'Are we killing our pets?' Petfood article.

crank_girl

Paradigm wrote: »

An interesting article on vaccination in dogs Here follow the links in the red box.
The author is also an advocate of raw feeding hence the website name

Interesting article.

One of the vaccination issues that wrankles with me is the fact that it completely bypasses immunoglobulin a. This is the antibody found in skin and mucosal membranes - so in most cases this is the antibody that will start an immunological reaction against a particular pathogen because the vast majority enter the body via the skin, mouth, eyes, nose etc. If you inject a vaccine it completely bypasses this vital step. I've seen very little research investigating the consequences of this. It has quite profound implications for all vaccines IMO. It might explain why there are so many cases of animals/people contracting the diseases against which they are vaccinated, but of course it's diagnosed as something else because they've been vaccinated. D'Oh!

Fire_Fox

Kayl06 wrote: »

What about Burns food then? Is that another bad one?

My dog is allergic to all meat apart from fish and lamb so feeding him a raw diet would be quite difficult i think.
He gets an upset stomach if he has too much lamb (apart from the dried stuff of course) and he refuses to touch fish!

Any suggestions as to what we could feed him if Burns turns out to be really bad for him?

Just because an animal is sensitive to a meat in it's ultra heat treated form does not mean they will necessarily be allergic to the same meat raw, as heating denatures (restructures) the proteins.

Has your dog been allergy tested or have you worked out his allergies from an elimination diet? Has he been tested on any raw? The Food4Dogs minced lamb only contains lamb. When he has had an upset stomach did you change the food over slowly?

cyberbob

crank_girl wrote: »

The only reason why pet jabs are given yearly is because their is no data to support long term use. It simply doesn't exist. And who's going to do it? Certainly not pharma.

Ahh no the reason is that most catteries and Kennels require it. A high proportion of vets do not always recommend yearly vaccs anymore. Mine doesn't unless your kennelling your animal. Research in animals is always behind that of Humans. A few years ago Humans were recommended Tetanus boosters every 7 years now they don't Animal medicine will move forward too as it always does. Personally I think seeing some sort of conspiracy between Pharma companies and vets is a wee bit paranoid the problem with the internet is it really is a hotbed for the tin foil on the head brigade. I trust my vet a lot more than these stories

crank_girl wrote:

I know a little about immunology and from the research I've done, I can't see that cat antibodies last a proportionately shorter time than human antibodies.

I think the word little here is quite important.

Fire_Fox

Can we please have a debate without being rude?

catlou

I feed Burns as it would not be practical for me to feed my dog raw. This is what John Burns says about the Daily Mail article - obviously he is not going to agree with it as he has food to sell :rolleyes:.......but it makes sense to me so I will be sticking with Burns.

http://www.burnspet.co.uk/dog/john_jan_20_2010.asp

I think the main point of all this is that maybe raw is best, but if you can't do that a really good quality dry food is ok and we should not be made to feel guilty about feeding it to our dogs. All dried dog food is not the same!

Also we forget some of the rubbish we humans eat / drink (me included at times!) Maybe they should do a dried food for us too!! :rotfl:

cyberbob

Paradigm wrote: »

An interesting article on vaccination in dogs Here follow the links in the red box.
The author is also an advocate of raw feeding hence the website name

Interesting Article but the man obviously has an agenda. As far as I can find the article has never appeared in any peer reviewed journals it seems to have only appeared in his own publications. If anyone can find any different I would be interested

cyberbob

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Can we please have a debate without being rude?

Who's being rude? I think your jumping the gun a bit FF. If your referring to my post I'm just pointing out that there is a lot of Paranoia out there and also the fact that crank girl admits herself that she doesn't have extensive knowledge of immunology. Both are valid points. If anyone takes that as rude its not meant to be

BubbleFrogette

crank_girl wrote: »

Interesting article.

One of the vaccination issues that wrankles with me is the fact that it completely bypasses immunoglobulin a. This is the antibody found in skin and mucosal membranes - so in most cases this is the antibody that will start an immunological reaction against a particular pathogen because the vast majority enter the body via the skin, mouth, eyes, nose etc. If you inject a vaccine it completely bypasses this vital step. I've seen very little research investigating the consequences of this. It has quite profound implications for all vaccines IMO. It might explain why there are so many cases of animals/people contracting the diseases against which they are vaccinated, but of course it's diagnosed as something else because they've been vaccinated. D'Oh!

As far as I'm aware, IgA (immunoglobulin A) is involved in the innate immune response, whereas vaccines aim to work with the adaptive immune response, to generate immunological memory. If animals/humans do contract the disease they have been vaccinated against, it won't be long before the immune system recognises the antigen and destroys it (unless they are immunocompromised).

KVet

Yet again, another article by Daily Mail lambasting the veterinary profession. I think thats 2 in as many months? (the other one was this one if anyone is interested). Also why on earth are they dragging the crazy people like Catherine O'Driscoll out of the woodwork? Shes at the complete extreme I would say (having read her website and laughed heartily over it).

I never recomend any one food so I certainly don't feel that its the Vets that rea "to blame"! The only time I advise a diet change is when animals are suffering from Kidney/liver disease etc etc. I feel that there is a whole load of scaremongering going on and, sadly,Vets are getting attacked. Again. Oh well.

sleepymy

BubbleFrogette wrote: »

As far as I'm aware, IgA (immunoglobulin A) is involved in the innate immune response, whereas vaccines aim to work with the adaptive immune response, to generate immunological memory. If animals/humans do contract the disease they have been vaccinated against, it won't be long before the immune system recognises the antigen and destroys it (unless they are immunocompromised).

Even human vaccines aren't all 100% effective but should lessen the severity of the disease if contracted.