I'm baaaaaaccccccckkkkkk! No, I didn't run away, my husband didn't pay the phone bill, so I came home yesterday to disconnected phone service :rolleyes: Apparently, I missed some name calling or something...I skimmed through the posts and missed it, but was there any hair pulling or anything else while I was gone? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Questions and comments for a few of you - Todd first. So from what you're saying, you can have a dog with bad genetics come from a perfectly good breeding where all the other puppies have good genetics. Am I understanding you correctly or am I missing something? And if that is the case, how would you ever know if the puppy you were purchasing had good genes and would be less likely to suffer from things like vaccine related problems?

Jason, I have to pretty much agree with your post. There are many vets who seem to recommend everything they can get you to agree to, whether it makes sense or not. I've been through my fair share of vets, and I've experienced people who come across that way.

Laureen, as for you comment about homeopathic vets, 3 of the vets I use/have used have been homeopathic. 2 of them have never seen my dog in person. I have worked with 5 different vets since my dog developed this problem, and the only ones that have been of any significant help were the 2 that have never seen my dog. The one I'm using now is the only one who has brought about any somewhat long-term desirable result, which in my dog's situation is amazing, to say the least. Is this because I'm a great "mom" to my dog, and I'm very observant and know my dog and his behaviors like the back of my hand, and can report these observations accurately to the vet? Yes, that plays a big part in it. I can spot a problem or change in his behavior a mile away, and I'm sure that plays a huge role in it, but you can't say that these vets are not any good or can't be tremendously successful, just because they've never met the animal or personally run tests on them. It's pretty amazing what you can accomplish when you have a great vet and a determined, observant owner working together, even over the telephone....the results can be incredible.

Melissa,

Yes there are some bad Vets whose sole goal is to "pad the bill". There is even a computer program desined to assist in doing it. But it is like dealing with any other buisness, buyer beware. You are responsible for the care of your dog.

My Vet won't use the software, in fact she bought out a partner that wanted to.

THe idea that most Vets are "quacks" just out to make money is at best misleading. The idea that anybody that disagrees with you is a "quack" with no knowledge because they have the ability to READ and UNDERSTAND sound research is ludicrous. With my Vet when I come on one of these books and I want more information she is always helpful. In most cases she has already researched the book and reseached the information contained in it. If she hasn't read the book she gets it from me and reads it. Then goes to her journals to review the available information. If she disagrees, she gives me the information from the journals to read. She has been very patient with my research, and rarely says "I told you so".

If you want to believe that the entire pet care industry is a conspirasy to bilk the public, you aren't going to listen to reason anyway. However, if you look at life expectancy for pets over the last 50 or so years you will find that it has increased, the percentage of puppies surving to adulthood has increased, and animals are much healthier than ever. Rates of most diseases are way down as a result of better treatment and vaccinations. Little of that is going to be a result of methods that are only practiced on less that 10% of dogs.

If you want to make a case for alternative methods, why not just describe the method, provide any documentation you have on the method, and allow people to make up their own mind? Just like you were allowed to do.

I have researched most of these things, and tried many of them. They didn't work for me. If they work for you great. Don't call me or the Vets I deal with names because you can't back up the claims you make with real verifiable data.

First and foremost, Richard, I didn't call you or your vets anything. I didn't say one single thing about your vet in particular, I am speaking of vets that I have dealt with personally. I certainly didn't call anyone a "quack", so if someone is calling you names, maybe you should direct this directly at them at not at me. Please give credit where credit is due.

I am using homeopathy. In a nutshell, homeopathy has been around since the late 1700's and is a modality based upon the belief that "like cures like." Basically, if a substance can cause an illness, a minute dose of the same substance may be able to cure the same illness. Homeopathy does not work to treat symptoms, instead it works to correct the underlying imbalance which is causing the symptoms.

I'm not sure what type of documentation you're looking for. In my situation, my proof is right in front of my eyes. My dog is an entirely different animal when he is being treated, which is all the proof that I need. Sorry to disappoint you, but there is no way that I can give you proof of that. You would be convinced too if you had been here to see the "before" and "after" of this animal.

Anyone but me think this thread is getting too LOOOOOONNNNNGGGGGGGGG??? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I don't know why some people involved in this thread took the term "quack" personally. I don't think it was intended for any specific individual on this board. Maybe I missed something......

I have been involved personally in the veterinary profession since the early 80's, we have 6 veterinary clinics in my town of 10,000 people and I would not take my dog to any of them!!! I run my grooming business out of one of these offices and I am appalled by the attitudes of the vets and the reps from the vaccine and drug companies.

Richard, consider yourself LUCKY to have such an open minded veterinarian. Most of them (in this area )do not want to "think outside the box." In my experience, when I have presented a book or literature on raw diets or alternative therapies I have been dismissed as a trouble maker!!! The vets are offended that I would suggest that the way they have done things for 30 years may not be the best treatment in every situation.

