Re: [RC] Very important message about WNV SHOTS - Heidi Smith
>See,
this is what I want to know, I personally do not know of any horses that have
been affected and I think it reasonable as Steph Caldwell has said, we need a
lot more unbiased data on the disease and the values of the shots. That is
all
>I had my herd done, last spring, but as I
said, I am seriously thinking of not giving a booster until I have a lot more
knowledge especially for the area that I live in. And what about the
horses that got the vaccine and still got the virus? what is the stats and data
on that?
The bottom line with ANY vaccine is the
risk/benefit equation. What are the risks of the vaccine and what are the
benefits of the vaccine (risks of not giving it)? ALL vaccines have
risks. So if there is no possible benefit (example--why would I vaccinate
for African Horse Sickness when I live in Idaho?) then there is no sense in
taking on the risk.
There is no ONE vaccine protocol that fits all
areas--and often not even one that fits all the horses on the same farm.
You have to take into account several things. One, what is the prevalence
of the disease in your area? If it is low, the risk of getting the disease
may be less than the risk of vaccinating. Two, what are the consequences
of getting the disease? If the disease has a high mortality rate,
there is more incentive to accrue the risks of vaccination than if the mortality
rate is low. Three, how is the disease spread and what are the chances
that your horses will be exposed? If it requires nose-to-nose contact, and
your horses are isolated, they are not at risk even if the disease is in your
area, but if the disease is spread by a vector, then your horses may be at risk
even if they are isolated. Four, what is your management system?
(This could really be 3A.) Do you have outside horses coming in, or do you
take horses out where they could be exposed? Five, what is the reactivity
of the vaccine in question? A more reactive vaccine will cause one to take
increased risks of disease before choosing to vaccinate.
And not vaccinating mares in the first couple
of months of gestation is just a no-brainer. I don't care to use ANY
vaccine at that stage, and will only do so if I think there is a real overriding
reason. My own preference is to vaccinate mares at about 9-10 months of
gestation--thereby also getting some colostral antibodies into the
foal.
Just a few examples, using my own herd.
Tetanus--not a high risk in my area, but nonetheless a fairly ubiquitous
risk. Very low chance of contracting it, but high fatality rate if you
do. Not "contagious"--but present in the environment. Vaccine highly
efficacious and one of the safer ones on the market. Cha-ching!
We'll do that one.
EEE/WEE--low to moderate risk in my area.
Seasonal. Vector-borne, so can't really control it by isolation of
herd. Vaccine highly efficacious and relatively safe.
Cha-ching! Another positive decision.
Influenza--an inconvenient but rarely fatal
disease. Low to moderate risk in my area, and requires some degree of
closeness or contact. Not something my horses are apt to catch unless I
bring it home with me. Nonetheless, a fairly safe vaccine, although
efficacy leaves a lot to be desired. Not a bad enough vaccine to shy away
from it, so this is a take-it-or-leave-it one in my book. Main reason for
giving it is the convenience of 4-way.
Rhino--again, not a high risk for my
herd. We aren't nose-to-nose to anyone. My main concern is bringing
it home to broodmares. Pneumabort K is a fairly reactive vaccine--not one
I care to do the 3-shot mid-gestation series that is recommended, unless there
is a definite risk of exposure. Intermediate solution--booster the horses
once a year that go off the place, and don't bring it
home!
Strangles--no exposure risk for my herd, unless
I bring it home. Vaccine has only moderate efficacy, and occasional
reactions. Disease can have serious complications, but the main
implication of an outbreak is a bunch of really sick horses and a lot of work,
not usually dead ones. Intermediate solution--only vaccinate those that
leave the place, and watch the hygiene when away from home! (So far rides
in our area have stayed pretty healthy--and I avoid fairgrounds stalls like the
plague. We went to a horse show last weekend--and camped out with our
horses just like at a ride, rather than put them in the "trafficked"
areas.)
PHF--very low risk here, although not
altogether nil. Vaccine fairly safe, not sure how efficacious, but due to
low risk here, I choose not to. Would choose differently in a different
locale.
WNV--still no cases in this area. Maybe
next year. Efficacy of vaccine around 75%, and vaccinated horses apt
to have milder cases. Personally still holding out, although many here
have given it. We do have SOME mosquitos, but not what they do down along
the river, so even if it comes this way next year, our exposure risk is lower
than many of our neighbors.
Rabies--we don't have it here. A
non-starter for us.
I think you have to go through EVERY different
vaccine and use that sort of thought process in making
your decisions. If I lived in other areas of the country, I'd
definitely be vaccinating for rabies, and most likely for WNV.
Likewise, if I lived in a really crowded area, I would rethink both
rhino and strangles. But you have to make up your own mind
about your OWN circumstances, and your OWN locale.
The main thing is to use good
factual data to do so--not emotional claptrap like the stuff on that inflamatory
WNV site.
