"April urges
everyone to read this and please act upon it by contacting
the legislators listed. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT
. If this gets defeated
it will set a president to stop the over vaccination. If
it goes
through it will also set a president, one that will very
detrimental to
our beloved pets. The number of people who respond to
this will make a
huge difference in the health and well being of all our
animal companions.
IF YOU DO NOTHING ELSE, I URGE YOU TO MAKE A COPY OF
THIS AND SAVE THE
ENCLOSED INFORMATION. ALSO, PRINT IT OFF AND SEND
OR TAKE IT TO YOUR
VET, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU GET THE YEARLY REMINDERS THAT
YOUR PET IS
SENSELESSY DUE FOR MORE DANGEROUS OVER VACCINATIONS.
Please feel free to make a copy of this and send it on
to everyone you
know who has a cat or dog."
Subject: Dodds & Schultz NO on NY Pet Vax Bills S02164/A14253
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 03:28:42 -0400
Greetings again!
The world's 2 leading authorities on veterinary
vaccines -- Dr. W. Jean
Dodds of Hemopet and Dr. Ronald Schultz of the University
of Wisconsin's
School of Veterinary Medicine -- have contacted New York's
legislators
urging them to VOTE NO on Senate Bill S02164 and Assembly
Bill A04253
(see e-mails below sent with permission) which would
require boarding
kennels and groomers to obtain proof of vaccination within
the previous
year (annual vaccination) with vaccines which have been
scientifically
proven durations of immunity of more than 7 years to
provide services to
New York's cats and dogs. To require pet owners (consumers)
to pay for
redundant vaccinations from which their animals derive
no benefit runs
contrary to consumer protection laws. These bills appear
to promote
veterinary medical malpractice by putting veterinarians
in the untenable
position of having to give animals drug overdoses (vaccines
are biologic
drugs) in order for their owners to be able to board
or groom them.
Passage of unresearched, non-scientifically supported
legislation like
this will have a profound impact on the health of companion
animals and
their owner's finances. Please do not allow these bills
to pass through
inaction. Your pets need you to fight this for them,
and these
legislators need more than a whimper from pet owners,
they need a
resounding roar to vote AGAINST these bills(http://public.
leginfo.state. ny.us/menugetf.
cgi
<http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi> insert
S02164 in the
box at the top after "Bill No.", click "2006" and check
the "text" box
to read the text of the bill). To contact the appropriate
New York
legislators, even if you're not a New York resident,
copy and past the
e-mail addresses below.
PERMISSION TO POST and CROSS-POST this message.
Regards,
Kris L. Christine
Co-Trustee, Co-Founder -- The Rabies Challenge Fund Charitable
Trust
cyoung@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:cyoung%40senate.state.ny.us>;
padavan@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:padavan%40senate.state.ny.us>;
lavalle@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:lavalle%40senate.state.ny.us>;
seward@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:seward%40senate.state.ny.us>;
morahan@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:morahan%40senate.state.ny.us>;
little@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:little%40senate.state.ny.us>;
winner@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:winner%40senate.state.ny.us>;
valesky@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:valesky%40senate.state.ny.us>;
stachows@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:stachows%40senate.state.ny.us>;
breslin@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:breslin%40senate.state.ny.us>;
jdklein@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:jdklein%40senate.state.ny.us>;
fuschill@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:
fuschill%40senate.state.ny.us>;
nozzolio@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:nozzolio%40senate.state.ny.us>;
marcelli@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:marcelli%40senate.state.ny.us>;
ojohnson@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:ojohnson%40senate.state.ny.us>;
robach@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:robach%40senate.state.ny.us>;
krueger@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:krueger%40senate.state.ny.us>;
sabini@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:sabini%40senate.state.ny.us>;
hassellt@senate. state.ny. us <mailto:hassellt%40senate.state.ny.us>;
alessim@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:alessim%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
butlerm@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:butlerm%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
abbatep@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:abbatep%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
benedem@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:
benedem%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
delmonf@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:delmonf%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
destitr@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:destitr%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
cohena@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:cohena%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
camarak@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:camarak%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
crouchc@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:crouchc%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
cymbros@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:cymbros%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
GiglioJ@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:GiglioJ%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
finchg@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:finchg%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
fieldsg@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:fieldsg%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
rabbita@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:rabbita%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
GuntheA@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:
GuntheA%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
Pheffea@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:Pheffea%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
riverap@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:riverap%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
>mcenenj@assembly. state.ny. us
<mailto:mcenenj%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
RosentL@assembly. state.ny. us
<mailto:RosentL%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
McDonoD@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:McDonoD%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
mengj@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:mengj%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
markeym@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:markeym%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
liftonb@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:liftonb%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
maisela@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:maisela%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
mcdonar@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:mcdonar%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
mageew@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:
mageew%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
peraltj@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:peraltj%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
reillyr@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:reillyr%40assembly.state.ny.us>;
tonkop@assembly. state.ny. us <mailto:tonkop%40assembly.state.ny.us>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 11:33 AM
Subject: NO on Pet Vax Bills S02164/A04253
Dear Senators and Assembly Members:
I echo the concerns of my esteemed colleague Professor
Ronald Schultz
and Ms. Kris Christine about Senate Bill S02164 and Assembly
Bill
A04253. I urge you to vote NO on this bill, as it will
set back the
recent progress made in changing protocols for pet vaccinations
so that
dogs and cats will not be unduly vaccinated with the
inherent risk of
adverse reactions, let alone the costs involved.The change
in our
understanding of the appropriate need for pet vaccination
and avoidance
of overvaccination began in the late 1980s. At that time
I had spent 27
years in comparative hematology and immunology research
at the New York
State Department of Health
in Albany, working closely with colleagues at the NY
State College of
Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University. Today, the collective
body of
published research has culminated in a new approach to
pet vaccinations.
