Thursday, June 19, 2014

Vaccinating cats and dogs: should you ever use less than the full dose?


Should these two canines receive different doses of vaccine based on size?

Short answer: no.

No, not even for kittens/puppies.

I've done this too, don't feel bad. There's this widespread feeling, especially among dog breeders and animal rescue folks, that splitting vaccines between young/small animals is a good thing. It saves money and seems like it would be safer somehow. The thought process goes: if a one mL dose is good for an 80lb dog, than shouldn't half or less of that amount be fine for a 10 lb dog?

But vaccines aren't drugs. You don't measure dosing by weight.

And everyone who knows what they're talking about says don't do it.

All you need to know is in the following email response from an expert to one of our board members' request for clarification:


You are correct regarding the recommendation AGAINST splitting vaccines.  This is applicable for both dog and cat vaccines.  The idea behind the recommended vaccine dose is that it contains what has been determined to be the minimum amount of antigen needed to adequately stimulate the immune system- regardless of the pet's size.  If you do not administer the vaccine properly (route, dosage), then not only can this result in vaccine failure but it also negates the manufacturer's warranty regarding the efficacy of the vaccine.  
 Regarding references: it is difficult to locate primary references since these concepts were validated in studies done some time ago.  I did find two references that might help you though - one is a recent publication, "2013 update on current vaccination strategies in puppies and kittens" by GM Davis-Wurzler (Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2014 Mar;44(2):235-63.).  Here is the applicable quote from this publication: 
 
"The practitioner is advised to always follow the manufacturer’s directions for dose
and route of administration. Using a topical product parenterally or splitting doses
should never be done. A full dose is required to stimulate the immune system; there
is no medical basis for giving a smaller dose to a toy breed dog, and this practice could
lead to vaccine failure in that animal. If done with a rabies vaccine the practitioner is
not following federal requirements, which carries potential legal implications."

Also, WSAVA (the World Small Animal Veterinary Association) publishes vaccination guidelines for cats and dogs and under its FAQ section it states, 

"26. May I use smaller vaccine doses in small breeds to reduce the risk of adverse reactions?
No. The volume (e.g. 1.0 ml) as recommended by the manufacturer generally represents the minimum immunizing dose, therefore the total amount must be given."


I hope this helps, 
Chumkee 


Chumkee Aziz, DVM 
Resident, Koret Shelter Medicine Program
UC Davis Center for Companion Animal Health
www.facebook.com/sheltermedicine

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

A Law Restricting Pit Bulls Saves the Day!

...or not.

Same owners, different dogs, repeat bite attacks in Kennewick

Thank goodness Kennewick has restrictions on pit bulls! Oh wait, that does nothing to help since no pit bulls were involved. That's right, an entire neighborhood is in fear from these people's dogs, multiple bites have occurred off the property, children are being chased, even the school bus driver altered their route because of these people... and there's nothing that can be done about it because " "There are no laws on the books that say otherwise. Only a judge can decide whether or not a person is fit to own a pet, even after multiple occurrences just like this situation. Still, there's got to be a lot of evidence to even prove a case before it gets that far."

There's a detailed law about restricting pit bulls, but none about this? Way to prioritize, Kennewick!

This owner, who's dog once barked at someone, faces more repercussions than these scumbags. How is that logical or justified?




Sunday, May 11, 2014

I Don't Like The AKC: Borzoi Edition

A brief and totally weird anecdotal thing:

I've handled a lot of dogs (including other sighthounds), and the handful of Borzoi I've laid hands on (all "purebred" AKC versions)  have all felt... funny to me.

They're large dogs that look like they're supposed to be smaller, somehow. They're spindly and narrow, with wispy hair with that weird (and totally unnecessary) humped back and under my hands they feel... too light. Like they  have bones made of balsa wood, or they're actually hollow on the inside. That ridiculously extreme roman nose seems like it's full of air. Certainly, they feel delicate: fine china that would fall apart with too much pressure. Now that I'm writing this out, it occurs to me that all borzoi I've met, no matter the age, feel the way an old or sick dog does under your hands.



My friend and fellow vet tech Joellyn once told me she "prefers a dog she can thump on" (and then gave an affectionate thump on the ribs of her border collie for emphasis). I feel the same way; I don't like tiny shivery dogs.

I don't feel like AKC borzoi are dogs that can be thumped on.

