In my area, once in awhile a bat gets into a house, so my critters are kept up to date on rabies vax. It's impossible to imagine the heartbreak of having to surrender a critter for rabies "testing" for something so preventable.

I ran into an odd situation some years ago regarding rabies vax. I took in a street ragamuffin who needed to be neutered as quickly as possible (he smelled quite foul) and had explosive diarrhea.

I was in the process of switching vet clinics and attempted to get an appointment for neutering, vax and checkup. I called a nearby cat clinic and they refused to do anything except the rabies vax with the explanation that they do not treat any critter without current rabies vax in full effect. In other words, they would not even do an exam for several weeks, much less neuter him, when he was in obvious need of medical help.

It worked out well, though, because I found my current clinic and would be loathe to leave them. The clinic that refused to see him ended up losing a whole lot of income.

Has anyone else heard of this odd rule of getting only a rabies vaccine first and everything else weeks later?

I've had one large vet practice here say that all animals have to be UTD on rabies because of his insurance. But as long as he gives the vaccine he is covered - even though it isn't really effective when he is treating. At least your ex vet is honest about the vaccine not being in effect if it's just given.
We do have an occasional rabid bat here in NE Florida and I've even spotted foxes within a mile of my home. So I do not take rabies lightly. But I also follow the info from The Rabies Challenge Fund to be sure I do not over-vaccinate.

My dog's father had a severe immune mediated pan-uveitis in reaction to the rabies vaccine. He will be on meds for the rest of his life.
I chose not to risk this for my dog, so I Titered her for Rabies and did not vaccinate. Her titers were fine.
I understand the risk of this, but I am more worried about her genetically increased risk of reaction.

I'll give you legitimate excuses. First of all, once the first booster has been given, most all dogs have immunity for many, many years, if not for their lifetimes. Annual rabies vaccinations are a marketing gimmick. Second, dogs suffering from serious disorders, such as cavalier King Charles spaniels with mitral valve disease, cannot afford the nasty side effects to their immune systems that annual vaccine injections cause.

Not at all true. A Cavalier King Charles Spaniel certainly does have inheritant anomalies (thanks to humans disrupting canine genetics,) but they are just as subject to rabies as any other dog (maybe even more so by being less hardy and smaller, as well.)
Rabies vaccines are NOT a "marketing gimmick," although what few people realize is that the "3 Year Vaccine" and the "1 Year Vaccine" are the same vaccine with different labels. The labels are made such due to confusion resulting when one county or municipal jurisdication requires more frequent vaccinations than another. The medically recommended protocol deemed best is to vaccinate puppies or kittens no sooner than 12 weeks of age and ideally before 6 months of age, booster that vaccine 1 year later, and then every 3 years for life. Local laws may require more frequent vaccinations, but that is separate from medical recommendations.
No medical professional would ever refer to rabies vaccinations as a "marketing gimmick." A person with a medical or scientific background takes this disease and public health issue far more seriously than laymen "armchair experts."

And if you had read clearly you would have seen the original comment was "Annual rabies vaccinations are a marketing gimmick" with ANNUAL being the key word you left out. And that was my point as well....annual vaccines of almost any kind are a money making, harmful practice.

The Rabies Challege Fund is testing to document the time of efficacy for rabies vaccine. (Easy to look them up online and on facebook). Finally, someone is doing what is best for the animals instead of what is a way to make money for vets and vaccine producers.
My Shih Tzu started experiencing seizures and ataxia after his last rabies vaccine which the vet admits is most likely related to that vaccine. But I was never informed before the vaccine that this could happen. Even with the seizures, the vet didn't mention that it was probably the rabies vaccine until I found the research and confronted them about it. They also refused to acknowledge that 3 year rabies vax were legal here until I pushed it with them.
I've also had my little 4 lb maltese suffer a severe reaction to parvo vaccine and had the (ex)vet laugh and call it "little white dog syndrome."
In rescue we usually have to vaccinate if vaccination hx is unknown, but we've seen way too many incidents of anaphylaxis and immune reactions like life threatening anemia. In addition, we adopt to many people who lost their beloved dog because of vaccine reactions. You may call that anecdotal, but it is concrete to all of us who have had it happen to us!
One vet here admitted that he is primarily concerned with public health and not animal welfare and that is why he pushes vaccines even if he knows they are unnecesary. Most vets refuse to break ranks and do what is best for the animals. Some are willing to titer the animals out for parvo & distemper but few are willing to titer them out for rabies.
Very disheartening and frustrating - not to mention expensive to pay for unnecessary titers, have a holistic vet in addition to a "regular" vet and several specialty vets to manage the sequale of autoimmune reactions to previous vaccines!!

