Maltese Dogs Forum : Spoiled Maltese Forums banner

Vaccine dosage based on body mass study

  • Yes, I support this proposed study and will be willing to donate and think we should start the fund

    Votes: 21 41.2%
  • Yes, I support this proposed study and will be willing to donate and feel we should start the fund r

    Votes: 25 49.0%
  • Yes, I support this proposed study but am unable to donate.

    Votes: 3 5.9%
  • No. I feel this is not a study worth pursuing and would rather see a future fundraiser go towards so

    Votes: 2 3.9%

Dr Jean Dodds has agreed to do the study on vaccine dosage based on body mass!!

15K views 156 replies 32 participants last post by  Snowbody 
#1 ·
After communicating with the AHVMA as to what it would take to get a study started to base vaccine dosage based on body mass, this is where we are. I brought Maggie in on the past couple of communications to ensure I was not misunderstanding or misrepresenting SM.

1. Dr. Jean Dodds is the one who came up with the proposed study and wrote the grant. She will be the one to do the study and is volunteering her time. They will not begin the research until all of the funds for the initial phase of the study have been generated, and will be relying solely on third-party donations. They hope that Spoiled Maltese can spearhead this fundraising. Dr. Nancy Scanlan is the one who takes care of the financial aspects and told us that they could feature our drive on their website. So there is a possibility of getting donations from outside of SM as well. This could also be thought of, in a way, of them helping to fund this study without actually taking money from their own reserve. I know many of us are also members of various FB groups that we can take this too as well. So by the AHVMA featuring the drive on their site, it would make it easier for others outside SM to donate.

2. The cost of the initial phase of the study (very small pilot with 20 dogs) is estimated at $5500. This first pilot study is pretty inexpensive and cost is being kept down also due the fact that veterinarians participating in this study will be volunteering their time. As for how long the first pilot study will take really depends on how many volunteer toy breed puppies they can find. If they have lots of toy breed puppies to vaccinate and test right away, the research would be done within 7 months. If it takes longer to find enough to complete the study, then longer.

3. The Foundation accepts donations at any time, but they only process research grants twice a year: January 15 and June 15. So if we raised the funds before January, the proposal would be evaluated later in January and the project would start somewhere around February/March. If we did a February fundraiser, the research would not start until after June 15. If after a specified period of time the $5500 can’t be raised, any money that has been donated can be directed to another study that AHVMA finds acceptable. They are already partners with The Rabies Challenge, so this would be a logical alternative. Dr. Dodds is currently researching an accepted rabies titer now that the results are in from the 5 year study. All donations to the AHVMA are tax deductible. They are a non-profit 501(c)3 organization.

4. If the $5500 is raised and the first phase of the study is successful, (Dr. Jean Dodds, believes it will be), there will be additional studies needed (and additional funding needed) before the results are significant enough to be presented to the veterinary community. The second phase would be approximately 100 dogs; no estimate on funding requirements was provided.


Ever since I've been a member of SM (something like 9 years), there has been discussion on Spoiled Maltese about our concerns that our 3-10 lb + babies are getting the exact same dose of vaccine as a Great Dane and what it would take to change the vaccination practice for small dogs. This is what it would take. It's important to point out that this is an independent study not tied to any pharmaceutical company, which is why it needs to be funded by donations. We want unbiased research and findings. I think it is also important to note that if your fluff has had a true allergic reaction to a vaccine, whether their allergy is coming from the actual vaccine or adjuvant, by reducing the amount of the vaccine will not prevent them from having another allergic reaction. But will it lessen the severity of the reaction for those that are having their first vaccine? My biggest concern with the way vaccines are dosed now is that I believe this is why we are seeing so many auto immune related illnesses/diseases in our toy breeds.