Kind of sad for a breed whose other name is Russian Wolfhound and that supposedly descends from great and tough hunters of the Russian plains.

I wouldn't have thought of this at all, except I saw this recent post about some "real" borzoi (as in: non-AKC dogs in their country of origin, doing the job they were bred for, instead of being overbred to look a certain way for a show ring):



Now there's a dog you can thump on.

Monday, April 28, 2014

What Were They Thinking - Cat Rehoming Edition

Last week, a cat carrier appeared outside the door of Sundance Natural Foods in Eugene, Oregon. Inside was a scared cat, and on top was a fun little note:


The note reads: "Hello! My name is Gizmo but my last owners called me Gizzy. You can even give me a new name if you want. I'm looking for a new home and I'm pretty nervous and a little scared right now but I'll settle down as I get use to my new home. Let's see... a little about me. I usually hang out inside or outside. I don't need a litter box - I'll let you know when I need out to 'do my thing' by hanging out at the door. I like to eat inside and I like to come inside to sleep at night. I'm a lap cat and like the 'scratch behind the ears' thing. When you're ready to get up, just stand up, I kinda get a little irritated when people pick me up off their lap. It's my one and only fault if you want to call it that (smiley face). I get along with every body except little people and dogs that chase me and make lots of noise. What's their deal anyway?! Thanks for thinking about making me part of your family! Meow! (Smiley face)" Written in the margin: "Oh, by the way, I haven't had water for a while and I'm pretty thirsty")

So, yeah, that happened. And while, of course, your first reaction should be a mighty *facepalm*, (perhaps followed by a couple *headdesk*s), I personally can't help but really consider the decision process for these people.


I think I know these people. Oh, not specifically, but you've met them, too. They're the ones who show up at parties without a hostess gift, eat all the tasty finger food, then leave without helping to clean up. They never use their turn signal when driving. They ride their bike on the sidewalk, oblivious to pedestrians jumping out of the way. When they HAD a cat, he crapped and pissed in the neighbor's garden so often the rose bushes died, and they laughed about what a silly kitty he was. Immature? Yes. Clueless? Yes. Inconsiderate? Yes. Over all terrible people? I dunno. I doubt it.

That cheery little note, (moreso than if there HADN'T been a note), makes me want to hunt these people down, yank the organic sugar free chai latte from their hand, and dump it over their heads.

And yet...

They also tried their best, in their own immature little way. The usual method for dumping a cat is to toss it out in a residential neighborhood or country road at night and drive off. They made sure he was safe in a carrier with a (weirdly) thoughtful note. Did they already try alternative ways of rehoming this cat?

Googling the phrase "how to rehome a cat you can't keep eugene or" number 4 hit result is from a no-kill private cat rescue.... so great, this is the first place I'd look if I needed to rehome a cat.... but look what they say:

"There are very many excuses given for relinquishing your cat; however, there are few valid reasons... if, after examining your conscience and your heart, you still wish to relinquish your cat, please be willing to take the time and make the effort necessary to find him/her a good loving forever home. . .this is the least you can do. . .and you owe it to your cat. . . and, please, please, never adopt (or buy) another animal. .. Some humans should never have pets."

Wow. Judgey much? I understand. Beleive me, I do. but what is the goal with a heavy-handed rant like this,? If it's to vent and feel morally superior for a few minutes, well, mission accomplished I'm sure. But if you're goal is really to help pets, then venting your spleen on a page that's supposed to be a resource for pet owners in need is doing nothing to convince anyone of anything, and actually hurting your goals long term.

 This is not an uncommon attitude in animal rescue organizations.

If I'm an average pet owner who needs to rehome my pet, and I know I'm going to be judged harshly no matter what I do, by the very organizations who claim to be there to help, maybe I would prefer to  take the easier, anonymous route.

Gizmo's owners wanted to do the right thing. They were actually pretty close, and I can't help but wonder if, with a little more compassion for HUMANS from the animal rescue system (which includes myself, by the way), they might have actually made a better decision.

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Responsible Dog Breeding

What is 'responsible breeding'? If you want to buy a puppy, how do you choose a breeder who is 'ethical'? It may not be what you've been lead to think.

 Most people think that a responsible, ethical breeder only breeds purebred dogs that can be registered with the American Kennel Club (AKC) (in the US), or one of the other large breed clubs. Having "papers" is supposed to increase a dog's value, and ensure they're a healthy, typical specimen of the breed. It doesn't. This popular style of breeding is hurting dogs, and it's up to puppy buyers to stop it.