I saw this one come to my email and got all riled up to have to post and defend why I do not keep current on the rabies vaccine. How amazing to come to post and see so many of you already mentioned http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/ and your reasons why you don't vaccinate after initial shots. So all I need to say is "ditto"...I have French Bulldogs who have enough issues without the potential for any further skin, allergy related concerns that could be brought on by continuing a regular vaccination schedule. They get puppy shots, one booster, one rabies....done. I agree with the comments about vaccines being a money making scam....studies have shown and continue to show that immunity lasts...period. It is the exception where it does not. How many people get regular boosters...I NEVER have. nuf said...

To "The Old Broad"

To vaccinate an obviously sick animal is unethical...I am glad you choose to go elsewhere...it states as such even in the vaccine literature yet you see/hear of vets doing it all the time....shame on them!

You really only need to look here to see a graphic image of my excuse:

http://savelouie.blogspot.com/2009/07/part-5-rabies-vaccine-induced-ischemic.html

Yes, that's MY Louie, and he has had multiple immune-mediated disorders as a result of his second-ever rabies vaccination, given one year after his first vaccination, at the age of 9. I thought I was doing the right thing by finally vaccinating him after my ex and I split (ex was anti vax) and it only took two shots to produce the results you see in those pictures.

Go ahead and click on the pictures themselves. At full-size you can see, in graphic detail, the erosion of the skin at his ear tips. This got much, much worse before it finally came under control, some $10,000 later. The lesion at his shoulder (the vaccination site) is actually much better in this picture than it was a few months earlier. Other issues he developed will never be fully controlled.

I am not anti-vaccination, but I am staunchly anti OVER-vaccination and I advise people to vaccinate ONLY to the degree the law requires. I believe the laws need to be changed to prevent these kinds of incidents, and I believe that the work being done by the Rabies Challenge Fund (mentioned by others here) will, hopefully, provide good evidence for this to be argued as we move forward.

You have a very strong platform for increasing awareness here, Dr. Coates. I'd suggest you could do far more good and save far more lives advocating for better laws surrounding vaccination than you would save by encouraging people to provide unnecessary vaccinations without questioning the wisdom thereof.

Just my (well considered and experienced) opinion.

My oldest dog (10 years old) has Cushings disease, and I won't vaccinate her again due to that condition. In the unlikely event that she came into contact with a rabid animal, I would choose to euthanize. I think that is what is most fair to her.

My other dogs are kept current on the recommended 3 year schedule.

I did encounter a frustrating situation some years ago where I tried to save money by taking my dog to an inexpensive chain vet, just for a rabies vaccine. They administered a vaccine, and when I went to pay, the certificate they issued was only good for a year. Told me the next one would be 3 years. This was INCORRECT, the dog was a mature adult and there was no reason why the vaccine should not be good for the manufacturer recommended 3 years. But to remain legal, I had to get the dog vaccinated again the next year... didn't try to save money again, of course, I went to my regular vet.

Why do many cat people avoid giving their animals rabies vaccinations? Obvious answer: How about the risk of Vaccination Associated Sarcoma?

While dogs, to the best of my knowledge, have a much smaller chance of contracting a connective tissue sarcoma as a result of a vaccination, cats seem to be particularly vulnerable to this affliction, which I believe is generally attributed to inflammation caused by many vaccinations, but, in particular, rabies.

Yes, I realize that the incidence of VAS in cats is generally considered to be rare, but..... if your cat is the one who gets it then it's not so rare anymore, is it?

While the industry has, to some extent, addressed the inflammation issue through the development of adjuvant-free rabies vaccines, these vaccines are not always acceptable to animal control authorities, and they are not, in any case, totally risk-free. I think the connection between adjuvants and VAS is tenuous at best anyway.