In my town dogs are overvaccinated, sick dogs are vaccinated, anesthetized dogs are vaccinated, old dogs are vaccinated............ I think everyone needs to do what is best for their dogs---not what a veterinarian tells them is the best. We need to think for ourselves about our dog' health and our own as well. I agree with Jason about the lambs being led to slaughter........ sad but true.

Since this thread is about bordatella vaccinations I will say that out of all the vaccines, at least the intranasal vaccine is administered in the same way the dog would encounter the vaccine if it were exposed to the disease.(breathing it in) Parvo, distemper, Lepto would never be injected into the dog if it were exposed to these illnesses......... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Melissa,

You are right, you didn't use the word...... you just agreed with it. Go re-read Jason's post, I'll make it easy:

Jason
"The problem I have with these quacks, with all of their "formal training", is that very few are qualified to instruct you in exactly what a proper diet is, how important it is, and what it can do for you. Instead we are a society of McDonalds and Twinkies, Penicillin and Chemo. All have been aproved and tested by people who are supposed to have a clue, folks we are supposed to trust. The standard american diet however, is akin to feeding your dog the worst kibble you can find. But *don't worry* these real smart guys tested it, and no proof has been found bla bla bla. Aparently, they're too busy figuring out what drugs to sell you when you get sick, instead of filling you in on how to avoid getting sick in the first place, unless that involves selling more drugs in the form of vacs..."

You did say that you agree with that didn't you?

The type of information I am looking for starts like this:

We started with the premise that..... and studied 1500 dogs by .....

or

We retrospectavely examined the records of .... animals to test the theory that.....

What works for 1 animal or 50 animals or even a 1,000 animals is not a significant portion of the total population. It doesn't mean that it will work at all for the other 10,000,000 animals of the same type. That is the basic problem. Stories of a single dog are nice, and touching, but have little value for the majority of animals. That is what you are asking us to accept, with no back up. If it works for you great, it didn't for me. Does that make me a bad person or a bad owner because I do what has worked extreamly well for me for over 20 years? And yes that is the implication of the statements you make, that I am a bad owner for my dogs because I don't follow your methods. The idea that because I base my decisions on controled data based on the study of thousands of animals, rather than the opinion of someone that admits they conduted no studies, is making an educated guess, and tells a few nice stories will not sit well with me.

Quite simply, put out the information, back it up with anything there is, and don't attempt to chacterize people that disagree with you as not being reasonable or not understanding how the world really works. I have done this for a while, well. I am happy to hunt up refrences for the information I put out. If you choose not to accept them why not refute them with similar information?

No, I agreed with Jason that many vets are out there pushing vaccinations and things because they're trying to make as much money as they can. To be honest, I skimmed through the posts I missed and didn't even catch that he had called anyone a quack.

You can believe whatever you want, Richard. I'm telling you what I believe. And I honestly think that in the future, we're going to see quite a large number of people switch over to the holistic/homeopathic way of thinking. Many people out there are not even aware that these types of problems and issues exist. Up until a year ago, I had no idea that vaccinating could cause such horrible problems. In response to that, I have decided upon a more natural approach to healthcare for my animals, and am very very happy with the results. No, homeopathy is not a quick fix...it takes more time to see results than when using conventional medicine, but it also doesn't have the side effects that allopathic medicines have. If you prefer to go with what the research data says, then by all means go ahead.

This thread has crossed the tracks to the stupid side of town.

If you feel this is stupid VanCamp, then you're entitled to that opinion. Ed started a topic on vaccinations awhile back, and although I didn't say it quite as well as he did, his opinion on the topic is pretty similar to mine. I bet if he was here saying the same thing that I am right now, you guys wouldn't be implying that he is being silly for believing what he sees instead of the research data. And lest you think I'm making that up to, here's a link to that post.

http://www.leerburg.com/cgi-bin/UBB/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000003&p=

Did I say that I disagreed with you?

Nope, just that you guys are being stupid. I think someone has to tell you. Last time I checked your profiles I didn't read anything like "Damn Expert On Vaccinations And Bordatella". So why continue to whine, you have all made you points.

Here is what I think is the bottom line. You should vaccinate your dogs, it is worth the risk. You should not over vaccinate your dogs. It isn't worth the risk, unless there is some reason why you have to. Like a state mandated policy for boarding shelters.

What is so difficult about that?

Get the titters done, if they are real low think about a re-vax. Just consider the possible negative and harmful side effects. If they are good don't -F- with it. I'm not sold on the happy home remedies, but I'm also not sold on Dr. So-and-so's research. Everything can have a slant. Research can prove just about anything one sets out to prove, if you work hard enough. Same deal with the tree-hugger medicine, where are the results? Are they proven?

You just have to weigh the pros and cons and make a decision. I always try to cover all the bases. I vaccinate and get the first boosters. Then I'm done, unless there is a reason to do it again. So far I haven't had a good enough one explained to me. I have had titters (I said tit! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> ) done and the levels have always been acceptable. Go figure?