Catherine O'Driscoll will be on the Just Say No Yahoo group for a few
days starting on Wednesday.
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/jstsayno2vaccs/

She has done very much research into pet vaccines and is the author of
the article "Science of Vaccine Damage" which I use frequently as a
reference.
http://www.dogsadversereactions.com/...ineDamage.html

Here is her introduction post.

******************
Hello All



Firstly, I'd like to thank your moderator Kathleen for inviting me onto
this great list to discuss a major campaign that's taking place over
here in the UK. I use the word `major' – but this is more hope than
reality at the moment, since it relies upon the support and action of
those of us who know what vaccines are doing to our dogs.



As I'm away at a workshop, I have asked Kathleen to post this on your
list for me, and I'll be joining you on Wednesday to have a chat.



So … why the campaign? OK, so well meaning people keep making
suggestions as to how we can further the campaign that's been running
since 1994 to end the over-vaccination of companion animals. They say
things like, `why don't you organise a dog show', or `why don't you go
on twitter or facebook', or `why don't you get a celebrity to endorse
your message'…..



The problem is that the problem is a lot bigger than that. Although we
have bodies such as the WSAVA and AAHA saying we don't need to vaccinate
every year, most vets in practice are still vaccinating against all the
diseases on an annual basis. Even though there are vaccines licensed
for boosting 3 to 4 years later, they are still using the one-year
shots. And of course we all know that even the 3-4 year shots are
unnecessary.



There are some dog lovers who have wised-up and who won't allow their
vets to vaccinate their friends every year; there are even some ethical
vets. But there are still too many people who are taking it all on
trust, and then getting shocked, angry and catapulted into grief when
their dogs (and cats, horses, rabbits..) get a vaccine-associated
illness or die.



The other problem about vaccines is that reactions don't always happen
immediately. One in four dogs in the UK dies of cancer – but how many
people know the science which shows that vaccines cause inheritable
cancer? Epilepsy is one of the most common dog-related illnesses – how
many people know that the shots they give their friends in the name of
love probably caused that epilepsy? And how many people know that
arthritis is one of the unwanted gifts of a vaccine a dog didn't need?



So back in February, we wrote to the British licensing authority, the
Veterinary Medicines Directorate, calling for them to take one-year MLV
core vaccines off the market. At the same time, Canine Health Concern
members wrote to their political representatives to exert pressure on
the VMD.



The VMD responded the DAY BEFORE a general election was called in the
UK, a minute before everyone went home for the day. Parliament was
dissolved, and we were without an acting government until the election
was over. Essentially, we were in a position of having to start again
with regards to our political system.



The VMD's response was a `position paper on canine vaccination
schedules'. It was literally a position paper: "This is how it is, now
naff off." They had totally ignored our call. Therefore, with
government blessing, annual vaccination continues in the UK (and all
over the world, of course).



There is some background to this which may interest you. The head of
the VMD is a vet called Steve Dean. If you've read my book, `What Vets
Don't Tell You About Vaccines', you'll know that the book starts with a
column written by Steve Dean in one of the UK dog papers. This was back
in the early 90s, and Steve was mocking the people who spoke of vaccine
reactions in their dogs, and mocking anyone who said we don't need to
vaccinate every year. Then they made him the head of the government
vaccine licensing body.



Not only that, but it turns out that Steve Dean spent 17 years as a
marketing man within the pharmaceutical industry, and then went on to be
a pharmaceutical industry consultant. The government knew about his
background when they made him head of the official body in the UK that
monitors vaccine reactions, licenses vaccine products, and advises
government on these matters.



Further digging revealed that Steve Dean doesn't have a hands off
approach with the multi-billion industry he legislates. Rather, he
speaks at pharmaceutical company seminars and helps them with their
press launches. He's an industry man. On top of this, half of the
people at the VMD have consultancy, research grants and shares with the
pharmaceutical industry.



Turns out that the Veterinary Medicines Directorate was set up following
recommendations from the chief executive if ICI Pharmaceuticals. It
reflected government policy under Margaret Thatcher to effectively
deregulate the pharmaceutical industry and help it to get wealthier.
This policy has been continued ever since.