VAS is an awful affliction, and I often wonder why there seems to be (my perception) such a paucity of research on it. I also wonder, since the currently available rabies vaccines seem to be not supported by an ever increasing percentage of veterinarians, why the industry hasn't developed a safer alternative. Yes, I realize that there is at least one adjuvant-free rabies vaccine -- Purevax -- but I also read that there is no guarantee that using it will prevent VAS, since, as many reliable sources indicate, we really don't know what causes VAS.

This is a very sad state of affairs, particularly when many people (vets & animal control people) who know very well the risks and heartaches of VAS, keep pushing the vaccinations, but don't seem to be pushing the industry to develop a safer alternative to present vaccine formulations.

I also wonder if a lot of vets support rabies vaccination simply because of the legal implications of not doing so, rather than the belief that all animals need to be vaccinated for rabies.

One of the responders to Dr. Coates stated "You have a very strong platform for increasing awareness here, Dr. Coates. I'd suggest you could do far more good and save far more lives advocating for better laws surrounding vaccination than you would save by encouraging people to provide unnecessary vaccinations without questioning the wisdom thereof."

I would add to that a call to vets to support more research into safer ways to vaccinate cats against rabies (and other vaccinations believed to be VAS triggers), instead of just blindly following the "letter of the law" (aka "CYA") and supporting a process that can cause irreperable harm to our cats.

Am I missing something here?

Wow, guess you hit a nerve with this post! As others have mentioned, have you kept up to date on current research for vaccination immunity periods? See http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/
and other studies on revised vaccination protocols (Dr Jean Dodd vaccination protocol). That's my 'excuse'!

I am so happy to see so many people up on this topic and current research. Dr Coates....why are you not more with the current theories on immunity? Read some of Dr Jean Dodds work, read some of Dr Ronald Schultz work....then could you seriously say there is "no excuse for skipping rabies vaccination"....? I only choose vets who respect my decision to take care of my animals the way I feel is in their best interest. I see different vets for different reasons but none ever question my decision not to vaccinate, to feed a raw diet and to treat my animals with the utmost respect for their lives by attempting to extend it to as long as I can.

Apparently, you need to be a VDM to not realize what a fraud the vaccine mindset really is. What kind of a dense cloud do vet schools place over the minds of so many of their graduates?

Hmm. Where to begin?
First of all, no vet seems to point out that the first Rabies shot a dog is given at 4-6months is a 3-year vaccination regardless of whether it is labeled 1-year...
Second, giving a booster after a year essentially means you just over-vaccinated your pet.
Third, how about some guidelines on the amount of vaccine given? Did you know a chihuahua gets the same dose as a Great Dane?
Fourth, ever heard of the Rabies Challenge Fund?
Fifth, There is NO established threshold of immunization for a dog so the establishment just says that if the protection is lower than for a human (1:50), it's too low for a dog. I had my dog vaccinated at 6months, ran titers for 3 years and had the three-year booster done because he was right at 1:50 (He was actually closer to 4 years of age at the time.)
Sixth, since when should government override medical sense and insist that a vaccination be given and that titers don't count even when the titers prove protection?
Seventh, I've had Parvo and Distemper titers run twice (2 years apart) after the first puppy round and his protection is 1:1250 and 1:300 (or close) so why would I give him "vet-recommended" boosters? He doesn't need them.
Eigth, Why not spend more money on good food and care he does need than an outdated and over-reaching vaccination protocol?

While I do not believe in overvaccination and would love to see that the rabies vaccine interval is being extended I fully understand the issue of rabies vaccination and it is great that Dr. Coates has brought this up. Many who have responded are missing the point. Rabies is a deadly zoonotic disease. There is no cure and in countries where dogs don't get routinely vaccinated many dogs die a miserable death and so do the people who get exposed to the disease. I would suggest for anybody whose pet is not current on rabies to familiarize themselves with their state and local laws in regards to pets that are not vaccinated for rabies. Then think about the risks involved with not vaccinating the pets whose lives and well-being you are responsible for.
Vaccination saves lives and is safe and effective for most pets. Some will have negative outcomes, I recently had one of my dogs develop an autoimmune disease 6 weeks after her parvo/distemper "booster". The problem with that is not the vaccine, but her immune system that has predisposed her to this reaction and also we don't even know if it was the vaccine that caused this.

