Just read this entire thread and my goodness!!!! What a wonderful load of memories you'll have of her, what a trooper! No words for feelings at this time, just prayers and time for your healing. But what a gal! indeed!
How Often Should You Vaccinate Your Dog?
-
Hi Therese -
Linda, that is a bit patronizing of you. I have had three vets since having basenjis and two have admitted the very same thing to me personally and my current vet when asked why he still sends out annual vaccine reminders says he uses what his office has in place for vaccines to encourage people to come in for annual check ups.
You seem to have misread/misunderstood or are reading more into what I wrote.
I am writing from my point of view and as a person who works with vets - behind the scenes if you will - I can tell you in my umpteen years in the field - when working with the same kind of vets you and Jo are describing - I have NEVER heard one of them admit to a client (or at least not to a client they planned to have as a client for very much longer) they are willing to risk harming their dog with over vaccinating just to get you to come back each and every year. Talk about a lawsuit waiting to happen if you tell that to the wrong person!
I did not say it does not happen, only I have not experienced it (which is all I can share right? My experiences?) and I think if anyone can get their vet to admit it - my hats are off to them. Of course I would then quickly find another vet.
Linda, I as always am amazed that the assumption is because you are a CVT the rest of the dog community must be making uneducated often unsupported jumps to diagnosis.
How does sharing my experience (same as you shared your experience with Ali) become a statement that I assume the dog community must be uneducated or are making unsupported jumps to diagnoses? How is my sharing my experience, which is different than what you experienced (ie another side of the coin) not also helping to educate folks? Why does your personal experience carry more weight or validity than mine? My heart dog died, not yet 7 years of age; I take the subject just as seriously as do.
I would certainly presume and hope you (or anyone else) are working with people who are highly educated and in the know. I never said or implied there is no such thing as vaccine induced disease. If I did - please let me know where I said this.
If you care to learn more about vaccine links to auto immune issues that are not leaps of faith I suggest you consider studies in human conditions.
I find it ironic you can, in the same breath, call me out on presumed assumptions and yet you assume I have not educated myself on the subject you are so passionate about. Just because my thoughts and opines on this subject differ somewhat from yours does not mean I am lacking in education or interest.
Linda, Wow haven't you just jumped to a conclusion yourself. I see you assuming these are blanket statements, isn't that a blanket statement you just made about vets not sharing that they send out annual vaccine reminders to get patients in, pot kettle black Linda.
Sorry Therese - I do not feel I have jumped to any conclusions or assumptions. My door is open to the possibility that vaccines can play a role in disease. My door is also open to the fact that vaccines may not play as much as a role as some would have us believe. As I stated - while I am not a fan of over vaccinating, neither am I a fan of blanket mind sets when we just don't know all there is to know.
And Therese - please re-read what I wrote about vets not sharing - here it is again "While I have no doubts that there are vets who do this, I have yet to meet one brave enough to tell their clients this face to face." There was no blanket statement from me saying vets don't share this kind of info; I said I have no doubts there are some who do, I just have not been lucky? enough to meet one (or work for one).
I was speaking of the BCOA not being proactive about the vaccine related recommendations over a long period of time…... Honestly Linda, I'm personally tired of you speaking to me and others as if we are 6yrs old and not allowed to speak any opinion without benig accused of being unfair.
This is all good to know Therese but in truth I was not replying to you. I was replying to Jo's dismay at the BCOA's lack of action - I had not even read your post when I replied and had no comments to what you did write once I read it. But do feel free to continue to beat me with a virtual stick as though I was replying to you and/or for sharing my point of view and my experience.
Interesting that you recently wrote an article in the Bulletiin about not being appreciated and being told how you aren't doing your job or handling your responsibilities correctly, is that not what you are accusing Jo of here? Really, here we go again…pot kettle black.