I emplore the legislature of New York State to adopt
the current
technology and recommendations of our national veterinary
professional
bodies [AVMA, AAHA] and other experts like
Professor Schultz and vote NO on this bill.
Sincerely,
W. Jean Dodds, DVM
President, Hemopet
938 Stanford Street
Santa Monica, CA 90403
310-828-4804; FAX 310-828-8251
hemopet@hotmail. com <mailto:hemopet%40hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 8:21 AM
Subject: NO! Pet Vax Bills S02164/A14253
Dear Senators and Assembly Members,
You recently received an email urging you to vote NO
on Senate Bill
S02164 and Assembly Bill A04253, from Kris Christine.
I would also urge
you on behalf of the health and well-being of the dogs
and cats in New
York not to vote for this bill. All the reasons stated
in Kris' email
are correct and clearly define the reasons why this bill
is
scientifically unacceptable to anyone that understands
the basis of
vaccine immunity and prevention of canine and feline
diseases. This
legislation is at least 20 years outdated on the basis
of our current
knowledge in veterinary vaccinology. I hope that it is
not supported by
anyone at the N.Y. State College of Veterinary Medicine,
Cornell
University. I was a faculty member at that fine institution
when I began
my research on duration of immunity for canine vaccines
in the
mid-1970's and where Dr. Fred Scott did his research
in the 1980's on
duration of immunity for feline vaccines. Our research
showed very long
term immunity (e.g. 7 years for the vaccines required
by all dogs and cats!
If you have any questions please contact me.
VOTE NO!
Sincerely,
Ronald D. Schultz, Professor and Chair
Department of Pathobiological Sciences
School of Veterinary Medicine
University of Wisconsin-Madison
2015 Linden Drive West
Madison, WI 53706
Tel. (608) 263 9888
FAX (608) 262 1739
manningj@svm. vetmed.wisc. edu <mailto:manningj%40svm.vetmed.wisc.edu>
cc: Dr. Jean Dodds
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 8:59 AM
Subject: NO! Pet Vax Bills S02164/A14253
May 5, 2006
Greetings Senators and Assemblypersons:
I am writing to strongly urge you to vote NO on
Senate Bill S02164 and
Assembly Bill A04253 which would legally mandate that
New York boarding
kennels and grooming facilities require proof of vaccination "against
distemper, hepatitis, para influenza, leptospirosis,
parvo and
bordetella during the previous year" for dogs and "against
feline viral
rhinotracheitis, feline calicivirus, or feline panleuopenia
within the
past year" for cats engaging their services.
Requiring proof of annual vaccination with vaccines with
much longer
proven durations of immunity is ill-advised and reckless
- it would put
companion animals at needless risk of adverse reactions
without boosting
their immunity and incur unnecessary expense to their
owners. Veterinary
medical schools do not recommend annual booster vaccinations
for
distemper, hepatitis, parvovirus, and feline panleukopenia,
so why would
the New York Legislature introduce bills that do? It
would be akin to
requiring New York residents to be vaccinated annually
against polio
and/or tetanus.
