Rabies Vaccinations

[JoAnn Purser]

Dr. Brad,

The City and County will be looking at the proposal regarding rabies vaccinations being required every 3 years versus annually. Do you have an opinion or can send me to a link that I can use for information?

JoAnn Purser

[Brad Buckley, D.V.M.]

JoAnn,

Current state law requires that rabies vaccination be given every 3 years. A local entity (city, county) can have ordinances that require the vaccine be given more often. Killeen, Bell County and Fort Hood all require annual vaccination.

I believe that there are several issues to consider when discussing this issue. First and foremost is the protection of human and animal health. The vaccines are very effective when administered properly and in a timely manner. I do have the concern that if only required every 3 years that some folks might not be timely in obtaining the vaccine thus allowing protection to lapse. Secondly, as our community continues to grow and develop we are bringing more pets into closer contact with wild animals. These wild animals are the primary means of transmitting rabies thus making the protection of pets even more important. Lastly, I frequently examine pets for clients that are moving to another area via the Army and different states have different regulations concerning vaccination and our current policy allows us to help those clients make the transition in as easy a way as possible.

Decisions about vaccinations is all about risk-assessment. I always try to customize a vaccine protocol to meet the optimum health needs of my patients and provide a level of service to my clients such that they have confidence that their pet and family is protected from some potentially very bad disease. I personally believe that the current ordinance works very well and makes for a safer community for our animals and their people.


Good luck and thank you for your service to our community.

Brad Buckley

[Night Owl]

Here is my thought on this issue. If a vaccine is good for three years, why give it yearly? My belief/opinion is that it is an economic one for vets to push the annual vaccine.

For example if the vaccine costs the owner $50 and a vet gives 100 shots a year that is $5000 income to the vet and in three years that is $15,000 income. If that is reduced to every three years the vet stands to lose $10,000. I am sure vets give more than 100 rabie shots a year so we are talking BIG bucks. Just my opinion.

[Brad Buckley, D.V.M.]

My belief/opinion is that it is an economic one for vets to push the annual vaccine.

I cannot speak for other veterinarians but I'll speak my clinic. We have decreased the interval in which we give many vaccinations and have stopped giving some altogether. For example, I do not give Lymes vaccine routinely due to the fact that in Texas we just don't see Lyme's in dogs. However, I do have clients that travel to Lyme's endemic areas with their dogs and I try to make sure that I provide the dog with the protection they need based upon this fact and my vet/client/patient relationship.

Again, it is about risk-assessment. I have many older dogs that I choose not to vaccinate annually (often in violation of city ordinance) and instead I recommend organ function testing and disease screening. This allows us to diagnose disease earlier and treat things more proactively and hopefully help a pet live a longer more quality filled life.

Finally, the first vaccine to be scaled back in dogs was the distemper vaccination. When I graduated from veterinary school in 1993, distemper was hardly ever seen in clinical practice. Experts agreed that we had practically eradicated the disease through diligent vaccination of potential distemper victims. Now since a vocal few have pronounced annual distemper vaccination unnecessary we see (in my clinic alone) probably 100 cases of distemper annually. Is this data a result of a scientific study? NO. But it is damn hard to tell a client not to worry about canine distemper when a puppy in the next exam room is dying from the virus. Furthermore, besides a very infrequent minor vaccine reaction I just have not seen the "problems" associated with vaccination that some of my colleagues describe.

As for the economic accusation, vaccines are but a small portion of MOST modern veterinary hospital revenue streams. We provide a service, treat the sick and injured, provide consultations about a myriad of problems and try to protect and enhance the human-animal bond.

City or county ordinances paint everything with a broad brush and that is fine. But different animals have different risk factors for disease and all I ask is for that to be taken into consideration and do not just lump everyone into the same bucket.

[engteach64]

We've lived in many states. It seems the larger the city the more often the rabies shot. When we lived in small towns or country towns the vets said every three years. I would think that if rural areas only need it once every 3, then city animals would be better protected, and only need 3. I think what the vet said about risk assessment is true. I believe that in a city the chances of a dog (or cat) biting someone is more likely and that is why they force us to do this yearly.

On the other hand, my vet clinic always has something that my dogs need. I never leave the vet paying less than 150.00. Even for a regular visit I end up paying more. I was told my dog needed teeth cleaning...220.00. Wow, I've never had a vet tell me my dog needed a brushing. My dog has one or two dirty teeth, and dentabones clean it up. There's always something. I love my vet, but not the fees.

[siamcat]

How about a compromise then. If the vaccines are good for 3 years, but the worry is that people won't be exact and pets would be at risk let's do it every 2 years.
This way if you go over a bit the pet will still be protected.
I know vet costs can add up. I love my vet because he knows I will take care of my pets but won't pay for things that are extravagant. He only recommends things to me that are neccessary and just mentions other things in passing.
Just my two cents...

[Brad Buckley, D.V.M.]

siamcat - you have hit the nail on the head - my wish is that everyone has a great relationship with their veterinarian and then they can work together to determine which protocol fits the risks of a given pet

my fear is that those that don't visit their veterinarian very often (maybe only for a the rabies shot) will view the change in policy as a de-emphasis of the importance of rabies vaccination and other preventive care

thanks for weighing in and contact your veterinarian if you have any questions about your pet's protocol

[poundpup]

Like Dr. Szeremi said when she was briefing council, the people who vaccinate their animals according to the requirements will continue to do so whether the rules say 1 or 3 years - they will follow the law.

Dr. Buckley, you seem to agree that rabies shots are not the healthiest to do unto a dog or cat, because you stated that you will allow an owner to skip the shots on an old dog. If the shots were so harmless, old age would have nothing to do with it, right? There is no doubt in my mind that rabies shots are stressful on the pet's system. Two of my dogs who seem to have a weak immune system are sick for two days every time they get their shots, vomit, listless, weak.