Jo posted her dismay about the BCOA not being proactive enough for her re: this issue to this forum. I do not think it is wrong for anyone to ask her something to the effect of "Hey Jo, as a BCOA HRC member what are doing to get the ball rolling to get the BCOA more proactive on this subject." It is no more than I would ask myself (or would have others ask of me) if I, as a BCOA Board member, posted my discontent of some BCOA Board matter to a public forum. I would be mentally all over myself saying "So Linda, what part of the solution (or the problem) are you? What active role have you taken to help or hinder?" Sorry if you do not agree and/or that I did not ask in a manner you approved of.
Linda, I don't speak for Jo but I would personally love the opprotunity to use a page and a half to write my views on this topic in the Bulletin at no cost to myself.
I think this is a GREAT idea. The Bulletin is ALWAYS looking for new and original material. We are constantly pimping people to send something in. I say go for it - July 25th is the deadline. Just be prepared that not everyone is as passionate or as convinced as you are that the troubles that plague the world are all vaccine related. And these folks have as much right to voice their opine as you do.
Maybe you would want to concentrate your efforts in encouraging people to use all available avenues to educate themselves about the health and well being of their dogs and stop telling other members how they should approach a topic and to whom they should discuss it with.
Ummm. Could you please cite where I said this or implied this in my post today? I am at a total loss where this is coming from and I am starting to think you might have a personal gripe with me, not at all based on my post to this thread.
I certainly hope people on this forum and any other list or group will continue to discuss this topic and push for change where change is needed. I applaud those who shared this info on this forum and appreciate having these links available to myself and owners of my dogs.
Change that we ideally want to come from the BCOA, yes? Isn't that what I was advocating?? If we want the BCOA HRC to be more proactive, we need HRC members to "get to work" if you will vs spending their time and energy posting to a forum.
And Therese - I do want those video links available to the whole fancy, not just to me or my dogs or my puppy people. I even said as much but perhaps you missed it in your desire to reply.
I wrote: "I hope those on the HRC committee - who are also on this forum - will make sure these links are given to the committee for inclusion."
-
<>
Personally, I am not about to start telling ANYONE how and where they should be spending their energy, and I think it is beyond presumptuous to even insinuate we should. -
You are so right Andrea. I should not have phrased it in such a way as to make it seem like I am telling anyone to do anything. I hate when that happens!
So let me rephrase it - It is MY OPINION that energy would be better spent - esp. since dismay is being felt and shared with us all - for any committee members to work within their committee to get the change they imply the BCOA does not have, that they desire. Just my opinion of course - folks are free to do as they please. If they feel posting to the forum is working for them or getting them the change they want, far be it for me to tell them to change their tactics.
Thanks for bringing that to my attention so I could better clarify.
-
Debra, at what age do you consider a dog senior for purposes of discontinuing the every-3-year vaccination schedule?
Depends on the breed. I don't do anything but required rabies on Rottweilers after 9. Since sadly most die between 8 to 10 (we celebrate every year we got, almost joyful at those over 12…in fact a guy is doing a documentary across the country on those who reach 13
), 9 is indeed senior for them. Chows by 10 or 11. If out, I do use kennel cough nasal... or when fostering dogs. Arwen is almost 9, she just had her last 3 yr shot. I cannot imagine doing more than rabies for her when she is 12. Human vaccines predominately last a life time. I frankly feel every 3 yrs is over kill.@Therese:
Kathy,
Jo is serious as a heart attack and so am I. I have been talking openly about this topic since the nationals of 2000.I actually recently posted, have been vocal and written on it a lot over the years.
As for vets, I am lucky to have vets who long ago conceded it wasn't necessary, who switched vaccines when I took them in the article on research, and who… although they are not convinced vaccines generally cause much harm if over vaccinated, admit not needed.
However, that said, there was a study almost 25 freaking years ago on mange and auto immune in bulldogs and over vaccination. I bless Norma Hugo (Hugobull kennels) for educating me on many issues when I was still new and before the internet!
Linda, I too read your post as condescending. Glad you cleared it up, but frankly it almost sounds like you are saying the BCOA is too busy and the topic not one they want to use energy on, so do it yourself or shut up. How hard it is for the BCOA to SIMPLY recommend the AAHA protocol? They don't have to go out on any limb there, do any work, just simply promote that guideline as a start.
-
Hi Debra, sorry you misread my intentions.
