You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 11:16 a.m.

Local expert dispels myths about indoor cats and vaccinations

By Lorrie Shaw

tortiecat.jpg

Is your cat underprotected?

flickr photo courtesy of pmarkham

A very sticky situation avails itself once in a while: a human is bitten by someone's pet — maybe their own. Bites are always a worry, regardless of whether it's a dog or a cat, and for several reasons. Why did they bite? How severe is the wound? And most of all, what's the risk of infection and the chance of contracting disease?

The latter should be of real concern whether it's a bite from either species, and because of social attitudes regarding felines, it tends not to be a worry when the pet biting is a cat. That's unfortunate.

In our society, there tends to be a lot of misinformation when it comes to cats. People commonly think that cats are not social, that they can fend for themselves, that they do not need attention in the way that dogs do. One of the most prevalent myths: cats don't need vaccinations.

There is a lot of controversy with regard to the topic of having cats inocculated against preventable diseases, but one thing is clear: understanding the ramifications of diseases that can be contracted is vital in making the choice to not vaccinate.

And as Bill MacArthur, DVM of Affordable Veterinary Services in Ann Arbor, explains, "It's a matter of public health."

Not getting core vaccines — FVRCP and rabies — can prove to have severe consequences not just for the individual pets themselves, but the animals that they come into contact with and people.

As a veterinarian for 17 years as well being a molecular biologist, MacArthur ought to know.

"I see cats come in with preventable diseases that are gravely sick, and their owners say, 'I wish there was something that could be done' — and in these cases, there was something that could have been done prior to illness — a simple injection before being exposed to these things."

He's referring to things like panleukopenia — a highly contagious virus and closely related to the canine parvo virus. This opportunistic, stable virus is tough and ubiquitous.

Since it can survive on surfaces indoors at room temperature for over a year and also at freezing temperatures, if a feline that has an active infection sheds the virus (which it does by way of all bodily fluids and secretions), other cats that come into contact with it will also be infected. Due to a feline's habit of rubbing up on everything and being fastidious about grooming, it's easy for them to pick up this virus.

As MacArthur points out, "They're living mops."

Symptoms of panleukopenia include fever, weight loss, diarrhea and vomiting.

If the virus' virulency and ease of transmission isn't enough to convince cat owners to have their cats inoculated against it, here's another reason — the virus shuts down the immune system by suppressing white cell production. No white blood cells, no ability to fight infection, period.

MacArthur is adamant that all cats need to be vaccinated against panleukopenia to give them protection against becoming infected, and the vaccination is usually administered along with two others (referred to a multivalent, or combination vaccine): calicivirus (FCV), which causes upper respiratory infections and oral disease, and rhinotracheitis (FVR), an upper respiatory infection caused by the feline herpesvirus. This shot is typically referred to as FVRCP.

Another disease that we have heard a lot about in recent weeks, is rabies. Any mammal can carry the virus, and for that reason, it's the other of the core vaccines that MacArthur insists that are "must-haves" for in this case, felines. Rabies is recognizable to those with and without pets, and for good reason.

"Rabies is 100 percent fatal if untreated, plain and simple," states MacArthur flatly.

It's a serious matter, and in fact, Ann Arbor has an ordinance that mandates that all felines over the age of 6 months must have it, and it must be administered by a liscensed veterinarian. Violating the city ordinance can result in a ticket.

Some cat owners think that because their cats are strictly indoor animals and don't venture outside, they don't need to be vaccinated at all. However, they're wrong, as MacArthur points out.

As a human, you're inadvertently bringing stuff into your home on your shoes, your hands, your clothes, etc. Additionally, if you have other pets and they venture outdoors — or if you have other pets who visit your home — they bring those viruses and the like (think parasites) in with them and expose your unprotected cats to something that could make them seriously ill or kill them.

Lapses in vaccinations are a problem, too. Rabies vaccinations, as an example, start with one shot that is good for a year. Thereafter, a shot is given every three years. If a pet owner allows the time in between scheduled shots to lapse, the schedule starts all over — back to a one year vaccine, and protection in that interim period is sketchy.

One situation that an owner of an unvaccinated cat doesn't want to face having the animal bite someone. Because the presence of rabies isn't always clear when the bite occurs — mammals with the virus don't always present with symptoms right away — there is a mandatory quarantine period of 10 days, and the victim is given a series of post-exposure vaccinations. Bite victims in this scenario are usually not willing to forgo prophylactic treatment until after the quarantine period.

The quarantine period for vaccinated cats who have bitten is 10 days as well.