Although distinct dog breeds have been around for thousands, the current extremes in dog breeding became popular only about 150 years ago. That's when three things started to go wrong:

1) Closed studbooks leading to loss of genetic diversity
2) Increased genetic disease due to inbreeding
3) Breeding for extreme physical traits that affect dogs' quality of life

Unfortunately, many dog breeders don't think this is a problem. Many people are caught up in this fad of breeding and can't see that they're hurting the dogs they love. Other breeders simply don't care as long as it gets them a ribbon in the show ring and/or money from puppy sales.

Whether they're good people or not, whether they love dogs or not, whether they commit these crimes out of ignorance or not, these types of breeding practices should not be supported.

Here are some rough guidelines to choosing an ethical dog breeder. They are different from what you've probably read from the ASPCA or other animal welfare groups, and very different from what the AKC would have you believe. But, choosing a puppy based on these guidelines is one small step to ensuring that we have a healthy population of dogs for years to come.


How to Spot an Ethical Dog Breeder:


1) Their animals are housed, fed, and exercised appropriately based on individual needs
2) They use inbreeding sparingly, if at all
3) They support outcrossing/backcrossing
4) They avoid increasing obvious heritable disease in the population
5) They don't breed for extreme physical traits
6) They genuinely like dogs, and do things with them besides breed them
7) They take genuine interest in their puppies, and will always take them back if needed


Explanation:

1) Their animals are housed, fed, and exercised appropriately based on individual needs
There's no checklist for this. For example, dogs and puppies with "ribs showing" is normal on say, a Boxer, Saluki or German shorthair pointer. Likewise, many people think dogs should never live outdoors, but there are lots of dogs who are happy, or are actually meant to live outside 24/7. Having a large number of dogs on the property also isn't necessarily a bad thing: many breeding programs focused on genetic diversity, for example, require having lots of dogs around. It's also good for young puppies to socialize with adult dogs who aren't their parents. And some breeders just really like having a lot of dogs, which isn't bad if they're all cared for appropriately. Cleanliness is often misleading: some of the worst puppymills in the world are as sterile as a hospital room, while some of the best breeders, if caught on a bad day, will have puppies temporarily covered in their own poop.

Red flags: the dogs show signs of kennel insanity, (repetitive behaviors like spinning, ceaseless barking or lunging, etc); the breeders won't let you see the dogs "behind the barn"; they have small breed dogs that are never allowed inside; extreme matting on long-haired dogs; any dog that is housed with little to no human contact (with the rare possible exception of working livestock guardian dogs); puppies are listless, dull eyes, dull coats, bellies look bloated with worms, etc. or adult dogs are unhealthily fat; etc.

Good signs: they are happy to show you any and all animals on their property (not just dogs) and don't get offended by questions; even dogs that are kenneled/crated seem content (though they may be excited to see you);

2) They use inbreeding sparingly, if at all
Breeding close relatives on purpose is a tool that has been used for thousands of years in dog breeding. However, it is being over-used to the extreme today. Even healthy-looking dogs without obvious genetic disease are affected by a thing called "inbreeding depression". It causes immune system problems, difficulty conceiving, and small litter sizes, and shorter life spans. Inbreeding also reduces genetic diversity. Inbreeding is easy to avoid in this day and age, with most pedigrees available online, and so many ways to network and find mates for dogs. And we have so much knowledge about genetics now it's really a crime to ignore or deny it.

Red flags: they make excuses for why they "have to" breed close relatives; they claim that certain bad things are "normal for the breed" like small litter size, short life span, certain deformities or disease, etc;

Good signs: they are happy to explain their dogs' pedigree and breeding choices; they are outspoken about going out of there way to to avoid inbreeding even when it's difficult; they support outcrossing (see below);


3) They support outcrossing/backcrossing
Outcrossing is another tool that has been used in dog breeding for thousands of years (see below for more info). Unfortunately, (and inexplicably) many breeders and breed clubs like the AKC, are rabidly against backcrossing. They have been duped into believing a closed studbook is not only a good thing, it's the only way to breed dogs. Even though studbooks have only been closed for about 150 years or less (depending on the breed). They think that bringing in new blood somehow diminishes the breed, when in fact, when done thoughtfully, it only makes dogs healthier, happier, and longer-lived (see below for examples of outcrossing).