I sooooo agree with you Debra - how hard can it be to just post a link and be done with it? I mean seriously.
And while I wish, wish, wish, it were as simple as that - I am learning it is not.
The HRC is comprised of a number of vastly different people with vastly differing opinions and not one opinion or one position or one way of doing things rules. Everyone on the committee will want to be heard, their opinions considered about their belief symptoms not to mention where everyone feels the links should even go.
It is my opinion that good business practice would dictate in the end a consensus would be needed that all committee members can live with or risk rampant discontent within the committee and beyond. Sadly - it is getting that consensus which seems to eat up the hours.
Nothing like being on the board to a) lose ones idealism about how things can be done and b) put a different perspective on the simplest of things.
-
Great Posts Therese! Thanks for sharing….. people need to take notice, I too would love to see you write an article for the Bulletin so that people get both sides of the problem and why.
Or maybe better yet... do it for The Modern Basenji....
So Pat…you don't think the BCOA membership as a whole would benefit from the article? Or is it because you have a beef with the health committee that you would like the membership to pay to have access to the article/information?
Just curious.
-
@JoT:
Kris, thank you for posting these video links. This is critical information and presented so well.
You're very welcome, I thoroughly agree that the information is critical and well-presented, and I hope that everyone watches all 4 parts of this informative interview.
-
Linda,
Although I have no personal gripe with you I have read your posts here and on other lists and feel this time as well as a few others your post was condescending. I personally do not like being spoken down to or seeing anyone with an opinion being spoken down to publicly and as you say you don't either so I would think you would understand why I responded. In your reply you explain what you "really" meant in your post but contradict that in a couple of places so I remain a bit confused by your posts.
As with other topics you have written about when some disagrees or as you say "calls you out" you have now labeled yourself the victim and misunderstood here. I clearly see there is no point in trying to clarify further what I said, I am comfortable with what I wrote and willing to let it stand on its own.
AIHA is an awful disease and I'm sorry you lost your dog but as you said it was not vaccine related and although I would not jump to the conclusion the vaccine caused the AIHA I would wonder if I was you, if waiting for the blood results before vaccinating might have given you a better chance at treatment for Sage. Vaccinating a dog in the beginning stages of AIHA as you said Sage was could very well of triggered an immune system reaction which could have cut her life short, but I'm sure you already know this so I'm not telling you anything you haven't considered. Again I would use your dogs case as many others to explain why timing of vaccines as well of frequency plays a huge role in vaccine related issues in our dogs.
Therese -
I don't give any shots to my b's except for rabies after the age of 5. If I am concerned re the antibodies levels, I do blood titers. I recommend titers to anyone I place a rescue dog.
-
So Pat…you don't think the BCOA membership as a whole would benefit from the article? Or is it because you have a beef with the health committee that you would like the membership to pay to have access to the article/information?
Just curious.
I do think that the entire membership and Basenji owners that are not members would benefit from the article. Their choice if they want to pay for a subscription to TMB. The point that Therese was making is that she would love to write and article for the Bulletin (not a paid ad) about this point… I was agreeing with that and that putting it also in TMB would be a good idea also. Not sure where you think I said that I didn't think that the BCOA membership as a whole would benefit? If that is the way it reads, my apologies, not what was intended, however if the Bulletin doesn't want such an article, then yes, put it in a publication that will print it (and not as an ad). Could have been the part where I said "better yet", however I should have put "Better yet, put it in The Modern Basenji too".
I have no beef with the Health Committee, per say.... only with the antics of the Co-Chair. IMO the group is way to big and without the appropriate people on the committee. (myself incuded when I was a member as there are much better qualified people to serve on that committee)
-
Hi Therese,
With all due respect, I can no more control how you or anyone else personalizes and/or filters what I write (or what anyone writes). I can only write and respond through my personal experiences and intentions. If folks want to know what those intentions are vs. assuming they know and then writing as though their assumptions are fact, all they need do is ask. I am more than willing to clarify as I hope any one of us would be without making it or taking it personal.
