Is your dog vaccine hesitant?
Is your dog vaccine hesitant?
"Canine vaccine hesitancy (CVH) can be thought about as dog owners’ skepticism about the safety and efficacy of administering routine vaccinations to their dogs."
That’s the definition given by the authors of a recent study just made public in August of 2023. For me it doesn’t just give information about the now coined syndrome, canine vaccine hesitancy, but could be used as a fear-based angle to promote more vaccines for our dogs. In a way it does make perfect sense that dogs would be hesitant about vaccines, since every dog I’ve polled absolutely has never given consent to be vaxxed! Unfortunately, however, their choices get overruled.
Do you know what CVH is?
I didn’t know what CVH was or that there was an acronym for Canine Vaccine Hesitancy until last week. Shocked and pleasantly surprised, I found this research paper: Sick as a dog? The prevalence, politicization, and health policy consequences of canine vaccine hesitancy (CVH). Of course, The Heretical Vet found much to think about in this and other studies I’ll discuss here.
And what a timely study — right after the Covid-19 pandemic fiasco, which it seems probably has a lot to do with the resistance to canine vaccines according to the researchers.
Bias and the CVH study
The study included a vet in Pennsylvania who is more than likely seeing vaccine hesitancy in her practice which, as many of you can imagine, I’m happy about because it means you pet parents are thinking for yourselves and not just going along with convention. Those vets reading this blog who still vaccinate (and I am delighted to know you are here!) might find some help with the different perspective that I can offer…I hope.
This study is hot off the press, and published in the medical journal Vaccine which surveyed 2200 adult-American pet parents in March and April of this year. The survey showed these results:
unsafe (37%)
ineffective (22%)
and/or unnecessary (30%)
and about 53% endorsed at least one of these positions!
Their conclusion:
“CVH is problematic not only because it may inspire vaccine refusal –which may in turn facilitate infectious disease spread in both canine and human populations – but because it may contribute to veterinary care provider mental/physical health risks.”
My conclusion:
First of all - that’s more than half the population of random adults who either voted against vaccines or were worried about their risks! Secondly, there is no consideration in the study’s conclusion for chronic adverse vaccine events, nor compassion for the pet parents and their animals who often endure a lifetime of suffering both mental and physical problems. Apparently only the physical and mental health of vets matters. But this is where the profession has gone off the rails and has lost credibility — as I’ll show you in the next study. Hang in there, it’s worth the read.
But the authors do admit the study’s limits:
“We view this work as an important first step in understanding canine vaccine hesitancy and its public health consequences.”
It may be just a first step for them; but can they really open up their scientific minds and see what their clients and other vets are telling them? Or is it just a study that shows the reality of vaccine hesitancy, but then leads to the conclusion that they need more subtle and not-so-subtle coercion regarding hesitant pet parents? Is this a religion, a cult, or a pseudo-science that they accuse us of so vehemently?
To put it simply, this study tells me pet parents are politely screaming at vets that they don’t like the way things are going!
Evidence-based vaccine policies?
The researchers worried because the hesitancy was “with rabies non-vaccination, as well as opposition to evidence-based vaccine policies.” Evidence-based vaccine policies? Hmm? Apparently those reading evidence-based polices never got the memo from the many world-class vaccine authorities, including Dr. Ronald Schultz, about modified live vaccines lasting a life time; and that repeating these vaccines is neither scientifically proven nor safe, and therefore unnecessary.
There are many studies, but more are needed, that show the basic immunology and duration of immunity after the vaccinations — something every vet should know. This information is regularly dismissed. But the vaccine mandates, and the repeated reminder cards/emails keep being issued; and animals continue to be harmed.
Before I go any further let me just say: you cannot continue to inject attenuated virus particles, multiple carcinogenic chemicals, and heavy metals into a body and expect health to result. Anyone who thinks differently is in delusion that we have the capability to handle all these toxic substances. Many of those hesitant pet parents appear to know this. So why don’t vets and state epidemiologists?
