the maternal antibodies to wan enough to allow a vaccine to be effective varies with every individual puppy. You just don't know when your puppy will respond to the vaccine. I read an article with some quotes from one of the vets on the AAHA vaccine task force and he said he has seen some maternal antibodies not wan until 15 weeks of age, so one vaccine at 12 weeks will not necessarily do it (he recommends giving the last vaccine at 16 weeks). I suppose if your vet was willing and you were prepared to spend as much money as necessary, you could try to find a lab that had a test for the maternal antibodies and then test your pup every few weeks until you see that it's time for the vaccine. I don't even know if this is available to be honest. 

Have you looked into Jean Dodd's vaccination protocol? It is a minimal vaccine regimine that many owners are following.

You might want to do some reading about titers as well. It's not a black and white test where if the test shows the levels are low it means your dog is not protected. That could just mean the system had not recently been challenged by that particular virus, so your dog *might* be protected or might not. You just don't know. If the levels are high, it's safe to say your dog is protected. But what do you do if the levels are low? Some people believe once a dog has had it's puppy series it is protected for life. Unfortunately, there have not been any duration of immunity studies that proove this, so it's a guess. 

In the end, I think you need to educate yourself as much as possible, find a good vet you trust who will work with you, weigh the risks, and choose the vaccination options that you are more comfortable with.


----------



## taem (Mar 5, 2011)

PaddleAddict said:


> There really is no treatment for parvo. You just support the body with IV fluids and try to deal with the diarrhea and pray that they make it. It's a terrible disease.


What the authors say is "It is important to remember that Parvovirus is essentially dysentery -- solve the diarrhea and you cure the Parvo." They discuss homeopathic remedies, nosodes, Parvaid, and now there are some pharmaceutical responses, though it can run up to $2000+ for treatment. They note that Tamiflu is often used and it's not very effective.

But survival rate is 85%, so while I have no doubt it's dire indeed, the statistics might make it worthwhile to run the risk, especially if you emphasize nutrition and general immunosystem health. I'm not disagreeing with you in any way, btw, I'm just remarking out loud that there is something to think about, it's not the complete no-brainer vets make it out to be.



> Have you looked into Jean Dodd's vaccination protocol? It is a minimal vaccine regimine that many owners are following.


I'd never heard the term/name but I looked it up and that's basically what my vet recommends so I guess she follows it. I actually switched vets because the first (who seems great, nothing against her, just a philosophical difference) wanted to do way, way more vaccs, like lepto and bordetella.



> In the end, I think you need to educate yourself as much as possible, find a good vet you trust who will work with you, weigh the risks, and choose the vaccination options that you are more comfortable with.


That's really what has me upset over this article, that this is stuff no vet ever told me. It's not just that I have to educate myself -- I have to break down the false information that's already been handed to me.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

I had Swizzle get the shot as a puppy and at a year. The vet says perhaps never again - we will titer. I really like my vet.


----------



## tortoise (Feb 5, 2012)

taem said:


> I posted this in a different forum too but I wanted to mention it here as well, for those like me who'd never heard this stuff before.
> 
> The woman who runs the raw pet food store in town is a real asset to the community, for example when she found out one of my neighbors was giving her dog cheap treats from the supermarket, she offered to give my neighbor free all natural treats from her store. She gives away a bimonthly magazine called "Dogs Naturally" to her regular customers, despite the $5.95 cover price. Current issue (Mar/Apr 2012) is about nutrition, but last issue had an article about parvo vaccinations I found fascinating.
> 
> ...


#2 is false
#4 is false
#5 has nothing to do with parvo vaccination schedule.
#6 is misleading, the titer cannot determine if the animal has sufficient immunity
#7 is false, it's out by NeoTech

Not saying anything else is true. It looks iffy or misleading, but I'm not feeling up to researching it. I suggest you go buy a copy of "Veterinary Immunology" and read it cover-to-cover. Then watch a few dozen puppies that are dying from parvo. Then go pick your vet's brain. I used to be waaaayyy minimal/no-vaccine until I got curious and started learning. 

Be careful, raw feeders pass on A LOT of misinformation about diet and more.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

tortoise said:


> Be careful, raw feeders pass on A LOT of misinformation about diet and more.


Kibble feeders, I assure you, pass on A LOT of misinformation about diet and more.