As for contradicting myself, again please do let me know how or where I did this as I do not feel I have but am always open to the possibility. Your saying I have done so but then unwilling to show me exactly where does little to help me better communicate and creates an inaccurate implication.
Going back to my first sentence - I can not control how any one person processes what I write, all I can do is ask folks to please ask, using examples to support their premise, so I can better address the issue. Short of that folks sill continue choose to believe what they believe even if it is not true.
On another note - Pat - what do you mean by paid advertisement in the Bulletin??? Are you seriously suggesting the BCOA Bulletin charges people for their articles or folks have to pay to have an article included??? What ever gave you that idea? Therese (and anyone else for that matter - I don't beleive you even have to be a member) are more than welcome to send along an article AT NO COST for inclusion in the Bulletin, as has been the way since as long as I can remember.
-
On another note - Pat - what do you mean by paid advertisement in the Bulletin??? *Are you seriously suggesting the BCOA Bulletin charges people for their articles or folks have to pay to have an article included??? *What ever gave you that idea? *Therese (and anyone else for that matter - I don't beleive you even have to be a member) are more than welcome to send along an article AT NO COST for inclusion in the Bulletin, as has been the way since as long as I can remember.
No, not what I said, I wanted to make it clear that I was speaking of an "article" not a paid ad, period. I made NO suggestion that the Bulletin charge for articles.
Of course that said, it would have to pass the review committee….to be included
-
It is my opinion that good business practice would dictate in the end a consensus would be needed that all committee members can live with or risk rampant discontent within the committee and beyond.
Good business practices are not run by such measures. Ultimately, the majority have to make decisions. Simple majority often is needed to get ANYTHING done. Committee members have to accept they win some, they lose some, pull up your big girl panties and move on. Effective business cannot be run trying to please all the board members.
Or is it because you have a beef with the health committee that you would like the membership to pay to have access to the article/information?Just curious.
Snark.
If that is the way it reads, my apologies, not what was intended
You have, on occasions, taken shots at me, and me at you, so if anyone should be reading crappola into your posts, it would be me. So let me assure you, your post didn't display anything to apologize for.
@Therese:
although I would not jump to the conclusion the vaccine caused the AIHA I would wonder if I was you, if waiting for the blood results before vaccinating might have given you a better chance at treatment for Sage. Vaccinating a dog in the beginning stages of AIHA as you said Sage was could very well of triggered an immune system reactionTherese
If you had addressed that cruel, uncalled for comment to me, I'd have been barred from this forum before the virtual ink dried. The test showed
:::: The lab work was mostly unremarkable though her hemotocrit was slightly low - we just thought she was dehydrated that particular morning due to being fasted.:::::
Your post seems to indicate… no it SAYS it, had she waited her dog might be alive. Uncalled for callous comment. SLIGHTLY LOW, fasting, absolutely NOTHING but crystal ball to indicate a problem. Had she NOT vaccinated, it might not have, indeed progressed, so the dog would STILL have seemed okay, gotten the vaccine. Shaking my head. I don't know what the history is, but placing blame in any way on an owner who responded in a normal way is surely to goodness uncalled for at least. Perhaps Linda has a much thicker skin than me, but first I'd have cried, and then I'd have blasted you in a way that would have ended my participation here. (And please don't try spinning it that you were suggesting everyone should wait til full blood panel of all possible types before vaccinating... which is what, at that stage, it would have taken to indicate any real problem, if even that!) -
I do think that the entire membership and Basenji owners that are not members would benefit from the article. Their choice if they want to pay for a subscription to TMB. The point that Therese was making is that she would love to write and article for the Bulletin (not a paid ad) about this point… I was agreeing with that and that putting it also in TMB would be a good idea also. Not sure where you think I said that I didn't think that the BCOA membership as a whole would benefit? If that is the way it reads, my apologies, not what was intended, however if the Bulletin doesn't want such an article, then yes, put it in a publication that will print it (and not as an ad). Could have been the part where I said "better yet", however I should have put "Better yet, put it in The Modern Basenji too".