I have had someone express some concern that the AHVMA Foundation wants someone else (Spoiled Maltese) to do the fundraising for them; most likely it's because we're not the researcher or even a member veterinarian- just a group of concerned pet owners. Usually a veterinarian approaches the AHVMA with a proposed study that is already well thought out as to how to conduct the study as well as being the one to actually do the study. When I asked the AHVMA if there was already a study being done on this and what it would take to get a study started, they contacted several of their members. Dr. Dodds stepped up and said she would be willing to do this and came up with the actual grant as well as how to do the study. And as previously stated, is volunteering her time. I have listened to several lectures by Dr. Dodds and have heard her state on several occasions that vaccines should be dosed based on body mass. But that veterinarians are bound by law to give the dose that is printed on the vial. And it's the pharmaceutical company that makes the vaccine that decides not only the dosage but up until the Rabies Challenge Fund, the frequency of boosters. I also want to be very clear that if the study is successful, the AHVMA hasn't addressed who will need to do the fundraising for the subsequent phases of the study.

So now we come to you to get some feedback as well as dialogue as to any questions or concerns. Maggie can also jump in here and answer questions since she's also been in communication with the AHVMA on this. There has also been some discussion between the Mods on this as well. Lynn, Maggie and I are all in agreement that doing any type of fund raiser so soon after the Rescue Raffle and right before and during the holidays may not be a good idea. So we are wondering if starting something after the first of the year might be better. It was also suggested that in addition to dialogue on this thread, to also conduct a poll. So please feel free to discuss and ask questions and then vote so we know how to proceed.

Thanks everyone!!!
 
See less See more
#4 ·
I think it is a great idea. I agree with the holidays, and following a very successful rescue raffle, waiting until Jan might make it easier to raise money.
 
#7 ·
Which vaccines will be studied?

Will a genetic component be investigated?

Does Dr. Dodds have veterinary Immunology training? What about Genetics?

Are any of the Microbiology and Immunology programs at Veterinary schools already researching this?

What research has been done to date (both medical and veterinary) for immunologists to conclude that one dose works for all body masses?

What would be a cost estimate for such a study - the entire amount?
 
#8 ·
Actually Joy, your first question is a good one. I assumed it was for the core vaccines. But I will be happy to go back and check.

As for if Dr. Dodds has any immunology or genetic training, my mistake. I thought here on SM everyone knows who Dr. Dodds is due to the fact that her Rabies Challenge is discussed here often as well as the fact that due to her research is why the core vaccine protocol has changed from yearly to every 3 years per AAHA. Here is a link to Dr. Dodds' credentials:

W. Jean Dodds, DVM

And here is a copy of her resume:
W. JEAN DODDS, D.V.M.
Hemopet/Hemolife
11330 MARKON DRIVE,
GARDEN GROVE, CA 92841
Dr. Dodds received the D.V.M. degree with honors in 1964 from the Ontario Veterinary College, University of Toronto. In 1965 she accepted a position with the New York State Health Department in Albany and began comparative studies of animals with inherited and acquired bleeding diseases. Her position there began as a Research Scientist and culminated as Chief, Laboratory of Hematology, Wadsworth Center. In 1980 she also became Executive Director, New York State Council on Human Blood and Transfusion Services. This work continued full-time until 1986 when she moved to Southern California to establish Hemopet, the first nonprofit national blood bank program for animals.

From 1965-1986, she was a member of many national and international committees on hematology, animal models of human disease, veterinary medicine, and laboratory animal science. Dr. Dodds was a grantee of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NIH) and has over 150 research publications. She was formerly President of the Scientist's Center for Animal Welfare; and Chairman of the Committee on Veterinary Medical Sciences and Vice-Chairman of the Institute of Laboratory
Animal Resources, National Academy of Sciences. In 1974 Dr. Dodds was selected as Outstanding Woman Veterinarian of the Year, AVMA Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado; in 1977 received the Region I Award for Outstanding Service to the Veterinary Profession from the American Animal Hospital Association, Cherry Hill, New Jersey; in 1978 and 1990 received the Gaines Fido Award as Dogdom's Woman of the Year; and the Award of Merit in 1978 in Recognition of Special Contributions
to the Veterinary Profession from the American Animal Hospital Association, Salt Lake City, Utah. In 1984 she was awarded the Centennial Medal from the University of Pennsylvania School of
Veterinary Medicine. In 1987 she was elected a distinguished Practitioner of the National Academy of Practice in Veterinary Medicine. In 1994 she was given the Holistic Veterinarian of the Year Award from the American Holistic Veterinary Medical Association. She was the Editor of Advances in
Veterinary Science and Comparative Medicine for Academic Press, and is an active member of numerous professional societies. She was recently a member of the National Research Council/BANR Committee on National Needs for Research in Veterinary Science, which released its report in July 2005.