And just to clarify, Tortoise, you are incorrect about #6. If you have read the articles written by the leading vaccine researchers you will know that performing a titer test immediately after administering some of the initial vaccines *would* allow you to determine of seroconversion took place or not.

And, #4 *is* correct as it was stated by the OP.


----------



## tortoise (Feb 5, 2012)

It depends on the vaccine (not all vaccines for a particular disease are equal). Vaccines that only require 1 dose are more likely to cause vaccine reactions.


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

I think, as ever, there is a middle ground. Vaccination carries a tiny risk; not vaccinating carries a higher risk, both to the individual dog, and of allowing the pool of infection to build up in the population as a whole. Vaccinating early means for most pups the vaccine is ineffective because of maternal antibodies, but it may be necessary for some pups; leaving it too late puts the puppy at higher risk. Two shots, several weeks apart, and another at one year ensures the vast majority of puppies have immunity - research is still needed to prove that this is then for life.

I am personally sceptical about the effectiveness of homeopathic remedies, and even many homeopaths are sceptical about the use of nosodes to replace vaccines. Good diet is, of course, important in building up resistance to disease, but puppies in particular go downhill so rapidly I would never rely on diet alone. I am old enough to remember the days when distemper was rife and vaccination comparatively unusual, and I have read enough about the effects of parvo - and the ill health of even those dogs that survive it - never to want to take that risk for any of my dogs.

The World Small Animal Veterinary Association has recently published updated guidelines for vaccination - you may find them helpful as part of your research: www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf


----------



## taem (Mar 5, 2011)

Tortoise, the authors don't say you shouldn't get the vaccine, the article is about providing info the vet does not. The main issue is whether it makes sense to administer the vacc at 6 or 8 weeks, and administer multiple applications.



tortoise said:


> #2 is false


We're talking parvo which is treated. And there, 85% is about right. Some will say 80, some will say 90. Trend is upwards as treatments become better.



> #4 is false


Here is what the authors say:
"The important point is that it only takes one vaccination to protect a puppy from Parvo (or any other virus)... If delivered when the maternal antibodies are low enough to allow an immune response, it only takes one vaccination to protect your puppy and this has been common knowledge for over thirty years."



> #5 has nothing to do with parvo vaccination schedule.


Yeah I mentioned it was cats, although the Italian study posits a similar effect in dogs. It does seem to be well established fact that vaccines suppress immune health though, it's just that the consequences are at this point unquantified because they are not researched.



> #6 is misleading, the titer cannot determine if the animal has sufficient immunity


Here is what the authors say:
"If you vaccinate your puppy once, and as close to 12 weeks as you are comfortable, and then run a titer three weeks later, then the titer has the ability to determine whether your puppy has seroconverted or not. If there is any amount of circulating antibody, no matter how small, then your puppy is protected for life and there is no need for further vaccination."

I'm not sure that last point is correct, life cycle of the antibody presence (15 years or so) is longer than most dogs' lifespans, but some dogs will live longer than that.



> #7 is false, it's out by NeoTech


I think that's my mistake not the authors, that vacc is new, it is the only one available, and this article came out in the last issue of a bimonthly. But note that someone made a single antigen distemper vacc after the industry went so long with polyvalents. In other words we were all just vaccinating less effectively, despite the degree of risk with all vaccs, and it took this long for the industry to offer an alternative.



> Not saying anything else is true. It looks iffy or misleading, but I'm not feeling up to researching it. I suggest you go buy a copy of "Veterinary Immunology" and read it cover-to-cover. Then watch a few dozen puppies that are dying from parvo. Then go pick your vet's brain. I used to be waaaayyy minimal/no-vaccine until I got curious and started learning.


That's a vet school book though. Current issue of Naturally Dogs has a lengthy compilation of statements from vets on how they were never taught the downsides of vaccinations in vet school, it's a fascinating read of how it looks from the ground level, check it out if you get the chance. With vets, the choices are a vet that vaccinates a LOT, and a vet that vaccinates less than that. No vet I've ever talked to asks if you want a vacc, they ask when you want to schedule the vacc.


----------



## tortoise (Feb 5, 2012)

> If there is any amount of circulating antibody, no matter how small, then your puppy is protected for life and there is no need for further vaccination."


Not exactly. The most current researchers cannot determine what titer value is adequate protection.