I don't know if you read the previous comments. I think everyone here agrees with you. No one here is arguing against core vaccination, just suggesting that 1) more research on duration of immunity needs to be done and 2) for the health of all dogs, we need to educate the public on the dangers of over-vaccination.

We've been getting the "vaccinate early and often" message from our vets and from the media for years. Okay, we get it, and most of us do understand that vaccination is, for the most part, a necessary thing. Now it's time to educate the public on why the currently mandated vaccination *intervals* might not be the safest approach for your pet-- and to work to bring the laws in line with what science tells us is the best effective approach that produces the least number of adverse outcomes.

I realize this is nuanced, but it's important to recognize the nuance if we're going to keep pets safe from both preventable infectious disease and the adverse effects of too much vaccine.

In reading ALL of the comments, I don't think anyone advocates for no vaccine especially no Rabies vaccine... We just don't accept the general rule of thumb anymore... "Vaccinate early and often" is not necessarily the best advice... There are lots of things the public is told to do to their pets in the interest of society but aren't necessarily so (spay or neuter isn't the healthiest thing for an animal... spay/neuter at 9 weeks is asking for health problems in later life) The internet and availability of information makes it easy for anyone to find current thoughts on vaccination protocols should they go looking...

OK so you want the vets to get rabies vaccines every year too because that would not be over vaccinating? I say, when the vets and animal care folks get vaccinated every year, then the dogs get vaccinated every year. Of course rabies is an awful disease that people can get, and vaccines are great for dogs who are at risk. But vaccines should only be given as needed, not per the current overvaccination protocols.
That is why the Rabies Challenge Fund is so necessary - so that we have adequate protocols which protect both people and animals!

don't know what you are replying to, nobody advocates annual vaccines.
Dr. Coates post is strictly about rabies vaccine which is mandated by law. Regardless of how we feel about the intervalls for rabies vaccines, it is the law and there can be rather strict consequences for pets that are not vaccinated including being seized by Animal Control and put to sleep. Depends on the localities. Personally I feel that veterinarians should do more education about rabies vaccine in particular and why it is not optional to keep a pets vaccination for rabies current. Until the laws change and we don't have to do it so often anymore, we are putting our pets lives at risk by not vaccinating them, and I don't mean that they get rabies and die, I mean being seized and killed because they are not vaccinated and something happened. Friends of mine had senior dog that they didn't keep the rabies vaccine current on. He tangled with a rabied raccoon. Animal Control picked him up, owners were given the choice to have him euthanized or pay for 6 months quarantine at an approved facility. They were extremely lucky that their vet offered to quarantine the dog for that time. It's hard to forget an old man crying over his mistake to vaccinate his beloved dog saying he failed his old boy.

Just because it's the law, doesn't make it right... It needs to change. At the very least, people who pay the money to have titers run should be allowed to have their pets qualified as "protected" if the titers come back proving the point.

You are correct, as far as this goes-- from a very narrowt point of view.

However, the risk of exposure to rabies for most vaccinated companion animals is far less than the risk of adverse events due to over exposure to vaccine, and it is certainly far, far less than the risk of euthanasia due to exposure to rabid wildlife being brought to the attention of authorities.

I've seen the numbers in my own state-- the number of rabies cases in domestic animals is very small, and this in a state which is considered above average risk for rabies. This means, in part, that vaccine is working. Those of us who titer or who are unable to re-vaccinate due to illness know we need to keep our pets out of harm's way and away from wildlife in order to keep our protected-but-not-legally-recognized-as-protected pets from being confiscated and killed-- so what's your point? Sad as it is, 43 animals being euthanized is not news. Any kill shelter will kill many more animals than this in the course of any normal day. Your pet's risk of death is significantly greater if he simply runs out the door and ends up in the pound.

I'm pretty sure everyone arguing here knows the legal situation regarding mandatory vaccine. That's what some of us are suggesting needs to be examined and brought into line with current scientific evidence.

If you'd read my previous post, you know I'm not coming from a "narrow" viewpoint... And I'm not saying Don't vaccinate. I'm saying vaccinate by all means because none of us want our titered pets euthanized because of an out-of-date law... I'm saying the law needs to change and if a 1-year and a 3-year are essentially the same vaccine, then that needs to be clearly explained and the issue addressed. And I have friends whose dog had a severe reaction to the vaccine and almost died...