The symptoms that are associated with rabies can include unusual behavior/shyness or aggression, inability to swallow, fever, pica, paralysis, excessive salivation and more. Because the virus attacks the central nervous system, a infected feline can have problems with coordination and balance, too.

If your cat is hasn't been vaccinated or isn't up-to-date and the cat bites someone and is presenting with symptoms that are consistent with rabies, the news isn't good.

"The cat has to be euthanized immediately, because the only way that we can be sure that an animal has rabies," MacArthur says grimly, "is to perform a necropsy so that brain tissue can be analyzed."

The same goes for cats who present with like symptoms from a previously diagnosed neurological illness such as intervertebral disk disease. Clinicians just can't take any chances.

For some cat owners, the felineleukemia (FeLV) vaccine is something to think about as well. It's a virus that, once again, suppresses the immune system and one that can be prevented with a vaccine.

A higher percentage of intact, male cats who spend time outdoors are at risk of developing it if not protected against it. The reason? Felines in this demographic get in more fights, get bite wounds — even minimally — and the virus enters the body that way.

Controversy in the public realm continues to whirl around whether vaccines are safe.

As MacArthur emphasizes, they are, and any risk is very low when one considers the benefits gained. And considering the cost breakdown — which is minimal — it's a no-brainer.

He acknowledges that a tiny pertcentage of pets have a reaction to a vaccine, and in those animals who are known to experience those problems, a protocol to pre-medicate them with steroids and antihistamines is followed, yielding great results.

Other cat owners are concerned about vaccine induced sarcomas — a type of tumor — but as MacArthur makes clear, the incidence of this is rare. Additionally, there are new protocols in place to make removal of the tumors easier if they do appear.

Despite any controversy that is out there and the claim by some that cats are over-vaccinated, in our culture, core vaccines are a great tool on the front lines of maintaining public health for that of pets and humans alike.

Lorrie Shaw is lead pets blogger for AnnArbor.com and writes about pet health, behavior, pet culture and more. Catch her daily adventures as a professional dog walker and pet sitter, or email her directly.

Comments

Eliz Hart

Thu, Sep 8, 2011 : 12:56 p.m.

Lorrie, further to my previous comments, for your information, my tertiary background is in politics and philosophy. I am particularly interested in the ethical aspects of veterinarians demanding pet owners have non-evidenced based interventions for their pets, e.g. repeated annual or triennial revaccination of adult dogs with modified live virus (MLV) vaccines. In the past three years since my dog's death I have undertaken a great deal of research and correspondence on unnecessary vaccination of pets with veterinary associations, government regulators, academics etc in Australia, the UK and the US – refer to the links I have previously supplied above. My submission on the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' draft Code of Professional Conduct includes a list of hyperlinks to most of my open letters and articles on this subject: <a href="http://bit.ly/oUXcxJ" rel='nofollow'>http://bit.ly/oUXcxJ</a> The documents I have prepared cite the scientific literature (such as it is) and most are fully referenced. Please feel free to critique the material I have produced, quoting any sections with which you disagree and provide evidence to support your position. I'd also be interested if you could provide details of 'peer-reviewed' papers which provide evidence to support repeated revaccination of animals which have already responded to MLV vaccination. Elizabeth Hart

Eliz Hart

Thu, Sep 8, 2011 : 12:23 p.m.

Thank you for your response Lorrie. My eight year old dog Sasha became very ill with what was diagnosed as haemorrhagic gastroenteritis about a week after her last unnecessary revaccination with core and non-core vaccines. The vet concerned was unable to explain her illness. It is my very strong suspicion that my dog's last unnecessary revaccination was implicated in her illness, i.e. it caused an adverse reaction. Sasha was subsequently put down. After my dog's death I discovered that the veterinary industry is very reluctant to acknowledge the possibility of adverse reactions after vaccination. The World Small Animal Veterinary Association's Guidelines for the Vaccination of Dogs and Cats (2010) note that: "Adverse events are defined as any side effects or unintended consequences (including lack of protection) associated with the administration of a vaccine product. They include any injury, toxicity, or hypersensitivity reaction associated with vaccination, whether or not the event can be directly attributed to the vaccine. Adverse events should be reported, whether their association with vaccination is recognized or only suspected. A vaccine adverse event report should identify the product(s) and animal(s) involved in the event(s) and the individual submitting the report." The WSAVA 2010 guidelines also recognise that "there is gross under-reporting of vaccine-associated adverse events which impedes knowledge of the ongoing safety of these products". Ref: World Small Animal Veterinary Association's Guidelines for the Vaccination of Dogs and Cats (2010): <a href="http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.wsava.org/PDF/Misc/VaccinationGuidelines2010.pdf</a>

Elizabeth Hart

Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 8:24 a.m.

