People who are concerned about the health of their pets should read the latest international guidelines for dog and cat vaccination. In 2007 the World Small Animal Veterinary Association (WSAVA) published Dog and Cat Vaccination Guidelines (built on the US AAHA (Canine) and AAFP (Feline) guidelines) for global application. Ref: http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VGG _09_2007.pdf The WSAVA guidelines include a number of significant statements: • We should aim to vaccinate every animal, and to vaccinate each individual less frequently. (p. 2) • …we should aim to reduce the ‘vaccine load’ on individual animals in order to minimise the potential for adverse reactions to vaccine products. (p. 3) • Vaccines should not be given needlessly. Core vaccines should not be given any more frequently than every three years after the 12 month booster injection following the puppy/kitten series. (p. 2) • In the case of dogs, the Fact Sheets of the WSAVA guidelines note that duration of immunity after vaccination with MLV vaccines is 7 years or longer, based on challenge and serological studies, for Canine Parvovirus Type 2 (CPV-2), Canine Adenovirus (CAV-2) and Canine Distemper Virus (CDV) vaccines. (pp. 15-17) In regards to duration of immunity, Professor Ronald Schultz, an expert in immunology and a member of the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines Group, notes: "I believe that dogs and cats vaccinated as puppies and kittens should be revaccinated at 1 year of age with the vaccines used earlier. After that I do not believe there is an immunologic need to revaccinate annually with CDV, CPV-2, CAV-2..." (Ref: Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs. Veterinary Medicine, March 1998, pp. 233-254). If your vet sends you an annual reminder to have your adult dog revaccinated with the core MLV vaccines for parvovirus, adenovirus and distemper, challenge him. The latest scientifically based guidelines state that it is not necessary for adult dogs to have these vaccinations every year of their life. It is of no benefit and actually puts the dog needlessly at risk of an adverse reaction. I learned this the hard way when my dog became very sick after her last unnecessary revaccination with core MLV vaccines. She had six annual boosters during her life, most of which were unnecessary, and needlessly put her at risk of an adverse reaction. She is now dead. I have been researching this subject since her death last September and I am shocked by what I have discovered. Australia is way behind on this issue. A culture of unnecessary and possibly harmful over-vaccination with core MLV vaccines has become entrenched. Read the WSAVA Dog and Cat Vaccination Guidelines and decide for yourself. People should be informed before they make the decision to revaccinate their pets. There are serious risks involved with over-vaccination.

Dear Elizabeth, You are obviously emotionally attached to the issue, due to your own experiences, however over-vaccination and under vaccination when relating to a population are not the same thing. This article is indicating the worrying trend in regional areas by owners to forgo vaccination altogether consequently allowing a population to become susceptible to disease. Encouraging Vets to comply with Int. standards and adopt 3 year protocols for core diseases is great and I commend you for it, but creating hype, confusion and fear in the entire vaccination debate is hardly helpful. In Qld this year we have had Parvo all over the State and it is a very unpleasant event. Articles like this are needed to reach those uncompliant pet owners - as you know the greater portion of the population remains unvaccinated. Vaccination, regardless of intervals, is still a marval of science and saves many lifes each year, this benefit is not trivial. What we need to ensure is that the Veterinary Industry act responsibly. The industry here is now moving, but our litigaous, blame oriented society is not helping - Vets fear reduced vaccinating in case there is a consequence later. Nicola

The Sydney Morning Herald recently picked up on the over-vaccination of pets problem in this article: “Vets dogged by criticism over vaccinations” PET OWNERS are wasting millions of dollars a year and may even be exposing their animals to harm by heeding the advice of their vets. http://www.smh.com.au/environment /vets-dogged-by-criticism-o ver-vaccinations-20090731-e4f7.ht ml

Nicola, the above article mentions vaccinations being kept "up to date". What does "up to date" mean? Does it mean annual revaccination? I understand this is still "accepted practice" in Australia. Is it ethical for vets in Australia to ignore the WSAVA guidelines, and to continue to urge their clients to have unnecessary and possibly harmful revaccinations for their pets? It is the duty of members of the veterinary profession to stay abreast of new developments in immunology to ensure the most effective and safest vaccination methods are used. Pet owners must be fully informed about vaccination, and enabled to make an *informed decision* before consenting to revaccinate their pets. Nicola, re your comments on under-vaccination and over-vaccination. If members of the veterinary profession are genuinely concerned about the health and welfare of pets in Australia, they should remember the key message of the WSAVA guidelines, i.e. "we should aim to vaccinate every animal, and to vaccinate each individual less frequently", rather than unnecessarily revaccinating some individual animals over and over again.