Today, Dr. Dodds is actively expanding Hemopet's range of nonprofit services and educational activities. The animal blood bank program provides canine blood components, blood bank supplies, and related services throughout North America. Hemopet's retired Greyhound blood donors are adopted as pets through the Pet Life-Line arm of the project. On behalf of Hemopet, she consults in clinical pathology nationally and internationally, and regularly travels to teach animal health care
professionals, companion animal fanciers, and pet owners on hematology and blood banking, immunology, endocrinology, nutrition and holistic medicine.



As for your question: Are any of the Microbiology and Immunology programs at Veterinary schools already researching this? The answer is no. That was addressed in the first post in this thread and I apologize if that was not made clear. It was also brought up in the past threads started on this subject. But it's good to put it in this thread as well for those who may have missed previous threads.


Your question: What research has been done to date (both medical and veterinary) for immunologists to conclude that one dose works for all body masses? My understanding (which could be incorrect) is that the only studies done on this in the veterinary field are those by the pharmaceutical companies who own the vaccines. They are the ones who decide on dosage as well as frequency of boosters of their vaccine. Which I already stated in this thread has changed due to Dr. Dodds Rabies Challenge. So their findings were either not correct or were slanted to promote more sales of their product. As for in the medical field for humans, I have no idea. However I don't believe that is relevant in researching this particular subject so that we have the data needed to change vaccination protocol in animals if the study should determine that dosage should indeed be based on body mass.

And for your last question, What would be a cost estimate for such a study - the entire amount? Answered in the first post of this thread.
 
#11 · (Edited)
I have given this a great deal of thought. My first thought was that a small study would be useless in fighting the drug companies. Then I realized that changing the dose would not lose money for the drug companies, and in fact, the first ones to do so would have a big edge. Owners of small dogs would demand the low dose brands, just as we are demanding the T-free brands.

Dr. Dodds has done an amazing job of heightening awareness on vaccines protocols. I never even knew that dogs could be titered for immunities, before MiMi's breeder informed me, because she followed Dr. Dodds.

I think we could spread the word on FB to lovers of other small breeds and come up with the initial amount quite easily.

After the first study, I think it would be wonderful if we could actually persuade a drug company to take over the funding.

I also voted to start immediately. The idea that we would rather spend our money on toys for Christmas is sad. Secret Santa is a lot of fun, but I would rather spend $60 on funding this study. Perhaps we could add that option to Secret Santa.

Thank you, Crystal for being proactive and for keeping us informed.

One more thing...It seems logical that the dose should be based on weight, but that is not necessarily true. It would be good to prove it.
 
#16 ·
Thanks, Crystal i'm so glad this grew out of threads and posts we had here recently about vaccines and without your care and perseverance we would be stuck complaining and not being proactive! I think of the money we raised for Lola's fund and GME research and feel we could make it. I agree with Sylvia about gifts and the holidays and usually ask my DH to donate to a chosen charity and would do so for this but right after raising $10,000 for Rescues i think it's hard to raise enough. If money is raised before Jan, it can't be earmarked for that particular study to take place later instead of going to another study? If it can't than probably best to wait but if it can would love it to be a SS option. We can also try to think of other fundraisers for it than just asking for money - maybe local events, etc. thanks to SM and mods and Yung for letting us pursue this!


Sent from Petguide.com Free App
 
#17 · (Edited)
I suppose with my background and the fact that I am an immunology patient myself, I like to know what the top veterinary experts know and recommend. I'm currently reading some Immunology articles on the WHO site.

In the latest vaccination guidelines article put out by the World Small Animal Veterinary Association, there is a question on page 28 about reducing vaccine dosage and the answer was no, it can't be smaller dose. This was question #26. I completely trust the recommendations made by this group, especially when Ron Schultz' name is on it. He is fairly conservative regarding vaccinations. I also think this group is thinking something genetic is the culprit for adverse reactions in small dogs.