The core canine distemper, hepatitis, and parvo vaccines
(see Duration
of Immunity to Canine Vaccines by Dr. Ronald Schultz http://www.cedarbay
vet.com/duration _of_immunity.
htm
<http://www.cedarbayvet.com/duration_of_immunity.htm>)
have demonstrated
durations of immunity beyond 7 years. The American Animal
Hospital
Association' s (AAHA) 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines
(
http://www.leerburg .com/special_ report.htm
<http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm>)
states on Page 18 that:
"We now know that booster injections are of no
value in dogs already
immune, and immunity from distemper infection and vaccination
lasts for
a minimum of 7 years based on challenge studies and up
to 15 years (a
lifetime) based on antibody titer." They further state
that hepatitis
and parvovirus vaccines have been proven to protect for
a minimum of 7
years by challenge and up to 9 and 10 years based on
antibody count.
The first entry under Appendix 2 of the AAHA Guidelines
(http://www.leerburg .com/special_
report.htm
<http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm>) "Important
Vaccination
'Do's and Don'ts" is "Do Not Vaccinate Needlessly - Don't
revaccinate
more often than is needed and only with the vaccines
that prevent
diseases for which that animal is at risk." They also
caution
veterinarians: "Do Not Assume that Vaccines Cannot Harm
a Patient -
Vaccines are potent medically active agents and have
the very real
potential of producing adverse events."
The American Veterinary Medical Association' s
(AVMA's) Principles of
Vaccination (http://www.avma.
org/issues/ vaccination/ vaccination. asp
<http://www.avma.org/issues/vaccination/vaccination.asp
>) states that
"Unnecessary stimulation of the immune system does not
result in
enhanced disease resistance, and may increase the risk
of adverse
post-vaccination events." (page 2) They elaborate by
reporting that:
"Possible adverse events include failure to immunize,
anaphylaxis,
immunosuppression, autoimmune disorders, transient infections,
and/or
long-term infected carrier states. In addition, a causal
association in
cats between injection sites and the subsequent development
of a
malignant tumor is the subject of ongoing research."
Perhaps New York's Legislators have been confused
by vaccine
manufacturer' s labels. According to AVMA's Principles
of Vaccination
(http://www.avma.
org/issues/ vaccination/ vaccination. asp
<http://www.avma.org/issues/vaccination/vaccination.asp>),
"..revaccination frequency recommendations found on many
vaccine labels
is based on historical precedent, not on scientific data
. [and] does
not resolve the question about average or maximum duration
of immunity
[Page 2] and..may fail to adequately inform practitioners
about optimal
use of the product.[Page 4] ." As the Colorado State
University
Veterinary Teaching Hospital states it: ".booster vaccine
recommendations for vaccines other than rabies virus
have been
determined arbitrarily by manufacturers. "
In an April 3, 2006 Newsday article by Denise Flaim
entitled
Annual Vaccinations May Harm Your Pet (http://www.newsday.
com/news/
columnists/ ny-adcova4687741 apr03,0,3250447. colum
<
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-adcova4687741apr03,0,3250447.colum>
n?coll=ny-rightrail -columnist, one of the world's leading
experts on
veterinary vaccines, Dr. Ronald Schultz, is quoted as
follows regarding
vaccine labels: "The label means nothing," Schultz says
simply, noting
that vaccines licensed for one year and three years are
often the same
product.
"The label has an arbitrary and capricious annual revaccination
requirement, and it takes an act of Congress to take
it off" literally.
Schultz says the Department of Agriculture has applied
to remove the
language, a legislative process that he estimates will
take seven years.
On Page 5 of the 2000 Report of the American Association
of
FelinePractitioners (http://www.aafponli ne.org/resources /practice_
guidelines. htm
<http://www.aafponline.org/resources/practice_guidelines.htm> (click
on
"Feline Vaccination Guidelines") , they state under "Feline
Panleukopenia" that "Both serologic and challenge exposure
data indicate
that a parenteral FPV vaccine induces immunity that is
sustained for at
least 7 years. Therefore, following the initial series
of vaccinations
and revaccination 1 year later, cats should be vaccinated
no more
frequently than once every 3 years."
Again, I urge you all to VOTE NO on SB02164 and
A04253. If you have
any questions or would like me to e-mail you a full copy
of the AAHA
Guidelines, please e-mail me.
Respectfully submitted,
Kris L. Christine
Alna, ME 04535
cc: Dr. W. Jean Dodds
Dr. Ronald Schultz
More!!!
Excellent Source for Dr. Schultz's Data :
http://www.ivis.
org/advances/ Infect_Dis_ Carmichael/ schultz/chapter_
frm.asp?LA
<http://www.ivis.org/advances/Infect_Dis_Carmichael/schultz/chapter_frm.asp?LA>
"My own pets are vaccinated once or twice as pups and
kittens, then
never again except for rabies,” Wall Street Journal
reporter Rhonda L.