2385 Veterinarians Surveyed
In another study, conducted on-line and published by the Canadian Veterinary Journal in March 2021, they surveyed 2385 veterinarians from Canada, the US, the UK, and Australia. Mind you, the study admits that the vets who completed the survey were probably pro-vaccine vets as they were all still vaccinating.
Veterinarians were most concerned about these medical issues:
anaphylaxis (dogs),
vaccine-associated sarcoma (cats),
soreness at injection site for several days (dogs and cats),
and lethargy for several days after vaccination (dogs and cats).
Pet parents were most concerned about:
vaccine costs,
the issue of real or manufactured necessity,
and the question of whether the vaccines might be causing chronic disease or severe illness.
So if vets were most concerned about medical issues, why was the primary focus on a few acute reactions and no chronic adverse reactions — with the exception of one type of cancer in cats. Apparently, no other types of cancers in dogs (or cats) can be related to vaccines in dogs. Ugh! But we have at least 50% of dogs acquiring cancer in their lifetime; and vet offices are overwhelmed with cancer.
Pet parents are clearly saying what is bothering them about current vaccine policies. But are their vets listening?
But wait, there’s more…
Blaming the anti-vaxx movement?
The same Canadian study showed a ‘positive’ association (not meaning a good association) between attitudes and the presence of local anti-vaxx information in the community or on social media. They blame the anti-vaxxers for impacting compliance about vaccinations. But what else is new? Could it be that pet parents are more educated? I know many folks are thinking about mandates and heavy-handed pressures to bring their animals to the vet clinic, where they’re being pushed to buy items they don’t want. And now the pressure continues because they can’t get their animals groomed, trained or live in a housing complex without yearly vaccinations. On my!
This study concludes that vets have had some success in “changing the minds of clients resistant to rabies vaccinations”; but have been less successful convincing them about the core vaccines. They say it “might be due to negative social media messages about vaccines.”
They conclude that social media has created vaccine hesitancy because: “Social media is one of the most common ways in which people access false information about vaccine safety”. And “Messages about vaccines on social media predominantly focus on negative experiences because these are easier to visualize than the benefits of vaccines — namely, the absence of disease.”
All of this ignores the fact that pet parents who have experienced what they believe (always a good idea to believe moms and dads) are adverse reactions have no recourse, or place to vent their experiences and frustrations, other than on social media. There is no real CDC adverse-event reporting system for dogs, cats, horses or any other animal. Remember, they are just property we own. And if you or your child has had an event post-vaccination, the hair-pulling task of reporting on the CDC website is clearly not user-friendly for you or your doctors, leaving most human events unreported. John’s Hopkins estimates that 90% adverse events are NOT reported.
Are vets listening? The answer from many, many pet parents that I speak with is a resounding ‘no’!
Are we so stupid that cognitive overload is an excuse?
The report states:
“Misleading or biased social media messages can lead to erroneous heuristics, thereby fostering vaccine hesitancy or resistance. Unfortunately, people tend to cling to pre-established beliefs and are often resistant to new information that can change these beliefs.”
To be clear - the definition of heuristics is this: a mental shortcut commonly used to simplify problems and avoid cognitive overload.
Actually, I do think most pet parents have cognitive overload when it comes to vaccines. But let’s put the onus where it belongs. Because vets (or MD’s) rarely, if ever, take the time to explain anything about vaccines to their clients. Because a vet can’t elaborate much in a 15-min office visit, the clients are being set up for failure to completely understand. This is truly a failure to provide informed consent — which is something I was never taught in vet school. And because the bread and butter of many general practice vet clinics are the exam/vaccine appointments, no one has time for informed consent. We vets often exude the medical deity pheromone, and expect our clients to just do what we say when it comes to vaccines.
You can understand how things can get broken with these kinds of attitudes. So cognitive overload is truly something being created by our profession, NOT by the pet parents.
If we want to create more ‘cred’ with our clients, then we have to ‘teach’ them — which is the real definition of the phrase ‘to doctor’. And that does NOT mean forcing an agenda with a fear-based mindset. It means giving advice and information unique for each animal about vaccine necessities related to prior vaccinations, health status, geographical location, economic status, age susceptibilities, etc. In other words: informed consent with plenty of science to support it.