Link to the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines. I thought they did a good job with the report.
http://www.wsava.org/sites/default/files/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf


From the information posted by Crystal, it appears Jean Dodds' background is more in Hematology. I personally would feel more like making a contribution if she were collaborating with experts such as Veterinary Immunologists and Geneticists. I would also be more comfortable contributing if I thought the correlation between vaccination adverse reactions and genetics were being researched. For some reason, I don't think dosage is the problem.

I think it's going to take MUCH more money if this study is done correctly. Like a minimum in the 500,000 to 1 million range.
 
#18 · (Edited)
I suppose with my background and the fact that I am an immunology patient myself, I like to know what the top veterinary experts know and recommend. I'm currently reading some Immunology articles on the WHO site.

In the latest vaccination guidelines article put out by the World Small Animal Veterinary Association, there is a question on page 28 about reducing vaccine dosage and the answer was no, it can't be smaller dose. This was question #26. I completely trust the recommendations made by this group, especially when Ron Schultz' name is on it. He is fairly conservative regarding vaccinations. I also think this group is thinking something genetic is the culprit for adverse reactions in small dogs.

Link to the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines. I thought they did a good job with the report.
http://www.wsava.org/sites/default/files/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf


From the information posted by Crystal, it appears Jean Dodds' background is more in Hematology. I personally would feel more like making a contribution if she were collaborating with experts such as Veterinary Immunologists and Geneticists. I would also be more comfortable contributing if I thought the correlation between vaccination adverse reactions and genetics were being researched. For some reason, I don't think dosage is the problem.

I think it's going to take MUCH more money if this study is done correctly. Like a minimum in the 500,000 to 1 million range.
I heard an interview with Dr Schultz, saying that exact same thing. That the dose could not be reduced, wish I had a copy, but it was something about the size was needed for all the necessary components or something. :unsure: He has even said that his own dogs were titered and have good immunity and won't be getting anymore shots. (I am sure he meant except by law B)) I believe he said immunity is immunity, the level doesn't matter. Why I was surprised with this possible study was that he and Dr Dodds have worked together on these issues.

This really only affects me if I need to travel with the girls, they have proven high immunity and won't be getting any more anyway.

Editing to include what Dr Schultz does himself
Dr. Schultz's core vaccine protocol for his own family's pets differs in that he actually runs antibody titers on the mother to know exactly when the best time is to effectively immunize the puppy or kitten for the 3 core viruses. Then he titers the little ones 2 or more weeks after the vaccine, and as long as the response is adequate, he doesn't in most cases revaccinate for the rest of the pet's life. Dr. Becker says she does the same as him.
 
#19 ·
Thanks for getting this started, Crystal and the mods. I will be supporting this study. I voted for doing it after the holidays but now I am wondering if we should try now? I am very divided on the issue.

I have worked for many non profits and really holidays was our maximum fundraising time period. Most people are in a giving mood, other people are trying to get that tax break, etc.

At the same time, I do think it's too soon after the Rescue Raffle. Sorry I am not being very helpful, I guess the voting will guide us.
 
#20 ·
Just looked at your link VJW Yes he states it can't be smaller. I think this question is a good one for Dr Dodds. Why do you think that it can be made smaller vs Dr Schultz who says it can't. They are working together so I am sure she has the answer.

He said this in another report,

Should a large dog (like a Great Dane) be injected
with the same volume of vaccine as the
small dog (like a Chihuahua)?
Yes. Unlike pharmaceuticals that are dose-dependent
, vaccines are not based on volume per
body mass (size), but rather on the minimum immuniz
ing dose.
 
#22 ·
I will contact the AHVMA today with the following 2 questions as these are the 2 questions that seem relevant in deciding whether or not SM should pursue fundraising for this study.

1. Which vaccines will be included in this study?

2. According to the WSAVA 2010 Vaccination Guidelines (pg. 28, questions 26 and 27, why does Dr. Dodds differ in her opinion that vaccines should be based on body mass?