Rundle quoted Dr. Ronald Schultz in a July 31, 2002 article
entitled
Annual Pet Vaccinations may be Unnecessary, Fatal "My
own pets are
vaccinated once or twice as pups and kittens, then never
again except
for rabies,” Wall Street Journal reporter Rhonda
L. Rundle quoted Dr.
Ronald Schultz in a July 31, 2002 article entitled Annual
Pet
Vaccinations may be Unnecessary, Fatal “In cats
there has been a large
increase in hyperthyroidism and cancerous tumors between
the shoulder
blades where vaccines typically are injected.” http://www.mnplan.
state.mn.
us/issues/ scan.htm? Id=2867
<http://www.mnplan.state.mn.us/issues/scan.htm?Id=2867>
The extended durations of immunity for vaccines is not “new” or “recent”
science as some members of the Maine Veterinary Medical
Association (MVMA) have claimed. AAHA reveals on Page
2 of
theirGuidelines that ideal reduced vaccination protocols
were
recommended by vaccinology experts beginning in 1978.
A Veterinary
Practice News article entitled “Managing Vaccine
Changes” by
veterinarian Dennis M. McCurnin, reports that: “Change
has been
discussed for the past 15 years and now has started to
move across the
country." http://www.vetpract icenews.com/ vpn/detail.
aspx?aid=
12547&cid= 3879&category=
<http://www.vetpracticenews.com/vpn/detail.aspx?aid=12547&cid=3879&category=>
Dr. Alice Wolf, Professor of Small Animal Internal Medicineat
Texas A&M
College of Veterinary Medicine, stated in an address
(Vaccines of the
Present and Future
http://www.vin.
com/VINDBPub/ SearchPB/ Proceedings/ PR05000/PR00141.
htm
<http://www.vin.com/VINDBPub/SearchPB/Proceedings/PR05000/PR00141.htm>)
at the 2001 World Small Animal Veterinary Association
World Congress:
“The recommendation for annual revaccination is
a practice that was
‘officially’ started in 1978. This recommendation
was made without any
scientific validation of the need to booster immunity
so frequently.”
She also stated that “some veterinarians use the
recommendation for
vaccinations as a way to ensure client visits for yearly
examinations
and, least appropriate, as a ‘profit center.’” According
to Colorado
State’s College of Veterinary Medicine Teaching
Hospital
(http://www.geocitie s.com/kremersark /CSAP.html
<http://www.geocities.com/kremersark/CSAP.html> http://www.calmanim
alcare.com/ vaccine.htm <http://www.calmanimalcare.com/vaccine.htm>),
“Yearly booster vaccine recommendations for vaccines
other than rabies
virus have been determined arbitrarily by manufacturers.” The
AAHA’s
guidelines state “..there is no scientific basis
for the recommendation
to revaccinate dogs annually with many of the current
vaccines that
provide years of immunity.”
http://www.dvmnewsm agazine.com/ dvm/article/
articleDetail.
jsp?id=35171
<http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=35171>
The statement stresses AVMA's stance on education, a
reduction in the
profession's dependence on vaccine sales, which account
for a
significant portion of practice income, ..........
Practitioners and scientists like Glickman theorize the
repeated use of
vaccines breed antibodies that can attack a host's own
organs, causing
autoimmune disease. Schultz argues that many annual vaccines
remain
effective throughout a lifetime; at least one of his
reports
successfully challenges a distemper vaccine after seven
years. But
despite all the research, it wasn't until veterinarians
started noting
soft-tissue sarcoma developing at vaccine injection sites
in cats that
the issue sparked widespread debate.
AVMA admits that the practice of annual vaccinations
is based on
historic precedent and not research.
" In the 1970s, there were four vaccines for dogs and
we weren't using
them often. Now there are 16 vaccines for dogs, and if
they're not
getting them annually, they're getting them more often
than that."
(quote from Dr. Ronald Schultz)
AVMA refuses to reveal much concerning its position prior
to
publication, but according to Galvin, the statement offers
advice for
veterinarians and proposes the following:
* Veterinarians must promote the value of the exam and
move away from
their dependence on vaccine income. Emphasize communication,
customization and learning the lifestyle of clients to
attract patients
to the practice.
From the article, to give you an idea of who Dr.
Schultz is, aside from
being a member of the task force for the American Animal
Hospital
Association, "immunologists like Dr. Ron Schultz, a University
of
Wisconsin professor who's performed duration of immunity
studies since
the 1970s" and about himself, he states in the article: "I'm
the only
one in the profession who challenges the immunity of
vaccines. I'm
really one among a total of three individuals who have
challenge studies
out. With just a few of us studying them and more vaccines
on the
market, how are we supposed to keep up?"