The education a vet receives is not universal. There are several vet schools and there are elective classes that may not be offered when a student has time to take them. Vets must get continuing education to stay licensed by they choose what they want. Plus in vet school they're presented with more information than is humanly possible to absorb. It's very possible some people missed any particular topic. It IS taught. My vet is my fiance and I've had the leisure of picking his brain, reading his textbooks, and reading the latest research as it is published. Vets are aware of the downside of vaccines. But most will subscribe to evidence-based medicine. It's a balance of risk and reward, and your vet's assessment of risk will be based on personal experience and the frequency of cases seen in the area. And I believe a good vet will respect your point of view while making sure you have correct information. My fiance/vet and I talked for a few hours before I decided on a vaccine schedule for my mpoo puppy. My puppy has high risk of exposure for everything so I did not do a minimal-vaccine schedule for him.

FWIW, I the breeder did 2 DHPP. I had DHPP booster, lyme/lepto done at 12 weeks. Rabies at 16 weeks. Bordatella 2 weeks before boarding. Rabies gets a booster in 1 year and then every 3 years. DHPP, lyme/lepto is either the same as rabies or just every 3 years.

In a perfect world, could we do titers every week on puppies to see when maternal antibodies are gone and then vaccinate? I don't know if maternal anibodies would show up on a titer test? I used to titer but it was $200 and nobody really knows what the numbers represent.

Vaccines certainly are safer than other options. They used to infect animals with the disease, lots of them died. I did this when I raised rabbits. I got rabbits that carried a less-bad strain of a highly contagious incurable disease. They essentially "vaccinated" new rabbits I brought in. Most were fine, 1 got the disease and had to be culled. 2 never fully recovered. There is no vaccine for this disease in rabbits, btw.


----------



## tortoise (Feb 5, 2012)

You might be interested that canine parvovirus is a human creation? It's origins are from a cat vaccine. I can't remember the details. It was in the book "What Vets Won't Tell You About Vaccines" I think that is the title. It was an interesting read and seemed legit, but that was before I started fact-checking everything I read.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

Tortoise, you are confusing the use of a titer test to determine whether seroconversion has occurred versus using titer to measure levels of antibodies.


----------



## taem (Mar 5, 2011)

Well I just got back from the vet. Sydney did get her 2nd round of DHPP. I spent about an hour chatting with the vet and ultimately I was satisfied with her take.

She agrees with some of the points in the article -- she does not do DHPP booster shots after 1 year, after that she's done with DHPP, she thinks the dog is protected by that point and further shots carry little if any benefit and she is sufficiently leery of the potential downsides of vaccinations to just give them without more evidence of benefit.

But she is not convinced the titer test for seroconversion is definitive -- her explanation on that got pretty technical and I am not sure I could relate it adequately. She does know vets she respects who think that test is conclusive though.

She does believe there are treatments, including homeopathic ones, for parvo that are effective to a high degree. But whether your dog will respond to them cannot be known ahead of time, and a parvo infection might require a massive injection of meds which carry far more downside than the vacc. (Not to mention possibility of outright death, and a truly miserable experience for your dog even if a homeopathic remedy works.)

We talked for a long time, but that's sort of a picture of how she approaches this. I think she has a reasonable take and I am relieved. The breeder Syd comes from is also a very good one and she's well informed on these issues (she waits til 9 weeks to give the first DHPP) and their views are aligned so that's another point of relief. And ultimately, this vet is not keen at all on the use of pharmaceutical products of any kind in general, and that's a huge point in her favor with me.

I'm glad I read this article though, and I'm curious enough I'll be doing a lot more reading up on it. I plan on getting another mini when the time is right and by then I hope to be much better informed.


----------



## tortoise (Feb 5, 2012)

taem said:


> Well I just got back from the vet. Sydney did get her 2nd round of DHPP. I spent about an hour chatting with the vet and ultimately I was satisfied with her take.
> 
> She agrees with some of the points in the article -- she does not do DHPP booster shots after 1 year, after that she's done with DHPP, she thinks the dog is protected by that point and further shots carry little if any benefit and she is sufficiently leery of the potential downsides of vaccinations to just give them without more evidence of benefit.
> 
> ...


Sounds like a good plan, read, fact check, consult the professionals, and ultimatley the decision is yours.


----------