26. May I use smaller vaccine doses in small breeds to reduce the risk of adverse reactions?
No. The volume (e.g. 1.0 ml) as recommended by the manufacturer generally represents the minimum immunizing dose, therefore
the total amount must be given.
27. Should the large dog (Great Dane) be injected with the same volume of vaccine as the small dog (Chihuahua)?
Yes. Unlike pharmaceuticals that are dose-dependent, vaccines are not based on volume per body mass (size), but rather on the
minimum immunizing dose.


Am I correct in the questions that need to be answered?


As for me, I feel knowledge is needed to be able to make accurate decisions. I want my dogs properly vaccinated. However I don't want them over vaccinated. There are many health related issues stemming from over vaccination. I was at first disappointed in the results of the 5 year Rabies Challenge, that not all of the dogs in the study still had the antigens. However, I DO want to know exactly when my own dogs need a booster. I want them protected. So I'm grateful for the study and it's findings. Was it a waste of time and money? IMHO I don't believe so. We now know that every dog is still protected for 3 years and that some dogs are protected after 5 years. And we are hoping that through this study we will have an accepted rabies titer. I prefer custom tailored vaccination schedules based on individual needs. I have much respect for Dr. Shultz. As much for him as I do Dr. Dodds. And I also know that I have heard on several occasions Dr. Dodds as well as Dr. Becker say that they believe vaccine dosages should be based on body mass. So there does seem to be a difference in opinion on vaccine dosing. So to me, that implies that a study has never been done and this is based on theory. So the question is, if a small pilot study costing approx. $5500 is what it takes to show the world that vaccine dosage either does or does not need to be based on body mass, and brings security in that knowledge that we are not giving a harmful dosage with every booster and not causing future harm to toy breeds, is it worth the cost of that study? To me, it is. We already know that vaccination protocols originally in place were not correct. And the reason they went from MLV vaccines to killed, was due to yet another situation where a proper study/investigation was not performed. Which is why we now have adjuvants added to the vaccine. Something else that an animal could potentially have a reaction to. Which has questionable (potentially harmful) ingredients such as Mercury.

Facts About the Rabies Vaccine

Joy, the verse that comes to mind is, Iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. Prov 27:17 (NAS) You are very much correct that genetics plays a factor in animals that are predisposed to reactions and triggers to immune mediated disease. However I don't believe that is what is needed in this particular study as to whether or not vaccines should be based on body mass. I want to know what is the minimal amount truly needed to protect every dog and cat. It is however a start. Who knows what it may then lead to? Possibly the findings will lead to a study including the correlation to genetics.
 
#25 ·
I will contact the AHVMA today with the following 2 questions as these are the 2 questions that seem relevant in deciding whether or not SM should pursue fundraising for this study.

1. Which vaccines will be included in this study?

2. According to the WSAVA 2010 Vaccination Guidelines (pg. 28, questions 26 and 27, why does Dr. Dodds differ in her opinion that vaccines should be based on body mass?

26. May I use smaller vaccine doses in small breeds to reduce the risk of adverse reactions?
No. The volume (e.g. 1.0 ml) as recommended by the manufacturer generally represents the minimum immunizing dose, therefore
the total amount must be given.
27. Should the large dog (Great Dane) be injected with the same volume of vaccine as the small dog (Chihuahua)?
Yes. Unlike pharmaceuticals that are dose-dependent, vaccines are not based on volume per body mass (size), but rather on the
minimum immunizing dose.


Am I correct in the questions that need to be answered?


As for me, I feel knowledge is needed to be able to make accurate decisions. I want my dogs properly vaccinated. However I don't want them over vaccinated. There are many health related issues stemming from over vaccination. I was at first disappointed in the results of the 5 year Rabies Challenge, that not all of the dogs in the study still had the antigens. However, I DO want to know exactly when my own dogs need a booster. I want them protected. So I'm grateful for the study and it's findings. Was it a waste of time and money? IMHO I don't believe so. We now know that every dog is still protected for 3 years and that some dogs are protected after 5 years. And we are hoping that through this study we will have an accepted rabies titer. I prefer custom tailored vaccination schedules based on individual needs. I have much respect for Dr. Shultz. As much for him as I do Dr. Dodds. And I also know that I have heard on several occasions Dr. Dodds as well as Dr. Becker say that they believe vaccine dosages should be based on body mass. So there does seem to be a difference in opinion on vaccine dosing. So to me, that implies that a study has never been done and this is based on theory. So the question is, if a small pilot study costing approx. $5500 is what it takes to show the world that vaccine dosage either does or does not need to be based on body mass, and brings security in that knowledge that we are not giving a harmful dosage with every booster and not causing future harm to toy breeds, is it worth the cost of that study? To me, it is. We already know that vaccination protocols originally in place were not correct. And the reason they went from MLV vaccines to killed, was due to yet another situation where a proper study/investigation was not performed. Which is why we now have adjuvants added to the vaccine. Something else that an animal could potentially have a reaction to. Which has questionable (potentially harmful) ingredients such as Mercury.

