I had my pregnant lab vaccinated (booster) on the advice of my vet who contacted the vaccine manufacturer for advice. The advice was that it was safe between something like 3 and 6 weeks of the pregnancy (I'm not certain of that timeframe but it was something like that). Anyway I her vaccinated during the advised time and she had 12 puppies but we lost 6, 5 at between 2 and 4 days of age and 1 at 9 days. They just faded, we tried everything but it was hopeless. I have bred 21 litters and never had this many die and am just wondering if it could be connected with the vaccination. Has anyone else had any problem like this or any knowledge or advice please?

You will never learn the answer trying to gather anecdotal evidence.  What about asking your vet to seek information from the manufacturers on what trials have been run on these circumstances and what the outcomes demonstrated?

Did your bitch have the CHV vaccinations during pregnancy too?  I would never have the annual vaccinations if my bitch was in whelp.

I have called the vets today and they are going to contact the manufacturer I just thought it might be worth asking other breeders.

I have never had the CHV vacs it was just the annual booster fro parvo/lepto etc.

It is certainly recommended in my breed and I have used it for the past 3 - 4 years.  Have you had PM's done on puppies to try and establish possible causes ?  Perhaps it is just coincidence or Fading Puppy Syndrome?

I didn't have PM's done, although I wish I had now, I thought it was fading puppy, but as I said I have never lost as many as this before. There is just this nagging doubt about the vaccinations, I wish I hadn't had it done now but I did take my vets advice. I just don't want them giving this advice to other people if it was the vac. 

sorry to hear of your loss,
My girl was due her booster as she got pregenant and our vet advised against it ,

I am so sorry to hear of your loss.

I am also absolutely appalled at both your vet and the vaccine manafacturer.

No bitch should be vaccinated in whelp ever and no dog that lives with her should be vaccinated whilst she is in whelp or while pups are on the ground. Live vaccines shed for up to weeks and the vaccine manafacturers are more than aware of that.

Vaccines when given correctly to puppies last a lifetime and there is no need for any adult dog to be revaccinated unless they have no titre levels.

I am not sure if anyone does titre testing in the UK but it is very popular in the USA and is becoming increasingly more available here in Australia when dog owners have realised the damage that vaccines can do to there beloved pets.

According to the data sheet it is not contraindicated in previously vaccinated bitches.

> Vaccines when given correctly to puppies last a lifetime and there is no need for any adult dog to be revaccinated unless they have no titre levels.

I think maybe you need to do a search as this has been discussed many times in the past and not everyone would agree with you there.
Yes, in the UK we are aware that vaccines can damage some dogs but we are also aware of the benefits. 

mallindg I am really sorry to hear what happened to your litter, it should never have happened and should not be allowed.

Lots of what wylie says makes absolute sense, and yes both the vets and manufactuers are appalling, I couldn't agree more.
Unfortunately here in the uk we don't seem to make any progress, but remain in the dark ages when it comes to pet health.

Titres are available here, but you have to ask and convince the vets (my experience) that is the what you are going to do, it is not easy.

I also think it is worth people knowing that once a dog has a reaction to a vaccine, he or she will most likely react to vaccines in future, so they should not be given again, I'm pointing this out as I've noticed one or two posts on here over the last week or so with dogs having adverse reactions.  Hopefully their owners will realise and not have them vaccinated again.

Just wanted to get that off my chest!

> and yes both the vets and manufactuers are appalling, I couldn't agree more.
>

Perry, I have posted the link to the data sheet showing it is not contraindicated in pregnant bitches.
Far from being in the dark ages, British vets conduct evidence based practice.  Conducting practice on hearsay or supposition, adding two and two together on a piece anecdotal evidence, would be far more typical of the dark ages.

Actually if you do some major research into vaccinations you will find it is contrindicated.

We have just had Jean Dodds out from Hemopet in the USA here in Australia and she was adamant that all countries not only over vaccinate dogs but that manafacturers are not particularly forthcoming as to why they put in place there vaccination protocols.

www.hemopet.com

Jean is an absolutely amazing woman who really has done her research into vaccines and titre testing. Jean was actually asked about vaccinating bitches not only in whelp but also about vaccinating lactating bitches and was quite clear that it should never be done due to the risks. It was if needed to be done better off being done when pups had gone to there new homes. Live vaccines the virus can shed for up to 2 weeks after vaccination thus putting pups at risk of disease.

Vaccine manafacturers are not Gods.....Neither is Jean Dodds................but she makes far more sense than they do.

