Yearly Cat Booster Jabs - do you?

harryharp

Nomad25 wrote: »

I tend to think the veterinary profession [with some exceptions] have a vested interest in keeping us in the dark and to keep on jabbing - based on my experiences.

That is a HUGE accusation to make, with no evidence to back it up. You are saying that the veterinary profession as a whole are giving annual vaccinations for no good reason, and that they're well aware of this and only doing it to line their own pockets?

Still, it's a convenient line of thought for those who decide not to get their pets vaccinated.

simontheiceman

As you may have guessed I am deeply interested in this thread - most probably because it gives me an insight into the psychology of "money saving" especially where animal health issues are concerned. I am prepared to bet substantial money that not one of you "savers" would like their cat to die (yes that is to become deceased) as a result of Variant FCV, Felv,FHV or FPL.

I am also pretty convinced that not one of you would like to have to explain to a distraught pet owner that their 18 month old cat has incurable renal disease or multi organ disease due totally to a preventable virus. Feline renal lymphoma is a relatively common presentation where I live and is directly associated with Feline Leukaemia Virus.

Feline Panleukopaenia is also making a bit of a comeback - virtually always fatal and completely preventable.

I'd also like someone to justify why a cat should suffer the horrific pain of calicivirus ulceration, just because its owner wanted to save a few pennies. Your pocket may benefit but its the cat that suffers. To quote a very interesting human rights lawyer "Do animals have rights". Could you therefore justify your "saving" to your pet?

Fair enough - many cats do live long and healthy lives without vaccination but that is just good luck. Luck cannot be considered as a rationale for management of healthcare (except by the truly stupid).

House bound cats are pretty much exempt from this debate as they are obviously at the very bottom of the risk category ladder and vaccination should be considered when necessary.

A lot of those who would consider themselves as non-vaccinators are also missing a very vital point: The annual examination is a good time to see if there are any other health issues that need attention. For example: Pet owners are notoriously bad at "lifting the lip" and discovering what is underneath; dental disease is rife in cats and is very painful.

By all means save some pennies and go to the cheapo vaccination clinic, but be aware that whilst the vaccine may be perfectly fine, the service is determined by how many come through the door. Its the old adage "you get what you pay for". The vaccine clinic usually won't see you when your pet is sick at 11PM and you've just got back in from the pub. Just dont be surprised if you then do not get tip-top red-carpet treatment when you visit the vet who will do all the jobs that the vaccination/neuter clinics wont touch.

Yes this is a bit of a "troll" post but it may force a bit of thought and if thats all it does then I have succeeded. If it touches a nerve and you are angry then it is up to you to work out what is wrong with you - I can't sort you out.

MrsE_2

simontheiceman wrote: »

A lot of those who would consider themselves as non-vaccinators are also missing a very vital point: The annual examination is a good time to see if there are any other health issues that need attention. For example: Pet owners are notoriously bad at "lifting the lip" and discovering what is underneath; dental disease is rife in cats and is very painful.

:T :T :T :T :T :T

For this alone its a great idea. I look on it as his annual MOT.

PS my cat has "great teeth" (thats what the vet says):D I've NEVER fed him wet food only Royal Canin Feline & it does wonders for the teeth.

For the people who say a dried diet causes XYZ (& kidney probs), I think you will find IF there is any truth at all in this its down to a cheap dried food diet.

harryharp

MrsE wrote: »

:T :T :T :T :T :T

For this alone its a great idea. I look on it as his annual MOT.

PS my cat has "great teeth" (thats what the vet says):D I've NEVER fed him wet food only Royal Canin Feline & it does wonders for the teeth.

For the people who say a dried diet causes XYZ (& kidney probs), I think you will find IF there is any truth at all in this its down to a cheap dried food diet.

Mine won't eat anything except Hill's Science Plan, and only the chicken flavour at that!

MrsE_2

harryharp wrote: »

Mine won't eat anything except Hill's Science Plan, and only the chicken flavour at that!

I wish mine would eat that. I know its about the same price but at least its frequently on offer.
Ted likes "Persian" & "fussy":rolleyes: cat flavour

pault123

mine have whiskers pouches with a mixture of dry food.