And this explains why the British government has successively ignored
our calls to halt over-vaccination. I'm pretty sure that the same
scenario applies in most countries of the world. For example, in
Denmark, dog owners are forced by law to vaccinate their dogs against
everything EVERY SIX MONTHS. This isn't about the science of
vaccination – it must be because they can get away with it, or else they
are experimenting on our dogs. Apparently the WHO passed a resolution
to experiment with vaccines on dogs some years ago.



So it seems to me that you and I can keep plugging on, year after year,
mopping up the casualties and hugging the people who grieve the death of
their dogs, but nothing much will change – unless we make the whole
corrupt system more visible.



People need to know that they are being manipulated by governments that
don't care about them and their dogs, but do care about industry,
commerce, profits and power. We need to make the REASON why our dogs
are being over-vaccinated more visible.



People need to know that their vets are also being manipulated. They
are educated in colleges that take money from pharmaceutical companies.
They are stalked by the pharmaceutical industry both in college and
out of college. The pharmaceutical industry is throwing money
everywhere. Pet charities, veterinary further education, vet seminars,
political parties …. Everywhere that helps them sell more unnecessary
product.



There will be many on this list who understand that apathy is our
greatest enemy. You will talk to dog owners and tell them the truth
about vaccines and pet food, and their eyes will glaze over and they
won't hear you. We need to somehow find a way to turn apathy into action.



I need you to go up to this website – www.petvaccine.weebly.com – and
download the 369-page report I've written. Read it. It explains the
science of vaccine damage, and it explains why annual vaccination
continues. This is, in effect, a free book. Use the knowledge in the
two-part report to open up the minds of dog lovers whose minds are
currently closed.



Importantly, if you are in the UK, please write to your MP. If you are
outside the UK, please write to the UK's Chief Veterinary Officer. We
have put letter templates on the site, plus the addresses of the people
you need to write to.



Make it clear to the British government that the world is watching, and
the world knows what is happening. Let them know that we don't
appreciate them selling our pets out.



So – please go to the site and help expose the truth. I for one am fed
up banging the drum day after day, year after year, with very little
changing. It's time to nail this one for good. Maybe if we are
successful in the UK, then the light of truth will shine around the world.



Typically, in any appeal, one person in a hundred will act. Let's
change this. Don't press `delete'. Do something. Share this
information with every dog lover you know, and on every list you are on.



(There is a 10-page summary of the report that you can forward on to
your dog-loving friends – it's up on www.petvaccine.weebly.com. You can
also forward the actual report, or the link, to your vets, dog-loving
friends and anyone else you think might be interested. There's a press
release up there, too – so if you have contacts with any of the dog
magazines, please feel free to send it on.)



Lots of love

Catherine O'Driscoll

ANIMAL VACCINE SAFETY
by Catherine O'Driscoll



Running Canine Health Concern for the past sixteen years, we have been
contacted by hundreds of dog owners who tell us that their dogs became
ill within a few hours, days or weeks of a vaccine event. Indeed,
Catherine O’Driscoll formed Canine Health Concern after three of her own
young dogs died of illnesses that were vaccine related.



However, bodies such as the Veterinary Medicines Directorate maintain
that vaccine reactions are very rare, although it is known in medical
and veterinary fields that adverse events are vastly under-reported.



It is a fact that many dogs have died of vaccine-induced illnesses
without their vets or guardians ever suspecting a link. Can this be
proven scientifically in every single case? No. Can the known science
point us towards this conclusion? Definitely yes.



There is much that science does not know about the sequelae to
vaccination, but there is also much that is now becoming visible.



Canine Health Concern is aware that animals who die as a result of their
vaccinations are viewed in scientific circles as ‘anecdotes’, and that
grieving pet owners are viewed with scepticism and discounted on the
same basis – that their dogs’ suffering and deaths are simply stories
without any scientific basis as to cause.



However, we are able to view the accepted published science and
understand that specific sequelae to vaccine events are known to occur.
These specific sequelae, such as brain damage, autoimmune diseases,
skin problems, organ failure, paralysis and allergies, are seen in dogs
far more frequently than the VMD appears willing to acknowledge.



Before looking into the science of these known vaccine-associated
conditions, however, we would like to challenge the VMD’s claim that:



vaccines are manufactured to a consistent and acceptable quality using
high grade materials and are uncontaminated with potentially harmful
infectious agents or other toxic substances



Live virus vaccines always come with the risk of contamination.