Do you vaccinate your kids every year for Rubella, Measles, Mumps, whooping cough etc? The answer is NO. So why do we vaccinate our beloved dogs annually? Titre testing proves that a dog has immunity. We dont titre test our kids. And thats not a supposition thats FACT!!

Jean Dodds Sydney Seminar was taped and is available on the net for anyone to listen to.

I attended the Brisbane seminar and can only rely on what others told me about the Sydney smeinar as i cant listen to it personally.

For those that are interested here is the link

http://www.pettalkradio.com.au/content/view/414/114/

No, it is not contraindicated just because Jean Dodds says so.  I don't need to do "major research", nor can I possibly do that not having the resources or facilities, because the manufacturers have to do it obtain their licence.  But perhaps by "major research" you mean trawling the internet reading anecdotes and items mavericks that have not passed muster in peer reviewed literature.  The manufacturers are not gods which is why they are required to continually research and produce the evidence.

> Do you vaccinate your kids every year for Rubella, Measles, Mumps, whooping cough etc? The answer is NO. So why do we vaccinate our beloved dogs annually?

Because the species and the diseases involved varies.  Even outwith vaccines some conditions can be contracted once and never again and others will reoccur as immunity is not continuous so surely the concept is not too difficult to grasp.

Actually Isabel you need to do some major research. Jean Dodds can back her facts up. Vaccine companies actually pulled annually out of thin air. Titres prove that dogs do not need to be vaccinated annually. Any result means the dog will be able to fight off an assualt.

Perhaps you need to do a search on Jean Dodds and her work in the USA and internationally. She is actually a vet and ex AKC breeder who runs an extremely well respected Greyhound rehoming service in California and is the leader in hypothyroidism and auto immune issues.

Thats right your not interested cos the Vaccine manafacturers always tell the truth. Thats why vaccine reactions never happen.

Even lowly old Australia now has 3 year vaccinations for parvo, hep etc. Thank goodness we dont have Rabies because i am more than sure our epilepsy rates would sky rocket.

You can be closed minded all you like BUT I will continue to do my own research and questioning for the benefit of my dogs.

And Immunity is about response by antibodies to a threat. If a threat occurs in any animals system the bodys antibodies actually multiply in a very short time to fight off that invader and that is a very basic principle.

My bitch was due in season when her booster was due. My Vet knew that I would be mating her that particular season. He told me not to vaccinate and that she could be done after the puppies were weaned.

My bitch was in season and due to be mated and due her booster. My vet told me there was no reason whatsoever to NOT vaccinate, and even showed me the bit where this was mentioned in the vaccine manufacturers details.

>Titres prove that dogs do not need to be vaccinated annually.

Titres prove that some dogs do not need to be vaccinated annually ...

>Thank goodness we dont have Rabies because i am more than sure our epilepsy rates would sky rocket.

I don't think you need worry on that score because (so far) that effect hasn't been seen here since the advent of the Pet Passport.

My friend's bitch was boostered two weeks before her puppies were due. Five strong, healthy puppies (the ones I still see are still strong and healthy a year later) resulted.

i agree with wylie and dont think that dogs should be vaccinated every year, when it comes to vaccines i think it is generally personal choice and owners must do what they are comfortable with. i personally only give the puppy jabs and would only booster if there was a problem in my area that i was aware of. i do believe that the vaccines last years (as they do humans) and that pumping our beloved pets with chemicals regularly is not a good idea.

obviously there is risks involved with either choice as some pets could react and some pets who are vaccinated are still unprotected due to there immunity not fuctioning for whatever reason.

i think titre tests are a good idea as if that proves your dog is immune then why pump him/her full of more crap that they dont benefit from.

It is simple logic that MOST vets will encourage yearly boosters after all that is a major percentage of their earnings, for the same reason most vets you will find dont encourage raw feeding - why? because they cant sell it to you, again special diets are major income, vets are there after all to make money like any business.

like i said it has to be a decision for the owner themselves, but as for vaccinating a pregnant bitch or even a bitch due to mated within the next month or so, i would never advise anyone to do that, even if you regularly booster then it can definatly wait a couple of months until after the puppies have all gone as it is just not worth the risk.

>It is simple logic that MOST vets will encourage yearly boosters after all that is a major percentage of their earnings,

The selfsame logic tells us that this could be very simply replaced by the charge for an annual titre test, with the chance of charging for a vaccination as well depending on the result.