What I like about the vets I use is great prices and great service, full cat checkover each year and really go the extra mile.

Nomad25

For those who think I'm being hard on vets, I'm not, this link to the highly respected Feline Advisory Bureau's latest info on vaccination/frequency may help to explain:

http://www.fabcats.org/cat_group/policy_statements/vacc.html

When was that explained to you last ....... in layman's langauge.... by your vet?

I do completely trust my own vets, but via my work I am presented with evidence of very shoddy happenings within some of the local veterinary practices, when it comes to annual injections for pets and it makes me cross.

We as owners need to make outselves more aware of the latest research, we do it with our kids and that's usually free!

Vaccines are bog standard treatments to give, require very little skill and have a very high mark up.

The vets I am talking about have usually had the animal on their books for years and yet fail to even use their time and expertise to do an basic check - the animals teeth, ears, heart rate or other bits that need a good knowledgeable prod [as my vet would do] this is where the expertise that we must pay for comes in and I am happy to do so.

Surely a decent check brings the likelihood of further treatment/revenue -
particularly lucrative dental work and more so, as the animal gets older and makes for a nicer relationship between all.

However, I have seen animals with sore spots, hot spots, sarcomeres [sp?]
abcessess, bald patches, drains stuck in the back of their necks and in total collapse, all attritutable to vaccination [again not the normal reaction and not the vet's fault, nevertheless I still send mine off for their annual mix dependent on their individual needs/lifestyles/ages. Harryharp - please note

Still, it's a convenient line of thought for those who decide not to get their pets vaccinated.

I hope you were not directing that comment at me.

My pets are neuteured and spayed, regularly flea dropped and wormed [even the equines], vaccinated annually, insured and two of the furry babies regularly visit the vet for monitoring of long term chronic problems which requires [10 years now] on-going meds [thank god for vet uk and such like.]

simontheiceman

Nomad25 wrote: »

For those who think I'm being hard on vets, I'm not, this link to the highly respected Feline Advisory Bureau's latest info on vaccination/frequency may help to explain:

http://www.fabcats.org/cat_group/policy_statements/vacc.html

When was that explained to you last ....... in layman's langauge.... by your vet?

I think youll find that I have alluded to risk assessment more than once above and that the majority of us in "enlightened practice" actually actively use this.

We should also all bear in mind the data with which we have to work. Vaccine companies provide data sheets. If we choose to vaccinate to a protocol that is outwith the data sheet then we do so at our own risk. I dont see many vets queueing up to willingly expose themselves to such risks. If a cat falls ill due to a disease for which it has had vaccination but at an interval which is not supported by the data sheet, then it is the vet who bears that risk. The vet could of course get the client to sign an off-label use form, and that is what they should do. How many clients want to bear the risk?

You refer to the vaccination of children - my advice is to steer-well-clear of this topic - it is currently the biggest can-o-worms out there, thanks to the disgraced Wakefield and the pile of idiots who tread the boards at the "JABS" website - mucho muddled thinking. If you are not aware of the recent i.e. in the last 10 days developments on the MMR thingy then you had better find out.

Buena suerte mis amigos; es mi ultimo mensaje en esta lista.

spookylukey

My cats are both vaccinated, albeit not for FeLV as they have their own secure garden and therefore will never come into contact with another cat.

For those who choose not to vaccinate for cost reasons alone - my vets charge £30 for the flu & enteritis booster - that's £2.50 a month. If you can't afford to save £2.50 a month then can you really afford to care for an animal at all?

Phoebs

simontheiceman wrote: »

House bound cats are pretty much exempt from this debate as they are obviously at the very bottom of the risk category ladder and vaccination should be considered when necessary. .

I'm with you on most of your post simon, but the housebound cats bit jars a bit... yes they are probably less at risk, however, we walk goodness knows what into our homes having been outside, we probably also pet other peoples cats from time to time, and although not all illnesses can be transferred this way, some can.

I'm preaching to the converted with you I know, but just wanted to reiterate that housecats are not exempt from the risk of these nasty illnesses, if they were, why would the GCCF/TICA/FB insist on annual vaccinations for all show cats, 99.9% of whom are housecats