Purdue Vaccination Studies & Auto-Antibodies

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Angelus9

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
292
Reaction score
2
http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/purdue-vaccination-studies/

Excerpt:

"The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated, dogs in the Purdue studies developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fibronectin, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen."

This article is taken from a "dogs naturally" website, so analysis may be skewed.

Members don't see this ad.
 
This article isn't very specific. Which vaccine are they referring to? Perhaps its the adjuvant and not the actual ligand or attenuated virus the animals are being vaccinated against. I'm just not sure I believe this article as it doesn't have any scientific evidence to back up what they're saying. I think if this article wants to be credible it needs specifics...which vaccine? which adjuvant? any specific breeds of dog? Is this the first dose of vaccine or a challenge dose?

In humans, this can happen occasionally with immunotherapy cancer treatments. The treatment involves harvesting dendritic cells or T cells from the patient, pulsing them with the specific antigen of the tumor, multiplying them into enormous numbers and putting them back into the patient. I've heard of a patient receiving this treatment for melanoma and then years later developing vitiligo. So its sort of the same idea...stimulating an immune response and then the immune response is overactive which then causes an autoimmune condition. But this is very rare, and its technically not a vaccine. Vaccines work through T cells to stimulate a specific B cell response which produces antigen-specific antibodies. The levels of these antibodies are what is measured to determine the success of a vaccine. These cancer therapies are more T cell based.

I'm always very weary of anti-vaccine groups, usually there isn't much scientific data/evidence to back up what they're saying.
 
That's why I listed the caveat, hoping that some on here who are familiar with the actual Purdue study would chime in.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I did see what you wrote, I was commenting on the article itself. I get very frustrated with anti-vaccine groups. If you look at the comments on this article you can see examples of how they influence the public. It just spawns fear in people who know nothing about science which then causes them to come to dangerous and wrong conclusions.
Also I noticed in this article they use cancer and autoimmune disease interchangeably....NOT OK. Those are two VERY different conditions.
 
This article is taken from a "dogs naturally" website, so analysis may be skewed.

yeah... I would say so. This is from a quack who states:

The word "allergy" is synonymous with "sensitivity" and "inflammation". It should, by rights, also be synonymous with the word "vaccination"
And says that several studies have been done, and cites 2 sources... neither of which actually cites the original study. It's been over a decade since that original study was performed at Purdue, and no further evidence has been shown to validate the idea that vaccination causes thyroiditis. In fact, the same group that did the original study in 1999 published a paper in 2006 titled "Lack of association between repeated vaccination and thyroiditis in laboratory beagles." (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16955802). Sure... 20 beagles may not be enough to give you the most reliable results, but if the only follow-up study out there in a 12 year span refutes an idea (and such a provocative one at that) BY THE ORIGINAL GROUP it's probably wiser not to take it as fact.

It may be true that the level of autoantibodies are increased, but no one has been able to show what those extra autoantibodies do. Same thing is going on right now with feline vaccines at CSU. They've shown that vaccination elevates levels of autoantibodies to feline kidneys. They're now working on making that next link. As tempting as it is to jump to the conclusion that autoantibodies --> autoimmune disease, I try to not go there since immunology is such a fast evolving field. I mean, Tregs didn't even exist 5 years ago... and now we know how important they are in regulating T cell mediated autoimmunity. If it were true that autoAbs automatically meant autoimmune dz, and we follow this lady's logic... our dogs would be totally f***ed.

The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing autoantibodies to their own collagen. About one quarter of all the protein in the body is collagen. Collagen provides structure to our bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues and connecting them with the skeleton.
I think it IS important to be skeptical about vaccines, esp when it comes to how often our animals really need to be boostered and such... but I think it's also important to balance that with the KNOWN adverse effects of NOT vaccinating. I prob wouldn't push extra vaccines on an indoor only cat or 17 year old lap dog that never sees other dogs (esp with a history of vaccine reactions). But if some crazy owner came in with a young unpredictable snapping dog that they like to parade in public, and refused to vaccinate for rabies because of possible "vaccinosis," I'd slap them and/or refuse service.

P.S. I think the only known link between vaccines and autoimmunity in dogs/cats is AIHA in dogs. Our immunology prof last semester told us we would get extra credit points for each article we could find that actually showed a clear link in domestic animals (aside from the AIHA study by Duval, et al)... and the only papers that got any credit was one on hamsters and one on salmon.
 
Last edited:
Oh gosh...I feel for the many veterinarians who are now going to have the people who commented on the article showing up with a know-it -all attitude and this paper to back them up. It is discouraging to see so many people who have little faith/trust in veterinarians. Possibly the best quotation from the article:

"They [vaccines] are undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators. Worse, we animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to unwittingly betray our loved ones."

And it says that was written last week, but the author says there are 27 vet schools in the US...
 