I am still unclear what you mean when you use the term "major research" but Jean Dodd has been around for many years. If you do a search on here you will find her work has been discussed before on many occasions.

>is the leader in hypothyroidism and auto immune issues.

We can expect her peers to be reviewing her findings for us then. 

our bitch was in season when her vaccination was due, our vet told us it was better to vaccinate after the pups were born, he didnt even suggest we had her vaccinated early.

Hi,
I'm sorry for your loss.
All I can say is I don't think you'll ever find out!

Three years ago I had a bitch vaccinated while two weeks into whelp, all bar one pup died. I otfen wonder was it the vaccination.
Have just mated a bitch and she was due for annual booster, but will never do boosters again any where near season, mating and whelpings, don't think I'd even do then when they are feeding pups.
Good Luck with rest of pups.

Hi, so you believe that dogs should not be vaccinated again after having their first ''puppy vaccinations''?  What about parvo and other diseases dogs can catch?  So would you say that our vets are conning us?

My Vet wouldnt vaccinate a bitch due to be mated so I  know she wouldnt vaccinate a pregnant bitch.

Hi,

i wouldnt say they are conning us, but i do think it is personal choice, and i personally feel that a yearly booster is not needed, vaccination probably last for very many years as they do in humans, after all what vaccine do we have boostered every year?

of course there is a risk of catching diseases but there is a risk when administering any drug also, so as i say it really is personal choice, i dont booster but that is my choice. dogs build up there own immunity and i truely believe that lasts years for most dogs, of course some dogs gain no immunity from vaccinations at all, though that is rare i would imagine.

> after all what vaccine do we have boostered every year?
>

Influenza.

But surely that is because the strain of influenza changes each year?

Like Parvo?

The real reason why different species and different diseases need different regimes is because they are different.  There are boosters for several diseases given to humans albeit for varying frequences so it is not at all correct to say because humans do not have boosters that provides some sort of evidence that dogs don't.

Vaccines Stimulate an Inflammatory Response

The word "allergy" is synonymous with "sensitivity" and "inflammation".

It should, by rights, also be synonymous with the word "vaccination".

This is what vaccines do: they sensitise (render allergic)an individual in
the process of forcing them to develop antibodies to fight a disease threat.
In other words, as is acknowledged and accepted, as part of the vaccine
process the body will respond with inflammation. This may be apparently
temporary or it may be longstanding. Holistic doctors and veterinarians
have known this for at least 100 years. They talk about a wide range of
inflammatory or "-itis" diseases which
arise shortly after a vaccine event. Vaccines, in fact, plunge many
individuals into an allergic state. Again, this is a disorder that ranges
from mild all the way through to the suddenly fatal. Anaphylactic shock is
the culmination: it's where an individual has a massive allergic reaction to
a vaccine and will die within minutes if adrenaline or its equivalent is not
administered. There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed
to withstand the vaccine challenge. These are the people (and animals are
"people", too) who have inherited faulty B and T cell function. B and T
cells are components within the immune system which identify foreign
invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they
cannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are
concerned, the immune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects such as
allergies and other inflammatory conditions. Merck warns in its Manual that
patients with, or from families with, B and/or T cell immunodeficiencies
should not receive live-virus vaccines due to the risk of severe or fatal
infection. Elsewhere, it lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies
as food allergies, inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological
deterioration and heart disease. To translate, people with these conditions
can die if they receive live-virus vaccines. Their immune systems are simply
not competent enough to guarantee a healthy reaction to the viral assault
from modified live-virus vaccines. Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines
replicate in the patient until an immune response is provoked. If a defence
isn't stimulated, then the vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the
patient the very disease it was intending to prevent. Alternatively, a
deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory conditions such as
arthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and any number of autoimmune
diseases such as cancer and leukaemia, where the body attacks its own cells.

A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith, explains
what holistic practitioners have been saying for a very long time. Here is
what a few of the holistic vets have said in relation their patients:

Dr Jean Dodds: "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic
and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV vaccines..." (9)

Christina Chambreau, DVM: "Routine vaccinations are probably the worst thing
that we do for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses, but not
directly to where we would relate them definitely to be caused by the
vaccine." (10)

Martin Goldstein, DVM: "I think that vaccines...are leading killers of dogs
and cats in America today."

Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: "Homoeopathic veterinarians and other holistic
practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm
than they provide benefits." (12)

Mike Kohn, DVM: "In response to this violation, there have been increased
autoimmune diseases (allergies being one component), epilepsy, neoplasia ,
as well as behavioural problems in small animals." (13)

A Theory on Inflammation

Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been saying
for a very long time, but perhaps they've not understood why their
observations led them to say it. His theory, incidentally, is causing a huge
stir within the inner scientific sanctum. Some believe that his theory could
lead to a cure for many diseases including cancer. For me, it explains why
the vaccine process is inherently questionable. Gary was learning about
inflammation as part of his studies when he
struck upon a theory so extraordinary that it could have implications for
the treatment of almost every inflammatory disease - including Alzheimer's,
Parkinson's, rheumatoid arthritis and even HIV and AIDS. Gary's theory
questions the received wisdom that when a person gets ill, the inflammation
that occurs around the infected area helps it to heal. He claims that, in
reality, inflammation prevents the body from recognising a foreign substance
and therefore serves as a hiding
place for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-risk cells produce
receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He says
that while At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed to switch
off the inflammation, in most diseases this does not happen. "Cancer has
been described as the wound that never heals," he says. "All successful
cancers are surrounded by inflammation. Commonly this is thought to be the
body's reaction to try to fight the cancer, but
this is not the case. "The inflammation is not the body trying to fight the
infection. It is actually the virus or bacteria deliberately causing
inflammation in order to hide from the immune system [author's emphasis]."
(14)

If Gary is right, then the inflammatory process so commonly stimulated by
vaccines is not, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable sign.
Instead, it could be a sign that the viral or bacterial component, or the
adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seen as an invader by the
immune system), in the vaccine is winning by stealth.

If Gary is correct in believing that the inflammatory response is not
protective but a sign that invasion is taking place under cover of darkness,
vaccines are certainly not the friends we thought they were. They are
undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets and medical
doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators. Worse, we animal guardians
and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to unwittingly betray our
loved ones. Potentially, vaccines are the stealth bomb of the medical world.
They are used to catapult invaders inside the castle walls where they can
wreak havoc, with none of us any the wiser. So rather than experiencing
frank viral diseases such as the 'flu, measles, mumps and rubella (and, in
the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are allowing the
viruses to win anyway - but with cancer, leukaemia and other inflammatory or
autoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking their place.

The Final Insult

All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their protocols for
vaccinating dogs and cats along the following lines; (15) however, vets in
practice are reluctant to listen to these changed protocols and official
veterinary bodies in the UK and other countries are ignoring the following
facts.

Dogs' and cats' immune systems mature fully at six months. If modified
live-virus vaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces immunity,
which is good for the life of the pet. 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 litre is no
"boosted", nor are more memory cells induced. Not only are annual boosters
unnecessary, but they subject the pet to potential risks such as allergic
reactions and immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia. In plain language,
veterinary schools in America, plus the American Veterinary Medical
Association, have looked at studies to show how long vaccines last and they
have concluded and announced that annual vaccination is unnecessary.(16-19)

Further, they have acknowledged that vaccines are not without harm. Dr Ron
Schultz, head of pathobiology at Wisconsin University and a leading light in
this field, has been saying this politely to his veterinary colleagues since
the 1980s. I've been saying it for the past 12 years.

But change is so long in coming and, in the meantime, hundreds of thousands
of animals are dying every year - unnecessarily. The good news is that
thousands of animal lovers (but not enough) have heard what we've been
saying. Canine Health Concern members around the world use real food as
Nature's supreme disease preventative, eschewing processed pet food, and
minimise the vaccine risk. Some of us, myself included, have chosen not to
vaccinate our pets at all. Our reward is
healthy and long-lived dogs.It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the
good and simple news. The gratitude I feel each day, when I embrace my
healthy dogs,
stretches from the centre of the Earth to the Universe and beyond.

About the Author:

Catherine O'Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns and also
delivers an educational program, the Foundation in Canine Healthcare. She is
author of Shock to the System (2005; see review this issue), the
best-selling book What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines (1997, 1998), and
Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? (1997; reviewed in NEXUS 4/04). She
lives in Scotland with her partner, Rob Ellis, and three Golden Retrievers,
named Edward, Daniel and Gwinnie, and she lectures on canine health around
the world.

For more information, contact Catherine O'Driscoll at Canine Health Concern,
PO Box 7533, Perth PH2 1AD, Scotland, UK, email <
<mailto:catherine%40carsegray.co.uk> catherine@...> , website <
<http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk.>
http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk.>

Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide from
Dogwise at <http://www.dogwise.com>.