I have been researching and campaigning on the international problem of over-vaccination of dogs since the death of my own eight year old Maltese x Silky terrier, Sasha, after her last unnecessary vaccination in September 2008. I have been appalled to discover that many veterinarians around the world over-vaccinate and over-service dogs and cats, this is a deplorable abuse of pet owners' trust. A fundamental part of this problem is non-evidenced based manufacturers' revaccination recommendations on core vaccine product labels. Where is the evidence to support repeated annual or triennial revaccination of pets that have already responded to core vaccination? There isn't any... For information, here are links to some of my open letters and a recent article on this topic: - Submission on the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' draft Code of Professional Conduct, in relation to pet vaccination: <a href="http://bit.ly/oUXcxJ" rel='nofollow'>http://bit.ly/oUXcxJ</a> - Open letter of formal complaint re the continuing calls for already immune animals to be needlessly, and possibly harmfully, revaccinated addressed to the Australian Veterinary Association, Australasian Veterinary Boards Council, and the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority: <a href="http://bit.ly/gBuQZY" rel='nofollow'>http://bit.ly/gBuQZY</a> - My latest article on pet vaccination titled "Vaccination failure!" which discusses the potential for maternally derived antibodies (MDA) to interfere with a puppy's response to core vaccination: <a href="http://bit.ly/lB9YDH" rel='nofollow'>http://bit.ly/lB9YDH</a> Elizabeth Hart

Lorrie Shaw

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 11:18 p.m.

Elizabeth, I'm terribly sorry to hear about your Sasha. How did you know that the vaccination(s) contributed to her death? I'm interested in hearing more about what your credentials are in the field. Do you have any peer reviewed or refereed articles or papers? I'd be interested in reading them. Thanks much for your two cents on this issue.

louiesmom

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 12:06 a.m.

It's good to know that there are people worldwide working to spread the word about this problem. Thanks, Elizabeth.

JMA2Y

Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 4:27 a.m.

My vet recommends only the distemper (panleukemia) and rabies shots for our indoor cats. I'm surprised MacArthur didn't state the necessity for the distemper even for indoor cats due to distemper being an airborne disease. Indoor cats that never go outside can still get distemper. Per the American Association of Feline Practitioners, new protocols for giving and frequency of vaccines were introduced years ago which says that the Feline Leukemia shots should be given to kittens and high risk cats. My vet said she gives them to kittens (which is when mine had them) and to outdoor cats (they are considered high risk as they come into contact with other cats.) The rabies virus is given as one year then three year as my cats received them. The Feline Rhinotracheitis/Panleukopenia/Calicivirus vaccines should be given every 3 years. The protocol also describes the place on a cat where a shot is given. Some shots go in one hip, some in another, some in the front limbs. That way if a sarcoma occurs they will know which shot created the sarcoma. But the removal of a tumor isn't as simple as MacArthur says. The entire leg/hip at the point of the tumor must be removed. I don't know if our vet ever discussed the rhinotracheitis and calicivirus shots but I will check.

Lorrie Shaw

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 11:11 p.m.

JMA2Y: Yes, panleukopenia is commonly referred to as &quot;distemper&quot;, yes. As I indicated in the text, Dr. MacArthur made it clear that the disease is highly contagious and transmissible, and the necessity for all cats, even indoor cats: &quot;Things like panleukopenia - a highly contagious virus and closely related to the canine parvo virus. This opportunistic, stable virus is tough and ubiquitous. Since it can survive on surfaces indoors at room temperature for over a year and also freezing temperatures, if a feline that has an active infection sheds the virus (which does so by way of all body fluids and secretions), rest assured that other cats that come into contact with it will also be infected. Due to a feline's nature of rubbing up on everything and being fastidious about grooming, it's easy for them to pick up.&quot; As for Dr. MacArthur addressing vaccine-induced sarcomas, I assure you that he in no way was flippant about the issue. All vets are aware of the risk, and as you state, there is a reason why specific vaccines are administered in the rear leg/hip area. Dr. MacArthur did not imply that it was simple to surgically address that area should the rare occurance avail itself. It certainly is easier for a pet to live a full, able-bodied life if a rear leg needs to be removed, rather than a front leg. I appreciate you taking the time to weigh in on this topic.

louiesmom

Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 10:38 p.m.