Facts About the Rabies Vaccine

Joy, the verse that comes to mind is, Iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. Prov 27:17 (NAS) You are very much correct that genetics plays a factor in animals that are predisposed to reactions and triggers to immune mediated disease. However I don't believe that is what is needed in this particular study as to whether or not vaccines should be based on body mass. I want to know what is the minimal amount truly needed to protect every dog and cat. It is however a start. Who knows what it may then lead to? Possibly the findings will lead to a study including the correlation to genetics.
Good post Crystal, :thumbsup: hopefully this will start the process for our babies to be properly protected with minimal harm.
 
#24 ·
Glad that this is opening up the discussion here and looking at all angles and posing good questions and opinions. I am not well versed at all in this area, just in my gut feeling that it makes no sense to use the same dose for a 100 lb dog and a 5 lb dog but that's just a personal feeling based in no science whatsoever. Come to think of it, I weigh roughly 118 and am pretty sure the vaccines I would get are the same as too a 320 lb man. :blink: But I've also had adverse reactions to things like the flu vaccine. So glad that real thought is being put into this and things proceed forward. Thank you everyone.
 
#26 ·
I'm really glad we are addressing this. There are a few questions that need to be answered, and I can't think of any that haven't already been asked here regarding the study itself. But as far fundraising, have we considered partnering with any other toy dog groups? I know that the Yorkie people share the same concerns that we do, and how about the AMA? The health committee chairs are Tonia Holibaugh and Vicki Fierheller. But our own TamiZami is on the health committee. I can contact her and see if she can propose this to gage interest on the part the AMA.

I don't know that we even need to have a typical fundraiser with gifts etc. It would be nice to have a fundraising page as I did for Lola. We could possible use "Chip In" and "Go Fund Me." People can share the widgets on FB and where ever. The more web pages that you can get it attached to, the more donations you will garner.
 
#27 · (Edited)
Okay, I must admit that I voted against the study. However, I am having second thoughts ... and, I am requesting that my vote to not to pursue the study please be removed.

And, yes, I will donate whatever I can to the to the study. So, please add a vote from me, to donations made after the holidays.

I won't go into detail right now ... but, a lot has happened since Snowball's adverse reaction to the rabies vaccination last month. (two issues being Snowball air licking more often ... and a weight loss of almost 1/2 pound. And, he has a dental cleaning schedueled for November 4th ... so, another worry)

Also, we were told by at least one professional, that even if Snowball had been given a lower dose of the rabies vaccine, he probably still would have had the adverse reaction. (I think based on the fact that he has already had a total of four rabies vaccinations since he was born, but, not sure)

Felix and I have also been getting a lot of feedback ... that only one, or possibly two vaccinations ... would be sufficient to protect our pets from rabies during their whole lifetime here on earth.

However, I am now thinking that at least Dr. Dodd has helped changed the annual vaccinations from one year to three. And, hopefully, soon, with contiinued research and studies ... the timeframe for legally required rabies vaccinations ... will be changed from three years to at least five/seven years ... thus giving doctors like Dr. Dodd, even more time ... to do further research ... in proving that our pets do not need to be continually revaccinated with the rabies vaccine and other vaccines.

So, Crystal, Yung, and to our super mods who are helping with this ... if one of you could please change my vote for donations after the holidays, I would appreciate that. And, thank you for all you are doing.