Red flags: they become angry at the mere mention of outcrossing; they claim outcrossing actually increases disease; they deny it's needed; they think it's possible to "breed out" disease within a closed studbook (this is a very common myth which simply isn't true: see below for more information).

Good signs: they actively support outcrossing for any breed, especially within their own; if they're breeding crossbreeds like labrodoodles, for example, they do so just as thoughtfully as if they were "purebred" breeders (with a critical eye on each parent, basic health screening, etc).

4) They avoid increasing obvious heritable disease
Most genetic disease is "invisible" meaning you can't tell a dog is affected or an unaffected carrier just by looking at it. Some diseases are visible or can be tested for. Still others occur on a gradient, meaning some dogs are affected worse than others. Sadly, many breeders will still breed dogs even when they know have diseases they will pass on to their puppies. This is another negative effect of closed studbooks being considered "normal", and considering many inbred-caused diseases to be "normal for the breed" and "not a big deal".

Before looking for a puppy, find out what diseases the breed is prone, and what kind of tests are available/common for the breed. Ask questions of the breeder, like: are the parents affected? The grandparents or aunts and uncles? Try to choose breeders that are actively outcrossing to eliminate or or "dilute" the disease (for example, if you want a dalmatian, only choose a one that is a LUA dalmatian).

Red flags: They don't do any testing at all (though many things don't have a "test"); they make excuses for diseases "it's normal", "it's not that bad", or that it's impossible to avoid breeding a carrier .

Good signs: the breeder is open and honest about diseases in their breed and/or in their dogs; the breeder has changed their mind about breeding a litter based on known or possible heritable disease (and is happy to explain why); they are actively outcrossing/crossbreeding to improve genetic health.

5) They don't breed for extreme physical traits
This is sometimes the hardest to convince people about, but extreme traits make life miserable for many dogs, all in the name of "fashion".

We all think pugs are cute, for example. But unfortunately, the average pug suffers every day of its life because of its physical deformities (see below for more info).  Dogs are great at putting on a brave face even while suffering, so even though they seem happy, they would be so much happier if we stopped supporting breeders who make them so extreme, and instead choose puppies that are more moderate in appearance (they're still cute!).

Pictured: illustration c. 1900 of non-extreme pugs that still look like pugs


It's not just pugs of course. English bulldogs and pekes have noses too short to breath properly; a lot of German shepherds have crooked backs and legs; most basset hounds have too much skin and parts of them drag on the ground; most Neapolitan mastiffs have way too much skin and are prone to skin ear and eye infections/injury... the list goes on.

There's even a word for it: "Qualzucht" which means "torture breeding", and it's so widespread that there is legislation against it in some European countries.

None of them have to look this way, despite what many people think. And what's more, and up until about 150 years ago, they didn't. Over just a few generations breeders have gotten off track to the point that even the general public thinks certain breeds "always look like that". Dogs are suffering for it.

All the excuses for keeping extreme traits are wrong. They're wrong morally, ethically, historically, and biologically.

Finding ethical breeders is harder for some breeds than others. For example, currently people who breed English bulldogs are almost all unethically breeding dogs with extreme short muzzles, skin problems, inability to conceive or give birth naturally, and can't cool themselves properly. They may be nice people and even think they love their dogs, but it doesn't change that what they do is horrible. Ethical breeders are out there, you just have to look harder to find them.

Red flags: simply having lots of ribbons in the show ring is a red flag since right now judges for most breed clubs reward extreme traits; the look of their dogs should speak for themselves: if it can't run, can't breath, or some part of it drags on the ground, too many wrinkles, too short of a nose... odds are it's suffering needlessly; they make excuses for extreme traits: "it's not that bad", "if it doesn't look like that, it's not really a (insert breed name here)", "it's cuter that way", "it's meant to be that way"; another red flag is breeders who focus strongly on one or two physical things about their "special line" of dogs, color or ear shape, for example, it probably means they're losing sight of health and temperament.