This is a pretty misleading article. While I agree that pets need to be vaccinated, it's fairly clear (and becoming more and more clear through solid research) that vaccinating too much is a serious concern in the area of pet health. As the owner of a dog who has several vaccine-induced autoimmune disorders, I've made a pretty serious effort over the past four years to become more educated about the problems and risks involved in overvaccination. It's true that no pet should go unvaccinated, but many of us risk killing our pets with kindness because we simply take recommendation such as these, given by so-called experts who make a lot of money selling us vaccine, at face value. The readers of this article who have serious concerns would do well to seek out the writings of some of the real experts in these issues, like Dr. Ronald Schutz and Dr. Jean Dodds-- Google them) before giving additonal vaccinations that your pet may not need. Drs. Schultz and Dodds are currently conducting a scientific study to determine the duration of immunity for rabies vaccines-- because they have seen too much vaccinosis, they would like to prove what they already know through titering; that the time between rabies vaccinations can be lengthened considerably from the current 1 to five year protocols currently used by many vets. There is a lof of credible information out there on this issue; please visit <a href="http://www.rabieschallengefund.org" rel='nofollow'>http://www.rabieschallengefund.org</a> and <a href="http://www.dogs4dogs.com" rel='nofollow'>http://www.dogs4dogs.com</a> if you want something better than this fresh out of vet school textbook advice. And if you want to know what my own dog has dealt with as a result of overvaccination, you can visit him at <a href="http://savelouie.blogspot.com" rel='nofollow'>http://savelouie.blogspot.com</a> or come to our facebook page at <a href="http://www.facebook.com/louiethelovemuffin" rel='nofollow'>http://www.facebook.com/louiethelovemuffin</a> as our mission is to bring people the facts about this issue and other issues that affect pet health.

Lorrie Shaw

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 11:46 p.m.

louiesmom, Please review the text again: I am not a doctor, and do not make that claim. My interview was, however with a veterinary doctor and his professional experience over 17 years was conveyed. I indicated that rabies is transmissible mostly by bites (in rare cases with an infected mammal's infectious material), not casual contact - or at least I was clear. As far as lapsing rabies vaccinations, the legal implications associated with doing so especially if a pet has contact with other mammals that are not vaccinated, and they bite someone are quite serious, and heartbreaking. That is certainly something for everyone to think about if considering to forgo the shot. After all, as Dr. MacArthur states, it's a matter of public health - both human and animal. I can certainly understand your position and bias and am sorry to hear about your pet's health issues . Thanks for the dialogue!

louiesmom

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 11:32 p.m.

And, yes, my focus is primarily on dogs because I almost lost my dog to overvaccination, however the experts who are researching vaccinosis in animals are doing a variety of work and looking at vaccine reactions is a variety of species, including cats. The major difference I am aware of between cats and dogs is that cats tend to develop injection site sarcomas, whereas dogs tend to develop more systemic immune-mediated disease. Neither of these is a desired outcome, and both outcomes are preventable if we simply stop pushing so much vaccine.

louiesmom

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 11:12 p.m.

Dr. Shaw, thank you for responding. What I find misleading in the article in particular is this: &quot;As a human, you're inadvertently bringing stuff into your home on your shoes, your hands, your clothes, etc. Additionally, if you have other pets and they venture outdoors - or if you have other pets who visit your home - they bring those viruses and the like (think parasites, too) in with them and expose your unprotected cats to something that could make them seriously ill, or kill them. Lapses in vaccinations are a problem, too. Rabies vaccinations, as an example, start with one shot that is good for a year. Thereafter, a shot is given every three years. If a pet owner allows the time in between scheduled shots to lapse, the schedule starts all over - back to a one year vaccine and protection in that interim period is sketchy.&quot; First off, rabies is not transmitted in this way. Rabies transmission requires close contact with the saliva of an infected host, usually through a bite, though rarely through contact with saliva in the air during a confrontation with an infected animal. It does not come into the home on shoes, etc. Since the rabies vaccine is the one most often associated with feline sarcoma, it's a little bit disingenuous (in my opinion) to lump all vaccines together like this. And the incidence of rabies infection in domestic animals is extremely low, so it's very unlikely one of my other dogs is going to bring the rabies virus indoors in that way. Lapses in vaccination are a problem from a legal perspective, but evidence is mounting that suggests that, from an immunological perspective, the duration of immunity lasts far longer than the legally required period, whether that be one year or three. In my opinion, the risks of danger by overvaccination are far greater than the risks of infection if vaccinations lapse. I am the first to admit that I am biased in this and I appreciate your taking the time to respond.

Lorrie Shaw

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 6:24 p.m.

To conclude, the topic of over-immunization is certainly in need of attention, but that isn't what I am, addressing here. Under-immunization is. Thanks for your input!