"They [vaccines] are undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators. Worse, we animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to unwittingly betray our loved ones."
Annnnnd these are the people we'll be dealing with!

Or perhaps not. Maybe they'll seek out some quack vet somewhere that'll go along with them.
 
Ok, I promise I won't make a habit of it, but I'm posting another "dogsnaturally" article: http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/bordatella-vaccination-dogs/

Someone I know posted this one on FB and of course all these people are chiming in saying great site, good to have this knowledge, I'm going to subscribe, etc. etc. This one to me was ridiculous from the get go. Any help in calmly refuting this stuff??

Thanks.
 
Ok, I promise I won't make a habit of it, but I'm posting another "dogsnaturally" article: http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/bordatella-vaccination-dogs/

Someone I know posted this one on FB and of course all these people are chiming in saying great site, good to have this knowledge, I'm going to subscribe, etc. etc. This one to me was ridiculous from the get go. Any help in calmly refuting this stuff??

Thanks.

You could start by explaining immunology. *facepalm* I couldn't read the whole article before I got cranky with it... 🙁
 
Yet they are routinely given to combat a self limiting disease that amounts to as much danger to your dog as the common cold does to you.

And you can bet if there was a vaccine for the common cold, I'd be the first one in line! I don't like being sick, I can't imagine my dog does either.

There are at least forty agents capable of initiating Bordetella so vaccination might appear to be prudent if it weren’t for the fact that only two of these agents are contained in the intranasal vaccine.

Not sure if this is true or not, but if it is, it might be a similar case to the argument against the HPV vaccines. The HPV vaccine is touted as ineffective for only being effective against 4 of the 70 types of HPV. This is true, but those 4 types are the most common sexually transmitted types and responsible for the bulk of HPV infections.

Although Bordetella is a bacterial vaccine, we now know that bacterial vaccines present the same threat as Modified Live Vaccines.

Except Bordetella is a killed bacterial vaccine or cell wall antigen extract only. : http://www.aahanet.org/publicdocuments/vaccineguidelines06revised.pdf

Really, this isn't hard to poke logical holes in. If they're not going to present accurate information, it's impossible to have a logical debate with them.
 
Isn't the intranasal bordatella vax modified live? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
There is a live avirulent bacterin Bordetella vaccine (in the vaccine guidelines pdf I posted) but it looks like it's only given in conjunction with parainfluenza, not as a standalone vaccine*, but the article you posted made it sound like there was only one Bordetella vaccine available and that's just not the case. That's where I take umbrage. They've given true information (yes, it's a bacterial vaccine) but they're playing fast and loose with the facts.

*Just using the pdf. Happy to be corrected a I'm not a vet (or even a vet student yet).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Ok, I promise I won't make a habit of it, but I'm posting another "dogsnaturally" article: http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/bordatella-vaccination-dogs/

Someone I know posted this one on FB and of course all these people are chiming in saying great site, good to have this knowledge, I'm going to subscribe, etc. etc. This one to me was ridiculous from the get go. Any help in calmly refuting this stuff??

Thanks.

Interestingly enough, the author of the article is http://www.dr-jordan.com/cv.htm

I suspect you'll have a hard time refuting it, given your credentials versus her credentials. I'm not saying that's fair or makes sense, but.... g'luck. 🙂
 
I'll grant you she's a DVM, but her resume also sets of my Quack Radar:
(3.0) CE hours: Crystal Energy Healing, Initiation and Training, Cape Cod, MA 05/26/07
(4.0) CE Hours; Feng Shui Institute, Earth Energies and Sacred Geometry, Dowsing, Speaker; Patrick MacManaway, M.D., British National Dowsing Society President, Third generation energy worker and partner in Integrative Medical Hospital in Scotland. 03/07
20 C E Hours: Annual Advanced Meeting in Veterinary Homeopathy, Saguaro Lake Ranch, Meza Az, 03/02-05/06
The word "homeopathy" comes up WAY too many times on that page.

ETA: Though unfortunately, in the eyes of the anti-vax crowd, her alignment with homeopathy probably just lends more credence to her opinions. Anti-vaccine and pro-homeopathy seem to go hand-in-hand a lot of the time.
 
Last edited:
ETA: Though unfortunately, in the eyes of the anti-vax crowd, her alignment with homeopathy probably just lends more credence to her opinions. Anti-vaccine and pro-homeopathy seem to go hand-in-hand a lot of the time.

That's what I was suggesting. I can't speak to her claims; I just don't feel I have the knowledge to do so. I'm pretty confident, though, that her background gives her a persuasive voice for the anti-vaccination crowd.

ETA: DOWSING? She has DOWSING on that CV? I only know of the classic water divination dowsing.... how does dowsing play into medicine?
 
