Edited twice because I can't type -- I HOPE I've caught all the typos!
BigBlueDog
Hello all. My dog, Blue (house mutt and dear family member, not a show dog), recently had a critical adverse vaccine reaction (immune-mediated thrombocytopenia). We are trying to nurse him back to health, and if he makes it, he can never be vaccinated again. I'm curious about the distinction between getting vaccinated (i.e., getting the shot) and having immunity (i.e., being able to defend against the disease). Vaccination does not guarantee immunity, although the law and consequently kennels, boarding houses, etc. act as though it does. Also (unfortunately as I'm learning now with Blue) vaccinating unhealthy animals very often does not confer immunity because the body is not able to mount a strong enough attack against the disease to build that immunity. I know this is an academic question, but I'm curious if you all have any thoughts about this distinction. ~Keka
*smile* opening a discussion generally about this is apt to be like opening Pandora's Box --
Those of us who have dogs who have (or have had) auto-immune diseases tend to see vaccines in an entirely different light. AND much much MUCH depends on their vet and that vet's medical opinion.
**I want to quality this and say -- different vets will have different opinions. You can have six vets in a line and they will all have a different medical opinion about the "wean off" protocol for prednisone .... or they may have totally different opinions about vaccines and what vaccines should be used and when ... and each of those vets may have rock solid opinons on what is right and wrong for how they believe. But medical opinion is just that **opinion** and, as such, there can be room for disagreement even among very very good vets. So I'm not trying to vet bash here at all. My vet may have a different opinion from yours. I have both a regular vet and two different holistic vets -- and yet they all are pretty much in agreement on vaccines so they've influenced me in my knowledge.
As far as the vaccine itself goes (and this is, according to both my regular & holistic vets both, for both the killed and modified live vax) it is generally shed in the dog's stool for up to 2 weeks. It takes at least that long to fully form immunity (often even longer than that for immunity to fully form).
In my opinion, that's where a lot of insurance regs and kennels go wrong -- it is SO typical for people to have the dog get vaccinated just prior to dropping them off AT a kennel. Immunity is NOT formed then. In fact, finally, the kennel we use to board did -- at my very strong suggestion (rollnig eyes) -- do some long thinking and now she requires dogs to have vax AT LEAST two weeks prior to being boarded. Thank heavens. That way every dog there isn't exposed to the vaccine in the dog's stool.
Immunity is pretty individual. Meaning some dogs may develop it fast, some slower. And this is where the "immune-mediated" problems come in -- because after the body has formed the necessary antibodies (which start out as reticulocytes or "baby red blood cells";) -- something goes wrong with the immune system, and and body begins to attack the retic antibodies because they look too much like the disease cells. In a similar vein it's that gradual failure by the immune system to rightly identify disease or threats that causes the body to then hurt itself.
That's certainly NOT the whole cause of auto-immune disease -- only one very small segment of it.
But the big deal with not vaccinating a dog with an auto-immune disease is simply because it triggers a strong response in the body and once the body has attacked itself in one way, it's WAY easy for the body to morph and attack itself in another place (like platlets vs. red blood cells, or causing anything from an inappropriate thryoid response to a fever to any one of a zillion different ways the body can screw up.
BigBlueDog
vaccinating unhealthy animals very often does not confer immunity because the body is not able to mount a strong enough attack against the disease to build that immunity.
That too is sometimes what happens -- but I think more typically, particularly with a non-killed vaccine, the risk is that with a reduced or unhealthy immune system, the vaccine can actually GIVE the disease to that animal or human. (which is why they always ask you when you get a flu shot IF you have ANY signs or symptoms of the flu on that day).
It's not typically so much that the body isn't going to have the strength to form immunity -- because IF the body (human or animal) survives the illness, immunity of a degree will be accomplished. But that instead, the body won't have the strength to combat the disease at all.
That was the whole point when they developed the "killed vaccines" like 25 years ago -- they were trying to make a vaccine that wouldn't run the risk of causing the disease. That's why in places like England -- they are even more nervous about a dog that has been vaccinated than they are a dog they can simply quarantine for a certain number of days to make sure that dog doesn't HAVE rabies. Because they are actually afraid that the vaccine will trigger the disease in some animal.
In the cases of parvo and distemper that can happen if puppies are vaccinated when they'd already been exposed TO the disease and are in the incubation period. It can make the difference between the puppy defeating the illness (usually with the help of maternal antibodies) and a pup that is on the edge of "almost sick" and the vaccine may push them over the edge into full fledged disease. There is a school of medical opinion that URGED vets to use the vaccine on a pup coming down with the disease to try to force immunity -- I have seen vets deliberately vaccinate as a sort of treatment. I've also seen that be fatal. But it's as I said -- this is again medical opinion.
That's one reason why they have worked SO hard to create the recombitant vaccines (they have them for parvo but not distemper **I think** -- I haven't checked this out in a while) -- literally taking the DNA of the disease apart and using living disease molecules to create a vaccine that will last BUT is not able to cause the disease. The new "Core Vaccines" use the recombitant vax for parvo - I think I"m correct in that.
Sorry -- those are all random thots, but it's something I've had to learn about because of what I went thru with Billy.
diseases like rabies, parvo, distemper, adenovirus -- they are SO bad, and vaccines are SO necessary. It's just the "yearly" part of it that disturbs me. We humans don't get vaccinated annually -- if I were working in a profession where I was at risk of being exposed to smallpox I might get a booster, but other than that I don't get vaccines at all.