Vaccination Waivers/Exemptions

[marymrumfelt]

Well let me just add my two cents worth. I AM HUMAN and immune compromised because of bleeding disorder as well as not having a spleen. I would be very upset if I were to be bitten by someones animal. Especially, if that someone decided that they didn't want to have to follow vaccination laws.

I know if that were the case, I would use every bit of legal recourse due to me. I would probably sue the person, and demand the animal be put down. Sorry, but, there's just no excuse. An animal is animal.

In light of some recent rabies outbreaks in my area, I find this topic very disturbing that its the same people who feel they don't need to follow leash laws because their dogs are,"friendly" are the same ones who feel their animals don't need to follow proper guidelines to make everyone safe.

Its just mind baffling to me. The End

Yes, but like the thread states, this is about medical exemptions. So if an animal has a medical reason it can't be vaccinated, then obviously the owner needs to take precautions. The point in this thread is some animals aren't healthy enough for a vaccine and they shouldn't be forced to have one and that an animal who has no health issues preventing them from one, shouldn't be granted a fake exemption. Vaccines aren't required by law. Only the rabies vaccine is. No one is required to do anything else inside the US. Traveling outside the US can be a different story.

If an animal bit me, I'd probably sue the owner regardless of a vaccine exemption or not.... because no dog should be off-leash in an inappropriate area. But to discuss that, you'd need to start another thread discussing dogs off-leash in inappropriate places.

 

[The Quahog]

Personally, I thought this was a pretty good discussion and thread.

We've discussed that medical waivers are available in some states, not in others, and why not, and that they should be, and that the problem is not resistance form the veterinary profession. Many threads talk about the dangers of vaccination, this one tended to focus not on the 'why not' but the 'why'. Including the rationales for requiring vaccination of isolated indoor animals.
Titers were discussed, and I think we agree that that would be fine if they could be legalised and standardised, but frankly i don't think the government has any interest in bothering with that.

All in all it seemed to me on balance positive and productive. -Dr. Mac

 

[Connie]

But a medical exemption does not mean that the dog is a carrier of rabies! (I assume we're only talking about rabies here because that is the only vax required by law, and therefore the only one for which a medical exemption exists. It's also the only disease that dogs contract which can be passed to humans.)

My dogs have very high titers in blood tests done to determine that, so I am perfectly comfortable requesting the medical exemption for Sunny, who has had cancer, and for Mike, who has chronic ehrlichia. I don't want to risk my dogs getting rabies, and the only way to get rabies immunity is to give a vaccination! (It's not like dogs can acquire immunity to rabies the way they can to parvo or coronavirus, by incidental exposure. Exposure to rabies is fatal. That's why it's a public health issue, and coronavirus isn't.)

When my dogs were younger, before Sunny got cancer, and before Mike got Lyme and erhlichia, they HAD rabies vaccines. They still have antibodies from those vaccines. The vaccines are good; they are so good that they last for years. Dr. Jean Dodds is running The Rabies Challenge Study to verify this with scientific studies, and the result ot the RCS is hoped to be a 7-year rabies vaccine for dogs.

I get quite bothered when I read people equating vaccination exemptions with lack of protection to the disease. Basic immunology tells us that circulating antibodies, measured in a blood titer test, are deemed to be protective against disease, although of course only direct challenge by exposure to the disease will prove immunity. (No, thanks.)

A great many people are opposed not to vaccinations per se, but to the repeated and *unnecessary* administration of vaccinations. If a vaccine is good -- by blood test, certified by the Rabies Laboratory! -- for 3, 5, or 7 years, then I don't want to repeat that vaccination every year just to make some drug company more $$$$$$$$, and to possibly make my dog quite sick.

Gee, can you tell I feel strongly about this?

 

[mellie]

Yeah, it's been a real nailbiter.

 

[Justicemom]

But a medical exemption does not mean that the dog is a carrier of rabies! (I assume we're only talking about rabies here because that is the only vax required by law, and therefore the only one for which a medical exemption exists. It's also the only disease that dogs contract which can be passed to humans.)

My dogs have very high titers in blood tests done to determine that, so I am perfectly comfortable requesting the medical exemption for Sunny, who has had cancer, and for Mike, who has chronic ehrlichia. I don't want to risk my dogs getting rabies, and the only way to get rabies immunity is to give a vaccination! (It's not like dogs can acquire immunity to rabies the way they can to parvo or coronavirus, by incidental exposure. Exposure to rabies is fatal. That's why it's a public health issue, and coronavirus isn't.)

