Re: vaccinations

[Leigh Stoller <stoller@fast.cs.utah.edu>]

> From: Gina Heitz <brier@oregonsbest.com>
> Subject: vaccinations 
> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 10:57:05 -0800
> 
>> What would be nice is to know which ones are safe to yearly and which 
>> one can be done less frequently. They seem to get
>> a ton of shots, and we do try to space them out through the year.
> 
> You are a bad dog!
> 
> My main augment is this:
> 
> Why is it that we *think* as humans that dogs immune systems are so fragile 
> that they require annual boosters for diseases that a normal immune system 
> should take care of anyway?  Why are we as humans only vaccinated twice in 
> most cases for most serious diseases?  Even ones that pose public health 
> risks?  A canine example is this:  Rabies, there has been an immune

Hmm, not sure the human analogy is a good one. There are several important
differences. First is that *all* US children are *required* to get
vaccinations by law; you cannot bring your child to school without proof.
For dogs, rabbies is required (although there is no equivalent proof
mechanism). Second, vaccinations have side effects, and while its terrible
when a dog dies from a vaccination, it tends to make the news when a 2 year
old child does, and that ripples through the system, all the way to the
people who set these rules.

Chicken Pox is a recent example in the news. Most of us are old enough to
have received the vaccination, but it is widely believed that we are no
longer protected by that after all these years. Basically, the entire US
population is susceptible to Chicken Pox. Chicken Pox has a very high kill
rate and is easily transmitted. Why don't we vaccination against that,
especially in light of the fact that we know the virus exists in labs
around the world, and that terrorists could possible get their hands on it?
Because the death rate of the vaccine would result in 400 (of 250 million)
Americans dying from the vaccine. No one disputes this, but no one
(espeically a politician) wants to be responsible for that. So, rather than
think of the greater good (the other 250 million), we decide not to
vaccinate. Its one of the risk tradeoff decisions we make as a society
every day (like 55mph vs 75mph).

Basically, I think that its easier to set the stricter rules for dogs
because dogs have a pretty small representation in your legislature!

Rabbies is every 3 years, and perhaps thats *because* its required for all
dogs; the chance of exposure is lower. 

I'm just wondering if there are valid epidemiologic reasons for vaccinating
more often in a population that is not required to get those vaccinations?

Be interesting to ask a epidemiologist!

Lbs