Endnotes

1. "Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of Dogs,
Phase II", Purdue University, November 1,1999, at
<http://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html
<http://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html%3e.> >.

2. See <www.vet.purdue.edu/epi/gdhstudy.htm> .

3. See <http://www.avma.org/vafstf/default.asp
<http://www.avma.org/vafstf/default.asp%3e.> >.

4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and Canine
Vaccination, DEFRA, May 2001.

5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003.

6. Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). "Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated
Hemolytic Anemia in the Dog", Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine
10:290-295.

7. New England Journal of Medicine, vol.313,1985.

See also Clin Exp Rheumatol 20(6):767-71, Nov-Dec 2002.

8. Am Coll Vet Intern Med 14:381,2000.

9. Dodds, Jean W.,DVM, "Immune System and Disease Resistance", at
<http://www.critterchat.net/immune.htm
<http://www.critterchat.net/immune.htm%3e.> >.

10. Wolf Clan magazine, April/May 1995.

11. Goldstein, Martin, The Nature of Animal Healing, Borzoi/Alfred A. Knopf,
Inc., 1999.

12. Wolf Clan magazine, op. cit.

13. ibid.

14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at <
<http://www.journal-inflammation.com> http://www.journal-inflammation.com>
content/1/1/3.

15. Klingborg, D.J., Hustead, D.R. and Curry-Galvin, E. et al., "AVMA
Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents' report on cat and dog vaccines",
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 221(10):1401-1407,
November 15,2002, <http://www.avma.org/policies/vaccination.htm
<http://www.avma.org/policies/vaccination.htm%3e.> >.

16. ibid.

17. Schultz, R.D., "Current and future canine and feline vaccination
programs", Vet Med 93:233-254,1998.

18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., "Titer testing and
vaccination: a new look at traditional practices", Vet Med 97:1-13, 2002
(insert).

19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., "Clinical application of serum parvovirus and
distemper virus antibody liters for determining revaccination strategies in
healthy dogs", J Am Vet Med Assoc

Have you read the Terms of Service, especially the part which says:
No press releases, newsletters, Webpages, or copyrighted content may be inserted into posts. Minor excerpts of less than one paragraph (5 sentences) may be used.
A link to the page is better rather than breaching copyright.

Like Parvo?

I wasn't aware that the strain of parvo changed every year - if that is so, how come boosters are only recommended by vaccine companies 3 yearly?

No, I doubt it changes every year, hence my question mark, but I understand it is thought to mutate over time.  I was just trying to make a point regarding the idea that all diseases and all vaccination requirements are the same.

Thats not as standard, only for the elderly and people with immune problems and diabetes etc.

the average young fit adult DOES NOT have yearly vaccines

As i pointed out in my post, it is my own personal opinion i did NOT state is was fact if you read it properly it is what i choose to do

i take it you booster every year then?

> the average young fit adult DOES NOT have yearly vaccines

because they are more likely to cope with the virus if they do fall victim not because their immunity lasts for a different length of time. 
Yes, I do booster my dogs every year or do you mean am I old enough to qualify for flu boosters? .

Awfully Sorry Isabel. Used to another forum where it is more than supported.

But there is your peer review from a UK person!

And the vaccines we use have not been changed for many many years. The KC component is for 2 versions only and there are at least 30 different forms of KC around these days. It has not been changed at all since it was released.

The human form for flu is changed annually. But then human life is seen as far more important than dogs.

Ha, yes it did read a bit like that when i read it back

No i meant your dogs.

> But there is your peer review from a UK person!

Peer review is publication in appropriate professional journals and review by that profession so not sure what you mean there.

> And the vaccines we use have not been changed for many many years. The KC component is for 2 versions only and there are at least 30 different forms of KC around these days. It has not been changed at all since it was released.

That does not mean it has not been reviewed.   It may be that review has determined that no change is necessary and that the components covered provide enough immunity to safeguard against the forms liable to cause significant harm. 
This is why these matters are best evaluated by those which the knowledge to interpret and avaluate all the data with have.  It is too easy for laypeople to make assumptions from the bits and bobs of info and understanding they have.

> The human form for flu is changed annually. But then human life is seen as far more important than dogs.

Or maybe just because this particular virus works that way.

asked my vet today about not vaccinating my dog and he said parvo and distemper are usually only done once every three years anyway, its the other disease that is vaccinated every year (the one that is carried through rats urine) is it wiles disease?

Leptospirosis