Lorrie Shaw

Mon, Sep 5, 2011 : 6:24 p.m.

louiesmom: I'm a little confused by your assertion that the post is misleading. No where in the text does it say how often that vaccines need to be given (as that is always really at the discretion of each veterinary clinician, depending on lifestyle sometimes, as well as age and overall health). The only recommendation that was made was to as that felines are vaccinated to begin with. The only specifications that were made, were with regard to the rabies vaccine &amp; in that, the recommendations are for the state of Mich. As you well know, the laws in Calif, where you are from, are very different. In fact, for each municipality, they may be different - just as they are for the area that we are based in, Ann Arbor, specifically apart from the state of Michigan as a whole with regard to felines. A link to the updated AVMA State Laws on Rabies Administration from Jan. 11 are linked here: <a href="http://www.avma.org/advocacy/state/issues/rabies_vaccination.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.avma.org/advocacy/state/issues/rabies_vaccination.pdf</a> The interesting thing is that when you are talking about veterinary health issues, geographic location, age, overall health, lifestyle all come into play. Clinicians may certainly have conservative approaches to vaccinating pets, as JMA2Y indicates. That is why it's important to read pieces like the one that I have written here, to understand the seriousness of the diseases that can be addressed by vaccinations &amp; dialogue with your veterinarian to assess the risk of each individual pet - &amp; having multiple pets can certainly change the landscape of each pets risk. Although we have a vast readership, we are also a local entity - in Ann Arbor - &amp; in the text, I refer to what the rules are in Ann Arbor so that our local readers are aware of it. Further, I am not sure if you noticed, but the blog post was only referring to felines, not dogs. Your focus &amp; agenda of your blog &amp; Facebook page seem to concentrate on canines.

louiesmom

Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 5:18 a.m.

This is to JMA2Y: Yes, it's about cats, but cats are at risk for their own forms of vaccinosis. There are real experts out there looking at vaccinosis and sarcomas in cats, as well.

JMA2Y

Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 4:30 a.m.

The article is regarding cats only. Cats have different vaccine schedules than dogs. For example, cats receive first a one year rabies then a three year rabies.

louiesmom

Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 10:40 p.m.

Sorry, I meant 1 to three year protocols in that next to last paragraph. The rabies challenge study is currently in its fifth year, with no indication so far that immunity does not continue for at least that long.

Jake C

Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 4:37 p.m.

Just because &quot;two sides&quot; exist to a &quot;debate&quot; doesn't mean a writer (especially a pet blogger) needs to give equal weight to the contrary side.

johnnya2

Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 5:31 p.m.

She is not acting as a blogger (giving her opinion) she is acting as a reporter. There is a growing concern among many that annual vaccines are unnecessary and really a money making machine for vets and the companies that produce the vaccines. In fact the AMVA has this to say about it: Q: How often should pets be revaccinated? A: Veterinarians have traditionally vaccinated annually; however, they are now learning that some vaccines induce immunity that lasts less than one year, whereas others may induce immunity that lasts well beyond one year. The AVMA recommends that veterinarians customize vaccination programs to the needs of their patients. More than one vaccination program may be effective. There was no mention of this in the report. It seems Dr MacArthur has a one size fits all solution that even the AMVA does not support.

johnnya2

Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 4:19 p.m.

I think if you are going to have someone write about pets, there should be at least the appearance of looking at the other side of the debate. <a href="http://www.holisticat.com/vaccinations.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.holisticat.com/vaccinations.html</a> <a href="http://www.homeovet.net/content/lifestyle/section2.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.homeovet.net/content/lifestyle/section2.html</a> Not all vets believe the same thing as Dr. MacArthur

Lorrie Shaw

Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 4:56 p.m.

johnnya2: Pets that are not vaccinated are at risk for developing these diseases. It doesn't matter whether or not they are indoor or outdoor cats. There are certainly other vaccinations that one can get or choose to forgo, depending on their cat's level of exposure. Some of these pathogens are not very stable and need to jump from animal to animal quickly to proliferate. They need close contact, like bites, sexual contact, etc. If your cat isn't engaged in the sort of activity that the pathogen requires to live, it makes sense to not get those shots. That is why they are not included in the &quot;core&quot; vaccine recommendation list. Dr. MacArthur isn't the only one who recommends these - in fact, the AVMA makes their stance clear about core vaccines, here: <a href="http://www.avma.org/issues/vaccination/default.asp" rel='nofollow'>http://www.avma.org/issues/vaccination/default.asp</a> Education is key, and as I made clear in my blog post, understanding the ramifications of the diseases that could easily be avoided is key in making a decision for one's cat. Thanks for your two cents!