When my dogs were younger, before Sunny got cancer, and before Mike got Lyme and erhlichia, they HAD rabies vaccines. They still have antibodies from those vaccines. The vaccines are good; they are so good that they last for years. Dr. Jean Dodds is running The Rabies Challenge Study to verify this with scientific studies, and the result ot the RCS is hoped to be a 7-year rabies vaccine for dogs.

I get quite bothered when I read people equating vaccination exemptions with lack of protection to the disease. Basic immunology tells us that circulating antibodies, measured in a blood titer test, are deemed to be protective against disease, although of course only direct challenge by exposure to the disease will prove immunity. (No, thanks.)

A great many people are opposed not to vaccinations per se, but to the repeated and *unnecessary* administration of vaccinations. If a vaccine is good -- by blood test, certified by the Rabies Laboratory! -- for 3, 5, or 7 years, then I don't want to repeat that vaccination every year just to make some drug company more $$$$$$$$, and to possibly make my dog quite sick.

Gee, can you tell I feel strongly about this?

Connie, I do agree with you. Medical exemptions, I do feel have their place and titers are certainly a way to determine immunity and as it is more expensive than a rabies shot, its not just the easy way out.

The issue as it stands now is, the exact duration of immunity is not known. Individuals reactions differently to vaccines and develop as different level of protection based on their genetics, what is going on with their immune systems at the time of the vaccine etc. Hopefully the rabies challenge will bring the true immunity to light.But no one really knows. I was vaccinated it vet school for rabies as was all my classmates. I was titered at 5 yrs out of school and had good immunity , one of my classmates I kept in touch with, needed reboostering at 5 yrs. Who is the normal of the population. Just an example.

As it stands now, the rabies vaccines have only been challenged to 3 yrs thus why we make them good for 3 yrs. There are some vaccines only labeled for 1yr because thats all they have been tested for 1yr immunity and yes that does involve exposing animals to rabies. Even with good data for the effectiveness of 3yr vaccines some states won't recognize them. This is because the concern of rabies in those states is so great.

Many many veterinarian have argued and lobbied for extending re-vaccination to at least 3 yrs, titers and medical exemptions but because of the concerns Dr Mac highlighted in his initial post, many in government are resistant. Fears that will people just decide not to get vaccines, that they will make up medical issues to be granted exemptions, basically abusing the system and putting the public(human) at risk.

Right or wrong rabies has that kind of fear because it is near 100% fatal if one shows signs.

If you live in a state with medical exemptions, I would certainly advise you to not vaccinated your dog with cancer and your chronic Ehrlichia(I know I had a client with a pitbull with Babesia that I would have loved not to vaccinate for rabies, I advised not other vaccines but it would have been a huge libiality for my client with no rabies of her sweet pitbull). I wish we could legalize and standardize titers but as it stands now each state decides for themselves and I can only advise one to follow the law. My state is currently working on rewriting the law, as it stands now most is handled at city and country level and there is no medical exemption but I am staying tuned.

 

[Connie]

I know, and I agree with everything in your post. What frustrates me is that there are people who do not vaccinate against rabies at all -- lots of rural areas, lots of inner-city areas -- and rather than beat the compliant owners over the head with repeated commands to re-vaccinate, IMO there needs to be an education campaign that would result in much higher rates of initial rabies vaccination in dogs.

After that, recommend (or require!) owners to titer for rabies every 3 years. If titers are low, require a booster.

Out of every population vaccinated, a small number will simply not respond to the vaccines. IIRC that's between 5 and 7% of the population vaccinated. There is no way to know, short of challenge with the disease (no thanks!) if those vaccinated subjects will be able to mount resistence to the disease. How then should the owner of such a dog proceed? Repeated re-vaccinations have been shown to not raise titers in such dogs ...

Titers are our best assessment of whether a vaccine has efficacy. We rely on titers to determine whether human health-care workers should renew vaccinations. It's a reasonable standard, therefore, to extend to our dogs.

I agree that rabies is a horrific disease, but I see this misguided demand for unnecessary repeated vaccinations to be a manifestation of the lobbying power of the drug companies. Yes, I am one of those who thinks that multinational corporations don't always put the welfare of people (and animals) ahead of profits. Shocking idea, I know! But if this were REALLY a public health issue as it should be, there would be a more sensible approach to it that would ensure the protection of more dogs and the endangerment of fewer dogs.

 

[sarasomething]

on the note of not knowing how long immunity lasts: there were a few instances of rabies here last year, and one report was that a family dog caught it, and the owners said it had been 7 years since the dog's last rabies vac. so for that particular dog, immunity didn't last 7 years...

but i'd also guess they weren't titering their animals either :/