UK Veterinary Vaccine Screening Failure



As recently as April this year, The Journal of Virology reported that
two independent laboratories had isolated a feline virus in both dog and
cat vaccines in the UK and Japan. The authors stated: “the current
methods used for screening human vaccines for retroviral contaminants
include extremely sensitive PCR-based RT assays (not required for
veterinary vaccines) that are much more sensitive than conventional RT
assays”.



Isolation of an Infectious Endogenous Retrovirus in a Proportion of Live
Attenuated Vaccines for Pets, Journal of Virology, April 2010, p.
3690-3694, Vol. 84, No. 7. http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/full/84/7/3690



The authors stated:



In this study, we isolated a feline infectious ERV (RD-114) in a
proportion of live attenuated vaccines for pets. Isolation of RD-114 was
made in two independent laboratories using different detection
strategies and using vaccines for both cats and dogs commercially
available in Japan or the United Kingdom. This study shows that the
methods currently employed to screen veterinary vaccines for
retroviruses should be re-evaluated.



Overall, it is possible that our data under-represent the number of
vaccines from which RD-114 can be isolated….



Collectively, our data show unequivocally that RD-114 is present in live
attenuated vaccines commonly used in dogs and cats from different
continents and produced by three different manufacturers. Future studies
will be necessary to determine whether RD-114 has any negative impact in
cats or dogs….



Infectious ERVs have the same biological properties and pathogenic
potential of exogenous horizontally transmitted retroviruses, once the
co-evolutionary mechanisms that have shaped the interaction with their
natural hosts cease to exist. In this regard, the large-scale exposure
to RD-114, particularly of the dog population, may have effects that are
impossible to predict even if successful RD-114 transmission was an
extremely rare event.



Millions of puppies are vaccinated annually worldwide, and they may be
more susceptible to RD-114 infection than cats as the dog genome does
not harbor RD-114. Also wild cats do not harbor RD-114, and they are
regularly vaccinated in zoos with the same vaccines used for pets. These
vaccines have been used extensively for many years without major acute
effects on vaccinated animals, but retroviruses rarely induce acute
diseases.



Therefore, it is impossible to rule out chronic effects, especially as
we were able to grow RD-114 very efficiently in dog cell lines (data not
shown), confirming older published studies….



A recently identified novel human retrovirus (xenotropic murine leukemia
virus-related retrovirus [XMRV]) has been found in some forms of
prostate cancers and chronic fatigue syndrome in humans, although causal
association has not been proven yet. XMRV is almost undistinguishable
from an ERV present in mice, and it will be important to investigate how
this virus passed into the human population, regardless of its
pathogenic potential.



Interestingly, the current methods used for screening human vaccines for
retroviral contaminants include extremely sensitive PCR-based RT assays
(not required for veterinary vaccines) that are much more sensitive than
conventional RT assays. Thus, contamination of human vaccines with XMRV
would not pass undetected with the currently available technology,
although this may not be necessarily true for vaccines produced in
previous decades.



Finally, although the risks posed by RD-114 are seemingly small, it
would be appropriate to produce live attenuated vaccines in cells that
do not express this endogenous retrovirus. To this end, cells of dog
origin may be better suited to produce pet vaccines than cat cell lines,
although not all cat cell lines express RD-114. Contamination of subunit
or inactivated vaccines by infectious agents in general (including ERVs)
is obviously less of a concern.



The implications of this study should not be under-estimated, and they
should especially not be under-estimated by the VMD, which is a
government body charged with the task of assuring the safety of
veterinary products. The study concluded that:



· Future studies will be necessary to determine whether RD-114
has any negative impact in cats or dogs….



· A recently identified novel human retrovirus (xenotropic
murine leukemia virus-related retrovirus [XMRV]) has been found in some
forms of prostate cancers and chronic fatigue syndrome in humans



· sensitive PCR-based RT assays [as used in this study] are not
required for veterinary vaccines



Writing in US Dog World, March, 1995, Dr Jean W Dodds stated:



“Immune–suppressant viruses of the retrovirus and parvovirus classes
have recently been implicated as causes of bone marrow failure,
immune-mediated blood diseases, haematologic malignancies (lymphoma and
leukaemia), dysregulation of humoral and cell-mediated immunity, organ
failure (liver, kidney) and autoimmune endocrine disorders – especially
of the thyroid gland (thyroiditis), adrenal gland (Addison’s disease)
and pancreas (diabetes). Viral disease and recent vaccination with
single or combination modified live virus vaccines, especially those
containing distemper, adenovirus 1 or 2 and parvovirus, are increasingly
recognised contributors to immune-mediated blood diseases, bone marrow
failure and organ dysfunction.”