Interestingly enough, the author of the article is http://www.dr-jordan.com/cv.htm

I suspect you'll have a hard time refuting it, given your credentials versus her credentials. I'm not saying that's fair or makes sense, but.... g'luck. 🙂

so thaaaaat's what happens to those of us who barely pass immunology 🙄 huh...

new and more 'enlightened' interpretation of medicine = fame and glory. i'm sure the woman also charges like $20 for all of her diagnostics (i mean, how expensive can a crystal ball be?) and her clients LOVE that
 
so thaaaaat's what happens to those of us who barely pass immunology 🙄 huh...

new and more 'enlightened' interpretation of medicine = fame and glory. i'm sure the woman also charges like $20 for all of her diagnostics (i mean, how expensive can a crystal ball be?) and her clients LOVE that

Treatments must be cheap too. I mean how much can you really charge for water? I mean, uh, homeopathic remedies. No need to reorder, just fill up the bottle from the tap.
 
Treatments must be cheap too. I mean how much can you really charge for water? I mean, uh, homeopathic remedies. No need to reorder, just fill up the bottle from the tap.

um, that would make you a quack homeopathic doctor.

you have to refill it before it gets completely empty (I heard 1/2-1/3 was a good benchmark) and then swirl it around or shake it or pound it on a book to revamp the energy. no joke. that's what i was told. dead serious. by the lady who "prescribed" homeopathic parvo 100c when there was a parvo outbreak. yeah... that did not end well. 95% mortality rate with that one.

but i digress. back on subject: if you put a drop of the homeopath in the animals' water bowls, no need to readminister it again until the water gets so gross you need to clean the bowl out. if instructions are to administer it every hour, you can just stick your finger in the water and swirl it around to rouse the energy every hour.

"THAT my friends is the beauty of homeopaths. It is so cheap. That's why the AMA and AVMA are so against it. There's no money in it, and the billions of dollars pharmaceutical companies make currently would go kapoot." - direct quote from Stevie the homeopath lady during a mandatory homeopath seminar I was subjected to, where it was explained to me very clearly why it's all about energy, and thus science. "people say it's not scientific, but it's QUANTUM PHYSICS GUYS!"

I was like 😱 the entire two hours. Sadly, it was very convincing to some of the everyday peoples who despise all those chemicals and antibiotics. Some of these people were easily convinced that traditional vets are not free thinkers, and just puppets of the AVMA, which is an evil org that quotes "biology" when they don't even understand the fundamentals of science - quantum physics... I felt bad for all the animals owned by all these people. Naturally, they were animal lovers and hoarded a bunch of them too. None of their animals are vaccinated for everything so aren't allowed to go to doggy day care or doggy school or anything like that. Therefore, they have their own little playgroup of all unvaccinated animals. When the dogs get sick, they just get treated with homeopaths.
 
I think one of the things that irritates me so much about homeopathy is they're usually dishonest about it. We've seen right on this board that many people think that homeopathic is the same as herbal, when this is not the case. I went to an RMT to fix my hip after a fall off a horse. She recommended a pain relieving cream and told me where to get it. What she failed to tell me is that it's homeopathic. I read the label to see what was in it (since it was god-awful expensive, and I wanted to see if it would be worth it), but most people won't. I've had to talk my hairdresser out of "vaccinating" her dog with nosodes, which were recommended by her dog trainer. What the trainer failed to tell her, is that nosodes are homeopathic and thus, they're water. If you're going to market this stuff, at least be upfront about what it actually is. 🙄
 
If you're going to market this stuff, at least be upfront about what it actually is. 🙄

HA! If the world was honest we would be in an entirely different world. They have a product to market just like everyone else. No one is honest about anything anymore, because there isn't much money to be made in honesty. And also, people are sheep, and thus it's quite easy to convince them of things.
 
I felt bad for all the animals owned by all these people. Naturally, they were animal lovers and hoarded a bunch of them too. None of their animals are vaccinated for everything so aren't allowed to go to doggy day care or doggy school or anything like that. Therefore, they have their own little playgroup of all unvaccinated animals. When the dogs get sick, they just get treated with homeopaths.

Sorry for the 2 consecutive posts but I agree too. It's unfortunate that we pay so much money to have people like this come in and take it all away with their magical potions... err water.
 
HA! If the world was honest we would be in an entirely different world. They have a product to market just like everyone else. No one is honest about anything anymore, because there isn't much money to be made in honesty. And also, people are sheep, and thus it's quite easy to convince them of things.

I get that everyone's out to make a buck, but I'm still allowed to be mad at blatant dishonesty.😉 They want it to be treated like a legitimate treatment option? Fine, make it standardized and tested and labelled as stringently as medications. I have a bottle of over the counter acetominophen with codeine here. There's a small novel of warnings and ingredients and other information printed on it. I just don't think that homeopathy should get to have it both ways. They want to be seen as legitimate, but without meeting all the standards required of being legitimate. I'm not okay with that. [/soapbox]
 
Top