In regard to donations ... I hope this ends up to be for donations, period ... and, no raffle ticket prizes. I just think it is too much for many members who will just not speak up about it. And, even after the holidays, funds may not be healthy for some of our SM members. Some of our SM members can contribute considerable amounts of money ... while others are not in a position to do so right now. I just hate to see anyone discouraged from participating and donating whatever they can ... even if it is a few dollars. A few dollars can add up when we have more members participating.

As for suggesting donations instead of a SS gift ... I think that puts the SS participants in an awkward position. Several years ago, when we received SS suggestions for the fluff we were sending gifts to ... a note was made that they felt kind of guilty making suggestions for their Malt ... when there was an option showing up to give a donation in their name.

I have two friends who are veterinarians. If at some point, you would like for me to reach out to them for suggestions, I would be happy to do so. And, we also have our Dr. Jamie. who used to be a moderator here (and now has her own practice) ... but, she is still a FB friend to many of us. In fact, Jaimie posted on my FB page that her Pixel also had an adverse reaction to the vaccine. So, maybe Jaimie could help with any sharing on FB?

I doubt this will help ... but, if Dr. Dodd ever requests medical histories of toy breed dogs who have had an adverse reaction to the rabies vaccine ... I have Snowball's complete history and would be happy to help in this way. His medical history can be followed since day one when he came home with us. I have detailed files from his vets, the internist specialist, the nutritionist, and the neurologist. Just trying to help in any way that I can ... along with donations.
 
#28 ·
I agree with Marie and Pam. We can just make this a regular fund raising drive. Having prizes etc. also make it exclusive to SM which I hope it won't be.

Can we make sure however we do it is through a recognized 501c so our employers can match our gifts?

Also agreed with Marie about not making this a thing on SS form. For me, if I want to donate to a charity I would just do it directly. Don't see the value in making Lynn go through all the trouble for SS when it's a lot simpler doing it directly.
 
#29 ·
Just want to put this out there for anyone worried about Secret Santa. SS is such a fun activity and people look forward to it every year that it has never even once been considered to do something like this in place of SS. I feel SM deals with enough sad things that we need to fully relish in the fun and joyous activities here on SM. As for whether or not we need to do a fund raiser similar to rescue raffle or just get donations, that is up to the group. Personally I feel just having people donate would be the route to go. No organized fund raisers. But I can be lazy. And have very little free time. So if we need someone to get the ball rolling on a raffle or auction, I'm hoping someone will step up. We have said from the beginning we would like to get donations from outside of SM so that is why it will be helpful to have our drive on the AHVMA web page. And we would like to see various toy breed parent clubs helping to fund raise as well. SM doesn't need to be the one to totally fund this study, but to spearhead the fund raising.

And yes, the AHVMA is a 501(c)3 non profit organization. All donations will be tax deductible and employers can match donations.
 
#30 ·
Pam - checking with TamiZami would be a great idea.

As Crystal said, this is a straight fundraiser - no games, prizes, etc. the way it would work is this:

- the AHVMA Foundation would put a special Donation link on their website. Any funds donated by anyone using this link would go towards funding the research so other toy breed groups could certainly help out.
- once $5500 has been raised, the research will be approved and funded by the AHVMA Foundation
- if by a date we specify, let's say July 2014, the needed amount hasn't been raised, the AHVMA Foundation will allocate the funds to another research project. Since we got the ball rolling, they would likely respect our wishes if we asked them to donate the funds to the Rabies Challenge, which is still working on a titer for rabies.
- since donations would go directly to AHVMA Foundation, which is a 501(c)3 organization, donations would be tax deductible and likely eligible for an employer match if you're fortunate enough to work for such a company.
- The AHVMA Foundation is the research funding arm of the AHVMA.
- I have a PDF copy of the AHVMA Foundation's 2012 IRS Form 990 which all 501(c)3 organizations are required to make public in case anyone else is as nerdy-minded as me when it comes to such things (I spent over 10 years on boards and as Treasurer of two 501(c)3 organizations so these things are actually interesting to me)

Keep asking the good questions so we can support ongoing good health for our fluffs!
 