According to Kennel Club research, one in four dogs in the UK can be
expected to die of cancer. Retroviruses are implicated in this scenario.



Retroviruses and cancer CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 81, NO. 5, 10 SEPTEMBER
2001 http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/sep102001/528.pdf - quote:



Indeed, the study of retroviruses in relation to cancer has been
recognized in the award of three separate sets of Nobel Prizes: to
Peyton Rous in 1966 for the discovery of his eponymous sarcoma virus in
chickens; to David Baltimore and Howard M. Temin in 1975 for their
discovery in 1970 of reverse transcriptase; and to J. Michael Bishop and
Harold E. Varmus in 1989 for their demonstration in 1976 that retroviral
oncogenes originate from cellular genes in the host. Retroviruses were
first associated with malignant disease in animals more than ninety
years ago. In 1908 the Danish veterinarians Ellerman and Bang observed
that erythroleukaemia is infectiously transmissible in chickens. Then in
1911, Rous in USA and in 1914, Fujinami in Japan showed that some avian
sarcomas could be transmitted by inoculation of cell-free filtrates.



On many occasions during vertebrate evolution, retroviruses have
infected cells of the host’s germ-line, destined to become the eggs and
sperm. In this way the integrated DNA provirus can be passed on to the
next generation without undergoing further viral replication. Such
genetically transmitted retroviral genomes are called endogenous
retroviruses (ERV) to distinguish them from exogenous, infectiously
transmitted retroviruses.



It is therefore somewhat astounding that the team involved in the
Journal of Virology, April 2010 study should comment that “ the risks
posed by RD-114 are seemingly small”. The word ‘seemingly’ is a
worrying word to use when, historically, such errors are evaluated
retrospectively, after they have caused ill health and death in vaccinees.



We are actually talking about cancer being potentially passed to
subsequent generations via the vaccine needle.



The authors also stated that, “Overall, it is possible that our data
under-represent the number of vaccines from which RD-114 can be isolated…”



The Veterinary Medicines Directorate has therefore failed in one of its
primary aims, which robs this government agency of the right to support
unnecessary revaccination through lax governance - when that
revaccination is known to be unnecessary



In its position paper, the VMD asserts that it seeks to ensure that:



vaccines are safe to be administered to young and older animals where
relevant, and pose no risk to the owner, their families or other animals
and persons coming in contact with vaccinated animals. Where necessary,
specific warnings are added to the product literature to minimise any
risk of an adverse reaction following administration of the product



Within this document, we seek to explain to the VMD, veterinarians, our
elected political representative and the wider dog owning public that no
vaccine can ever be considered to be completely safe.



The VMD is right to ‘seek to ensure safety’, since it cannot guarantee
to do so, although elsewhere in its document the VMD goes so far as to
state:



The seed materials are grown in cultures using a variety of biological
materials, often sourced from animal tissues and, therefore, the risks
of a vaccine containing an extraneous agent (unwelcome contaminant) are
high. To prevent this, the manufacture of products according to the
principles of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), the application of
quality control tests on every batch and pre-authorisation tests on seed
materials are the principle controls to ensure the quality of authorised
veterinary vaccines and the exclusion of extraneous agents.



It is clear that the VMD has failed.



It is also clear that both inflammatory and immune-mediated illnesses –
developing immediately after a vaccine event and within months or years
- need to be assessed in relation to previous vaccine events if the full
sequelae to vaccines are to be understood.



Vaccine safety is not assured at the point of license. It cannot be.



The unwanted effects of vaccines are seen in the field, after humans and
animals have been vaccinated; after they are forced to live with
vaccine-induced illness, and after vaccines have killed the people and
animals they were purported to help.



We must examine the wider picture of vaccine adverse effects – both
long- and short-term – and assess revaccination schedules with the
animals in mind, rather than having industry profits in mind.



Independent duration of immunity studies exist, using different vaccine
brands, to establish the



principle



that “once immunity to viral disease exists, it persists for years or life”.



There is no scientific reason, basis or justification – in view of the
potential adverse reactions – to continue with the annual vaccination,
or even three-yearly vaccination, of companion animals.



The government must act to put a stop to this general practice.