I can't help but laugh at someone telling me to educate myself on vaccines when I bet I know more about each individual ingredient and their effects than anyone on here. Have you ever taken apart the ingredients and researched them? Do you understand what formaldhyde does to the brain? Do you understand how vaccines literally change an animal's DNA? I think not. So let's get back to the topic of vaccine exemptions and I'm hoping a mod will step in and enforce staying on topic. I didn't ask a question -- I said I'm not sure how and I don't want to get into it because if we want to discuss vaccine immunity, we can start another thread.
Sorry, but you are very much misinformed. As an example, you previously stated in your first post to this thread:
Yes, I agree misusing medical exemptions is not the right thing to do. i'm pretty sure most people would agree with that. If you don't want to give your animal rabies, not based on a medical issue, then just don't do it...[sic]
Vaccinating an animal against a given disease, human or otherwise, does NOT "give" that animal the disease. This is a basic assumption made by many who do not understand a) basic immunology, b) basic biology, and of course, c) how vaccines work.
A "positive" on a titer does not mean an animal has a disease; it means they have antibodies to that disease - an indication of previous exposure, either by infection or by vaccination. Note infection and vaccination are
different. Even live, attenuated vaccines do not infect an animal with the complete pathogen - attenuated is weakened, reduced; in the right circumstances it has the potential to create disease but that is uncommon. And then there's the age-old question as to whether viruses are really alive (they are not really dead or alive). As far as vaccines "chang[ing] an animal's DNA", you seem to have misunderstood what you have been reading. Any animal's immune system is going to "learn" to respond to external threats (pathogens); this is
normal. If any of us (people, dogs, etc) lacked this, our adaptive immune response, we'd be screwed. Sounds like you are referring to naked DNA vaccines, or maybe the recombo vectors, both of which to my knowledge are still considered experimental.
I assume you've never given any thought to the fact that you have
already vaccinated yourself and all of your pets to many different illnesses without your consent, without a waiver. You are mammals and you had mothers -
boom! Vaccinated! You breathe everyday and inhale all sorts of pathogens -
boom! Vaccinated! You have skin with millions of pores -
boom! Vaccinated! You or your pet spent time with another of the same species with a little virus -
boom! Vaccinated! You can argue that these didn't involve dangerous chemicals like formaldehyde or mercury, but I will counter that your naturally acquired immunizations may have been more dangerous (using the vaccine components=bad concept) than any injection or drop at the doctor's office. Nature gives you whatever it has at the time; it isn't meticulously measured and prepared and sterilized. No one is ever (I hope) going to start issuing waivers allowing people to forgo breathing to avoid immunizations.
This complete lack of understanding of vaccines is a problem for people and our fuzzy pets. Parents who believe their children are being "given" a disease, or who think vaccine components are going to brain-damage their child, are contributing to the increase in diseases such as pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, even polio. Herd immunity is protective, but by definition only works when the vast majority of the herd has all of its shots. Many animal-diseases are considered rare or unusual by the public now, but the lack of disease is due to the diligence of responsible veterinarians and pet owners who vaccinate. Just like with people-diseases, the more pets who are not vaccinated, the more common these "rare" diseases will be, as disease spreads. That little pathogen finds a little crack and just picks away until there is a giant gaping hole where the fortress known as modern science used to be.
I stand behind vaccines. I work in the medical (human) industry and work with research methods and analysis. I have yet to see any vaccine study that I find scarier than most of what I've read about so-called homeopathic remedies. Vaccines have years and years of solid research to back up their use and prove their effectiveness and safety, as well as show the consequences of dropping or nonexistent vaccination rates.
And as far as cats not biting - ha. I've volunteered for cat rescues for years and while I have not been bitten, I have had too many close calls to count, and just about every vet/vet tech/shelter worker I know has at least one bite story. Most of our pets are great with us, but none of us can predict with absolute certainty how our pets would react in certain situations (same goes for people!).
If you choose not to keep up with your pet(s) vaccinations, at least get antibody titers checked as recommended by your veterinarian. Otherwise you are putting not only your pet, but all animals who come into contact with your pet, at unnecessary risk.