Good signs: again, the shape of the dog (usually) speaks for itself. Currently a breeder who focuses on a healthy shape is sometimes considered an "outcast" in the mainstream breeding culture (depending on the breed: it's especially true of the breeds listed above). They often advertise the fact that they're breeding this way, often using words like "working strain", or "old fashioned" or "moderate" versions of the breed. Keep in mind there are many ethical breeders that don't go dog shows, and often their dogs aren't able to be registered with a breed club. Sometimes breeders who want to reform or stop the downslide of a breed end up changing the name, or give a new name to their particular strain. For example, compare the "Olde English Bulldogge" or a "Leavitt Bulldog" to the modern "English Bulldog".


6) They genuinely like dogs, and do things with them besides breed them
Working, hunting, herding, playing, hiking, sports, etc. This criteria eliminates puppymill breeders from the equation, and also some show ring breeders  Remember: just because it has a shiny coat and "papers", doesn't mean it's not being abused or neglected.

There's nothing wrong with a dog who's only job is to hang out with people, but we should expect a bit more from dog breeders than we do the average dog owner.

Red Flags: they only touch their dogs to breed them, or show them; especially if they breed dogs with a lot of drive and energy whose original purpose involved work in some way.

Good signs: they are happy to talk about all the activities their dogs do, even the ones they sold years ago; at least some of their dogs do breed-specific activities (border collies and agility or herding; retrievers and dock diving or hunting; pit bulls and weight pulling; lap dogs and service dog work; etc, the list goes on, but you should know it when you see it).

 7) They take genuine interest in their puppies, and will take them back if needed
No ethical breeder wants any of their dogs to end up in an animal shelter, and they will take steps to make sure that doesn't happen. They may not have a written contract, but it should be clear that if a puppy buyer has to rehome a dog at any time, even if the dog is 15 years old, the breeder wants it back.

Red flags: they sell puppies to whoever comes with cash in hand, without giving out any information, business cards, signing a contract, getting contact information, etc. They don't show interest in puppies they've made in the past, or in who wants to buy their puppies or where they're going.

Good signs: a written contract that states clearly that they will take the dog back, no matter how much time as passed; the breeder microchips the puppies and lists themselves as a permanent secondary contact on the chip registry; the breeder wants to stay in contact, and wants occasional updates on how their dogs are doing, if they're good workers, if they've developed disease, etc.


NOTE:
There are many good, dog-loving people (who would be considered "responsible" by many) who are actually unethical dog breeders under these guidelines. The main culture of dog breeders have deeply held beliefs that they cling to with almost religious-like fervor, even as they're hurting dogs in both the short and long term.  As the saying goes, good intentions pave the way to hell. In the end, it doesn't matter if a breeder is a good person, or if they THINK they're doing the right thing. If Mother Teresa was breeding inbred pugs with no noses, I would criticize her, too.



Further Reading


Pedigreed Dogs Exposed - the documentary


The Canine Diversity Project

The Institute of Canine Biology

Canine Inherited Disorders Database

Inbreeding

Why is science so important to dog breeding? 
Why closed stud books are bad and outcrossing is good
Why is inbreeding bad?
The Science of Inbreeding 
What is Popular Sire Syndrome?
What is Inbreeding Depression

How to breed dogs with stronger immune systems
Why is inbreeding wrong? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Why health testing in purebred dogs is limited and won't save us from too much inbreeding
Poodles are in trouble from inbreeding

What has closed stud book done to the Afghan Hound
Cavalier King Charles Spaniel and Episodic Falling Syndrome 


Outcrossing

How Backcrossing Works
Are Mixed Breeds Healthier?

Crossbreeds generally live longer
Outcross example in German Pinschers
Outcross example in Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retrievers
Outcross example in Dalmatians

Extreme Physical Traits

What is 'Torture Breeding'
Another example of torture breeding
True history of the pug

Pug snores aren't "cute", they're slow, life-long torture
How the West ruined the Shar-pei
Show vs. working strain Labradors
Deformed basset hounds winning awards in the show ring
Deformed mastiff won "Best of Breed" at a Club UK's Breed Open Show
Structural problems in Frenchies (and what breeders AREN'T doing about it)
English bulldogs are all handicapped
100 years of breed "improvement"

Cultural Problems

Ignoring history and biology, breeders freak out over minor things like coat color
Kennel clubs don't guarantee healthy animals nor stop puppy mills


Acknowledgements
I'd like to especially thank a few people who are far more knowledgeable on this subject than I am, have been writing about it longer than me, and are all-around inspiring and you should read their stuff:

Scott Westfall
Jess Ruffner
Christopher Landauer
Jemima Harrison
Heather Houlahan