I have no beef with the Health Committee, per say…. only with the antics of the Co-Chair. IMO the group is way to big and without the appropriate people on the committee. (myself incuded when I was a member as there are much better qualified people to serve on that committee)
Thanks Pat for the clarification…yes, the bold was why I took your post the way I did.
-
Snark.
You have, on occasions, taken shots at me, and me at you, so if anyone should be reading crappola into your posts, it would be me. So let me assure you, your post didn't display anything to apologize for.Debra…do me a favor...and DON'T speak on my behalf or pretend for one minute that you know my intent - you DON'T. I'm quite capable of responding. If you took my comment as a snark, so be it. Quite frankly I DID take Pat's post as saying to put the article in TMB instead of the Bulletin and since I am a member of the BCOA, I wanted to know why. Pat has since clarified what she meant, I've since clarified why I took it the way I did - two folks involved in the conversation - explaining their side, problem solved. And your involvement has helped that how?
-
(I do yearly lab work on all my kids)
Linda, what type of yearly lab work do you have done?
-
Debra,
If you read my comment as cruel it was not intended to be and I'm clarifying that. Linda did not give clear detail but I stand by the fact that I am the cause of my Ali's red blood cell aplasia in the sense I allowed the vet to restart her vaccine protocol because he was not comfortable relying on the breeders vaccine records. I should have stood my ground and used caution. Linda S stated in her posts that she is educated in vaccine reactions and takes the time to do blood work annually, although I put no blame on Linda for vaccinating her dog anymore than I do Jo for using annual vaccines on her dog that is now facing an issue I do think questioning these types of decisions in hind sight can only prove to help the dogs in the future.
So to clarify, I do not believe Sage would have been saved by not waiting for labs, just that it may have helped or rather the vaccine given in this case as in others may have "hurt". Just wanted to clarify as I would never intentionally be cruel about someone losing their dog. It breaks my heart we don't get a second chance on dogs like Sage or my girl Ali to do things differently but we certainly can help dogs in the future with what we learned in the past and that was my point.
Therese -
Debra…do me a favor...and DON'T speak on my behalf or pretend for one minute that you know my intent - you DON'T. I'm quite capable of responding. If you took my comment as a snark, so be it. Quite frankly I DID take Pat's post as saying to put the article in TMB instead of the Bulletin and since I am a member of the BCOA, I wanted to know why. Pat has since clarified what she meant, I've since clarified why I took it the way I did - two folks involved in the conversation - explaining their side, problem solved. And your involvement has helped that how?
You post on public board, you get public response. You post a snark, inferring her comment was some nefarious slight to BCOA when it was simply addressing "free" means to publishing info, when it was not necessary to bring personal issues into it, when it really would have opened the article up to many who may not be part of BCOA (I'd have to see membership/subscriber numbers to know), was, IMHO, a snark. If you don't want public response, if you want private conversations, I do trust you know how to use email, no?
Helped? At least it let her know at least one person didn't think she owed anyone an apology for someone putting their own agenda/spin on her response. -
You post on public board, you get public response. You post a snark, inferring her comment was some nefarious slight to BCOA when it was simply addressing "free" means to publishing info, when it was not necessary to bring personal issues into it, when it really would have opened the article up to many who may not be part of BCOA (I'd have to see membership/subscriber numbers to know), was, IMHO, a snark. If you don't want public response, if you want private conversations, I do trust you know how to use email, no? In fact, much of your personal (the real word is attack but let's diffuse and call them "comments") comments to Linda, like the below, would surely have been better as a PRIVATE conversation. I have no issues with strong opinions about THINGS, but when the focus is a personal nature, it doesn't belong on a forum. And when you do, don't cry at responses.
Helped? At least it let her know at least one person didn't think she owed anyone an apology for someone putting their own agenda/spin on her response.
Can you read? Did you see the part that was highlighted in my response to Pat - after her apology. So you don't think that the one word "too" clarified what she meant? It did to me. Clear enough? Post a few more paragraphs…Again you have NO IDEA about my intent. I've explained (to Pat - I owe you no explanation), if you can't understand it, well no amount of explanation will get it across to you. I'm done.
-
OK, lets go back to our regularly scheduled programing!