We should simply follow the current rabies laws, and revaccinate, even if it is not really needed? Hmmm - ever deal with an ugly, usually fatal disease called IMHA? I have. Once was more than enough, thank you.

Here's an interesting question for you vets out there...
Are YOU protected against rabies? Your job requires that, right? Ok, now - do YOU automatically get revaccinated every year? How about every 3 years?
You DON'T?? Why not? That vaccine is 'perfectly safe', right?

WHY is it that vets get titer-tested for immunity, yet pets should just follow 'the local rabies laws'? Pets just not that important - or is it that vets & drug companies have to maintain their income flow SOMEHOW??

When an owner sees a rabies titer that says 'extremely high level' on it's results summary, giving that pet 'just one more shot' to keep the county happy is a darn good way to totally screw up your beloved pet's immune system, eventually killing the pet yourself, so you won't have to worry about the county doing so later.

The above paragraph clearly does NOT constitute a GOOD pet owner.

The risk of exposure to rabies for most vaccinated companion animals is far less than the risk of adverse events due to over exposure to vaccine, and it is certainly far, far *GREATER* than the risk of euthanasia due to exposure to rabid wildlife being brought to the attention of authorities.

What I'm getting at here is that your pet ending up euthed because of exposure should be the least of your worries, in the grand scheme of things. Other things far are more likely to do your pet harm.

Sorry for the poor wording. It's kinda late in the day :)

To SKINNYBONEDOG:


Wrong again. I did read it. Some areas have annual vaccines for a REASON. Where I live, approximately 20% of the raccoon population harbors inapparent rabies virus. It is a major issue for humans and other mammals.
But thank you so much for your expert opinion, I will keep the AVMA and NIH and CDC apprised so thay can make appropriate changes.

anything on the rabies fund challenge website....? I would guess not. You are free to do as you like. I will continue to protect my pets by NOT vaccinating them as they have immunity and have no need for annual vaccines. Most vet colleges already have adopted the 3 year booster schedule but vets fail to comply.

It's hard for me to consider giving my cats rabies shots. I've seen two cats and one dog die from vaccine-related sarcomas in the past several years. I've never in my life seen a rabid animal or rabies. I do know that rabies is prevalent in Georgia where I live. My cats are indoor, but walk outside with me on leashes. I feel the chances for a cancer caused by the vaccine is higher for my cats than getting rabies. My vet even gives the rabies vaccine in the leg now instead of the shoulder area because if cancer does develop at the injection site it is possible to remove the leg. That is so crazy... that means that she knows there is a chance... I worry we way overvaccinate our pets. I think dogs since they are outside more and often bite other dogs or people on occasion might make it a harder decision for me. It's a hard decision.

I am a certified vet tech who works in a very busy pet hospital where we get emergency walk-ins every day. It also happens to be a hospital in CO, the same state that Dr. Coates practices in. While I understand the concerns about vaccine reactions and overvaccinating, I cannot tell you how heartbreaking it is to repeatedly see young dogs, and adult dogs come in to my clinic with parvo, a preventable disease, because owners choose not to 'get too many vaccines'. The day a doctor and I had to tell a young family that their dog had to be euthanized because it had been bitten by a raccoon that got away just after the recent rabies reports was one of the worst days of my life.

Again, I understand the concerns about overvaccinating-but the diseases we are vaccinating against are viruses, if your pets catch them, there is no cure. Just supportive care and hope. Or in the case of rabies, very expensive quarantine or death.

Please talk to your vet at length before deciding not to vaccinate.

Let's keep our focus straight. NOBODY is questioning the importance of immunization here. Plus, "over-vaccination" is not just a "concern," but is a crime that is actually happening--killing (or at least weakening) our four-legged FAMILY members.

Our (dog parents') real question is WHY veterinary professionals, who took an oath to protect animals' health and well-being, have done nothing to change the regulations concerned.
One has to be mentally blind or bought with money by vaccine manufacturers to ignore this very serious issue (life/death issue).

When one uses the title "vet" as if to imply one's credibility, one should at least be able to read other's comments carefully and grasp what is the key issue.

No more excuse, please.

Thanks for that Snow HiRose,

I get tired of arguing a point that keeps getting convaluted.

Over-vaccination is the issue... not vaccination in general. And do people who do titers really NOT vaccinate? Of course not... just where warranted.

S.