Dr. Schultz is the chair of the Department of Pathobiological
Sciences
at the University of Wisconsin's School of Veterinary
Medicine in Madison.
The following link will take you to a site devoted exclusively
to
articles in DVM on the Vaccines issue:
http://www.dvmnewsm agazine.com/ dvm/issue/
issueDetail. jsp?id=2377
<
http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/issue/issueDetail.jsp?id=2377>
From a DVM article entitled, What Do We Tell Our
Clients?,
http://www.dvmnewsm agazine.com/ dvm/article/
articleDetail.
jsp?id=61696,
<http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=61696,>
It has finally happened. The American Animal Hospital
Association (AAHA)
has released canine vaccine guidelines. Some practitioners
may dread it
and consider the recommendations as a "practice buster."
The concern of course is the loss of our "vaccine hook." Some
of us have
been actively building new wellness care programs all
along to make this
transition easy and even sensible; others, unfortunately,
have buried
their head in the sand, hoping it wouldn't happen. Wherever
you stand on
this issue, the word will travel fast and it will surely
be an issue
that as a veterinarian you must address.
1. We must first assess the client's concern. Has damage
occurred to our
credibility? Has the client come across counter information
from outside
sources? If so we must first repair our credibility.
The key to our success will be devising a means of keeping
the "annual
visit" when not performing an "annual vaccination. " A
quick look at our
human medical colleagues (family practitioners, internists,
obstetricians) shows us that annual health care exams
and laboratory
testing are commonly performed with minimal regard to
vaccinations being
given. In fact, dentists do very well at getting their
clients to return
every six months. On the other hand, our image has become
that of a
"vaccinator" and not "a physician for animals."
Developing Common Sense Strategies for Fiscal Responsibility:
http://www.dvmnewsm agazine.com/ dvm/article/
articleDetail.
jsp?id=61694
<http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=61694>
The purpose of this article is to focus on the third
of these essential
cornerstones: the economic realities of protocol changes,
and howmedical
and surgical standards including reduced frequency
of vaccination can be compatible with financial viability;
and, yes,
even success.
For a real eye-opener of potential revenue loss, research
practice
records for the most recent 12 months of client activity
to determine
the estimated number of adult canine patients that were
seen for annual
vaccinations. Multiply this number times the revenue
loss calculated
above on an individual patient basis to determine the
total potential
lost income.
Do not get discouraged! Changes in product and service
mix have been an
ongoing fact of veterinary practice existence. Evolving
ideas about
vaccine protocols are no different than the introduction
of parvo
vaccine years ago, recommendations for less frequent
heartworm testing
more recently, and loss of dermatology income after the
introduction of
incredibly powerful flea preventatives in the mid-1990s.
Link to an article in DVM, the Newsletter of Veterinary
Medicine
describing the contents of the American Animal Hospital
Association's
2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines. Excellent place to start
with fabulous
quotes from task force members:
http://www.dvmnewsm agazine.com/ dvm/article/
articleDetail.
jsp?id=46546
<http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=46546>
Some quotes from that article:
Under "Booster Vaccines:" Of the core vaccines, the taskforce
recommends
that the adult dog receive rabies; canine parvovirus
vaccine; canine
adenovirus-2 (hepatitis vaccine); and distemper vaccines
every three years.
The caveat to the recommendation, says Ford, is that
there is good
evidence that the protection conferred in adult dogs
by both canine
distemper and canine parvovirus exceeds five years.
Under "Anticipated reaction:""It' s hard to believe it'd
be
controversial to any DVM who's lived on earth for the
past year or two.
You'd have to be from outer space if you haven't heard
about the
issues," says Schultz.
Under "Who Won't Buy It:" "There are some corporate policies
among these
conglomerates of veterinary practices in the country.
They have standard
policies that all dogs get all licensed vaccines every
year. What we're
saying is that's wrong. Don't do that," says Ford.
In the American Animal Hospital Association' s 2003 CanineVaccine
Guidelines http://www.dogs4sal e.com.au/ AAHA_Special_
Report.htm
<http://www.dogs4sale.com.au/AAHA_Special_Report.htm> on
the last page,
Appendix 2, #1 in priority under the "Important Vaccination
Do's and Don'ts" is "Don't revaccinate more often than
is needed..... "
Appendix 2 Important Vaccination "Do's and Don'ts"
11. Do Not Vaccinate Needlessly
Don't revaccinate more often than is needed and only
with the vaccines
that prevent diseases for which that animal is at risk.
12. Do Not Assume that Vaccines Cannot Harm a PatientVaccines
are potent
medically active agents and have the very real potential
of producing
adverse events. |