This reminds me of a report I read many years ago about how yearly distemper vaccinations became a commonly accepted practice. In the 1950’s distemper was a prominent and horrible disease that caused much suffering in dogs. A vaccine was becoming more widely used; but duration of immunity studies weren’t abundant. Titer testing was not considered because vets felt it would be too costly for pet parents, and that there would be poor compliance if the standard practice was anything less than yearly vaccination. So, just like that, yearly vaccinations became standard of practice. Yes, those vaccines might not have created antibodies that remained as long as they do now — probably, maybe because they were less toxic — but remember: as a dog/cat ages, susceptibility decreases. The vaccinate every year policy became standard - NO evidence based science that everyone seems to demand now.
In summary…
It’s been the experience of The Heretical Vet that yes, the vaccination mandates, choices, options, testing, etc. can be a little complex for the lay person. But with some education, I find people are able to make clear decisions that align with their lifestyles and beliefs about how the body can protect itself. That is call INFORMED CONSENT. Here are my suggestions for you pet parents:
Don’t let policies or aggressive language at vet clinics intimate you into vaccinating your beloved animal family before you’re completely clear about all your options.
Listen to your heart, your gut, your intuition if they speak of hesitation - no need to rush anything this important!
Take your time to get basic information such as in my blogs listed below.
Request a longer appointment with your vet to discuss all your options including titer testing, which I’ve discussed here.
Stop all vaccinations after the first year except rabies, which is required by law - but first do titer testing to evaluate the current antibody status. I’ve discussed this in detail in here.
Really, really stop all vaccinations if your pet has any form of chronic disease such as ear or skin infections, gut issues, liver or kidney enzyme elevations, etc.
Read up on these blogs to get you started:
Remember that true health, disease prevention and immune strength lies in the natural rearing practices you employ in your home: fresh foods and clean water, lots of exercise, mental stimulation and socialization, clean environment, whole food supplements, etc.
And for us vets, I will be so bold to suggest a few things here:
That 53% of our adult pet parent’s polled are speaking loud and clear to the vet profession to step back and evaluate a few things such as:
Pharma-dependent polices and ‘suggestions’. Re-evaluate all vaccine guidelines from professional associations because they’re not our clients and are only guidelines.
Be open to research from other vets and authorities other than Pharma representatives. Self-educate from sources not typically used, including other vets who have studied the topic and have much to share. Dialogue is free!
Improved listening and sincere acknowledgement of pet parent concerns and observations of adverse reactions in their pets. No dismissing, minimizing, gas lighting, laughing at, or categorizing into ‘negative client’ status any pet parent who is questioning vaccination practices. Build rapport, not walls.
Evaluation of records to observe when animals return for any sort of ailment - especially within 90 days post-vaccination for repeated patterns of illness, especially chronic ones. This information is gold and can help an inquiring mind see patterns that can be circumvented and giving steroid injections before vaccinations is not the answer!
Perform more antibody titer testing, at reasonable fees, to determine if the immune system is still active for rabies or any other ‘core’ vaccine before vaccinating. This is better medicinal protocol, less harmful to the animals, and creates better trust in relationships with pet parents.
Perform rabies antibody testing on all staff members to evaluate their current circulating antibodies if there is true concern about animals infecting staff, rather than mandating ANY animal (sick or well) be vaccinated before admission to the clinic.
Ask for professional help to evaluate the mental health of all staff members in the clinic, and don’t blame CVH or any other resistance to procedures on the clients. It’s up to every vet to own their mental health, especially in light of the recent increase in veterinarian suicides; and then to act when needed.
Remember
You are the main advocate for your animals, no one else. Use your search skills on the internet to gather knowledge from trusted sources. And know that holistic approaches to preventative health are easy to accomplish and can be specialized for each animal.
Thank you for taking the time to read this blog. I hope it has provided some insights and actionable steps to support you and your animals!
References:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264410X23010150
https://www.veterinary-practice.com/article/rising-vaccine-hesitancy
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/news/vets-amongst-the-most-trusted-professionals-according-to-rcvs/