#32 ·
I'm not entirely sure why there is negativity regarding this research? It's a wonderful start backed by an experienced researcher. in science, anecdotes are just anecdotes and case reports until there is enough actual research to support the hypothesis. We have to start somewhere and hopefully this will lead to more and more research that can produce similar findings. Of course, all the fine details will have to be tuned to create a strong study (for example, the controls, the amount of adjuvant vs actual vaccine component, etc...) BUT it's a start. Research starts small and then gains momentum and funding for larger studies.

Thank you Crystal for being such a strong voice. I think SM, parent toy clubs, other toy breed forums can all join together to gather the donations needed. I think a standard donation fundraiser would work with the right amount of publicity and exposure!


Sent from Petguide.com Free App
 
#38 · (Edited)
Marisa, I don't understand why you think there is negativity regarding this research. Could you please be more specific why you feel this way?

My honest thoughts are that we are not getting through to enough people on SM to particapte in the conversation ... and for them to offer feedback with their thoughts and suggestions. In reality, only sixteen members have responded to this thread. (I don't know why the poll results show more people voting ... I am assuming they are doing so without participating in the discussion on this thread. And, on another note ... I never received a response to acknowledge if my initial vote not to go forward ... was deleted, upon my request. It seems like one of our mods could do this, right? I would like to make sure our polls are accurate.

I will state one more time that I think the research is important. And, I support it. As far as donations ... I do think we need to reach out more to the general public.

I didn't mean to sound negative about Secret Santa. I have participated in the past and I think it is wonderful and fun for many of our members. And, Lynn always does such a fantastic job putting it together. I would participate this year ... but, too much is going on here right now. And, honestly, there is nothing Snowball needs. His treats are extremely limited. He has enough clothes for now. He has many blankets. And, he is so particular about toys that I feel bad when friends have spent money and he doesn't take to any new toys. (he has always been like this). And, without going into too much detail, I have two surgeries coming up in the near future to help me walk better ... this is taking up a lot of my time). I happen to love buying gifts for others ... but, right now it's not the best time for me to participate in the Secret Santa. Again, I commend Lynn for always doing such a fabulous job with it.

This does not stop me, however, from making personal donations. I, just in general, prefer to do so without wanting any special recognition for how much I might have donated. My personal feeling is that this discourages others from making donations ... I know, this might be difficult for others to understand. I am one who has always hated the lists of platinum, gold, silver, and bronze donors. I think it discourages the steel and plain metal donors ... as though their donations don't mean as much.

I feel bad that we have had such a minimal response from SM members. I am not sure that it is because they don't care. Personally, there are so many new threads on a daily basis ... lots of pictures, too. So, unless a thread is bumped up ... it can get missed or lost in the many threads. (this happens to me all the time on Facebook)

Okay, I just wanted to share one more time ... that I do care about the research. I think it is very important. I have heard from too many people ... that their dogs have had adverse reactions to the rabies vaccination. And, I strongly believe many of the adverse reactions have NOT been reported to the proper authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Somehow, I believe we need to reach out more to the general public. How, I am not sure.

Maybe we need to think of a thread subject title that will help draw more SM members in to read what Crystal has done so far to help support Dr.Dodd's research project.

And, just because one's beloved fluff baby might not have had an adverse reaction to the rabies vaccine (or other vaccines) ... does not mean it will not happen in their future vaccinations. We all need to do everything possible to protect our precious fluffs from any potential harm.
 
#34 ·
Not all states mandate 3 year rabies vaccines. In some states it is still up to the local municipality. There are still some places that require annual rabies vaccines.
There are a panel of veterinarians that recommend vaccine protocol for the AVMA and AAHA. As a matter of fact Dr. Ford from North Carolina has been at the forefront of updating vaccine protocols.
 
#36 ·
I don't pretend to know much about vaccines but I do know that Zoey had a reaction to her vaccinations and she was diagnosed with IBD not too long after. I titer now and will not be getting any of my girls vaccinated. I'm all for this research, there has to be an answer. I truly believe we're hurting our dogs with over vaccination but we want them protected too. Dr. Dobbs is so well known that I'm very happy to hear she is going to donate her time for this.
I'll be happy to donate whenever this is started.
Thanks so much Crystal.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top