Here is another matter to consider:

I know some low income dog owners. Their logic is that once they get one rabies shot, they are "in the system" and "the city" will come and fine them if they can't afford the shots next year. I asked a friend's daughter who has a dog who has never had a rabies vaccination or any other vaccination, if she would be more likely to get "in the system" if it was 3 years. Her response was yes, it was much more likely, if she could come up with the money for the first shots now, " 'cause things 'gotta get better in three years."

There are people out there who care about their pets, feed them, shelter them, give them a safe home but are scared away by the annual shots.

Here is my personal reasoning: Tetanus shots for humans are good for at least 10 years. We don't give them routinely every two years, just because there is a good likelihood that we might step on a rusty nail every two years...

I take my allergy medication only once a day, because it lasts all day. It would not help me any more to take it three times a day.

Do you see where I am going with this? Does that sound reasonable? Overmedicating by any means is not logical or more beneficial.

[Brad Buckley, D.V.M.]

You bring up some good points and I'll try to briefly respond.


I asked a friend's daughter who has a dog who has never had a rabies vaccination or any other vaccination, if she would be more likely to get "in the system" if it was 3 years.

Current law requires a dog be vaccinated for rabies by 4 months of age and receive a booster 1 year after the initial vaccination. Therefore a dog (even if adult) that has never received a rabies vaccine would need an initial shot and then a booster in 1 year before entering the "every 3 years" protocol. Also, several non-profit groups offer low cost rabies shots at least 4 times per year where the shots are $10.


There are people out there who care about their pets, feed them, shelter them, give them a safe home but are scared away by the annual shots.

Again, low cost shot clinics will cost an owner about $20 per year for rabies and the other additional vaccs so that the animal's and human health can be protected.


Tetanus shots for humans are good for at least 10 years. We don't give them routinely every two years, just because there is a good likelihood that we might step on a rusty nail every two years...

Yet there are times when I have been severely bitten or injured in other ways when my doctor elected to boost my tetanus even when I am within the 10 year window. I think the doctor/patient or the veterinarian/client working together to asses the risks are a great model for making these decisions.


Two of my dogs who seem to have a weak immune system are sick for two days every time they get their shots, vomit, listless, weak.

It is not uncommon for a vaccine response to cause some fever, malaise or listlessness for 24 hours or so. I know my kids get a little cranky and irritable when they receive vaccination and I often feel cruddy after a flu shot. Vaccine response should not be confused with vaccine reaction. A vaccine reaction is a true allergic response when hives occur, the face swells and the patient my itch all over. Pets with a history of severe vaccine response or vaccine reaction can be pre-treated with an antihistamine to lessen these symptoms.

I am not against changing the ordinance to align it with state law BUT I am against some of the reasoning suggested for the change. In the KDH article one of my colleagues was quoted as saying that canine rabies cases have "dramatically" decreased in the United States. However, if you look at the Texas Dept of Health data you will find no statistically significant decrease in the number of positive rabies cases in dogs and cats in Texas over the last 10 years. In 2008, 15 dogs and 15 cats were tested positive for rabies. Though small when compared to the population as a whole, there are still numerous cases of rabies out there. Additionally, I just have not seen some of the vaccine related side-effects that some of my colleagues suggest are so common. So I think it is not wise to suggest that the ordinance be changed because vaccines are making pets sick. This is simply not the case.

My biggest concern is that without proper education of the public by veterinarians, the city and health officials is that folks will view the change to mean that rabies is not a threat and will misinterpret the law. Remember, vaccinate by 4 months of age, boost 1 year later then boost annually or tri-annually depending on the type of vaccine used - this is what the law says. I would not be opposed for the city ordinance to follow the state law word for word but let's not leave the impression that rabies isn't a threat or that vaccines are making pets sick.

Thank you for your work on this issue and for your service to our community.

Brad Buckley

[poundpup]

Thank you very much, Dr. Buckley. I appreciate you taking the time to share your view point. I completely agree that a three year rabies program needs to be accompanied by a thorough educational program.

I also respect your view on the rabies count the past years.

However, I am thinking the entire nation is going towards this time frame, and it is working else where. There are many variants that we may need to require, such as, if new people move here, they must have proof of rabies vaccination within the past year unless they can produce proof of a three year vaccine being used, otherwise the animals have to be vaccinated, regardless when their last shot was.

[frances Egly]

General comment: I sure don't like to walk out of the vet clinic with a huge bill, and I have a huge one coming my way. But my two cents, when I took in two rescue dogs I took on the reponsibility to care for them to the best of my ability. And (as much as it may pain me to pay the bills) the $200 vet bills is small when compared to the love, comfort, and companionship I get from my dogs. If I don't understand what a vet wants to do to my dogs, I question. If I lose trust in my vet, I'll find another.

Question for Dr. Bradley: if I understand your post about the new strain of rabies that is spread without a bit, that is an Arizona concern right now. Will the rabies shot my dogs are getting now provide protection against this new strain should it spread to Texas?

[frances Egly]

Sorry, my post should read "bite" not "bit."

[Brad Buckley, D.V.M.]

Will the rabies shot my dogs are getting now provide protection against this new strain should it spread to Texas?

Mrs. Egly,

Our veterinary vaccine researchers and public health authorities continually survey the landscape for changes, mutations or introduction of new strains of virus into our population of animals. The report out of Arizona was interesting in that it indicated the possibility of rabies virus being transmitted from animal to animal in a way that we have not seen previously. It is customary for vaccine researchers and often a requirement by law that vaccine cross-protection be measured and studied. I am certain that officials will make that determination and make sure that the vaccine produced is effective and safe.

Brad Buckley