http://www.asr-svcs.dircon.co.uk/wwwchc/vac_rslt.htm
The following text forms chapter 11 of Catherine O'Driscoll's book 'Who
Killed the Darling Buds of May?":-
Canine Health Concern Vaccine Survey
Interim Results
February 1997
The upshot of the debate between Steve Dean and Catherine O'Driscoll and
others in Dog World (U.K.) was that the CHC decided to put its money where its
representatives mouths were. I (Catherine O'Driscoll) had been researching and
writing my book, 'Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? I:Vaccination' for some
two years at this stage, and felt sure that we could unearth some significant
information by implementing a vaccine-specific survey.
We knew for a fact that adverse side effects were possible from vaccination
- even the vaccine manufacturers admit this. But what we didn't know was how
common these side effects might be. We had many testimonies from owners whose
dogs had become ill or died immediately after vaccination, but few of these
reactions had been reported to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate. Further,
few vets or vaccine manufacturers will accept that a chronic illness has been
caused by a vaccine unless the illness developed immediately/within hours or
days after vaccination.
The homoeopathic vet Christopher Day, on the other hand, suspected that
around 80% of the diseases he treats in his surgery are vaccine related, and
occur within three months of vaccination where the start date of the illness is
known. Chris is a referral vet, which means that he tends to see mostly the
cases where every other avenue has been tried and failed, so the 80% figure
was, by his own admission, likely to be exaggerated.
It was, then, with only very slight unease that I agreed to my husband
John's suggestion that we put Christopher Day's hypothesis to scientific test.
If we were wrong, not only would two years' work go down the tubes (my book),
but I would also receive a blow to my belief system. That said, it was
important that the findings be truthful and accurate. In this respect, our
results are open to independent audit.
The CHC vaccine survey was launched during October 1996. A questionnaire was
devised with the help of Christopher Day, Jean Dodds DVM, and Dr Viera
Scheibner. Some 30,000 readers of Dog World magazine were invited to
participate: the questionnaire was printed within the publication. In addition,
all members of the Canine Health Census were mailed with a questionnaire, and
some members of the Census (very kindly) circulated the questionnaire to
friends and neighbours.
At time of publication, 607 detailed questionnaires have been received.
These cover 370 dog owners and a total of approximately 2,700 dogs. Based on
this data, our provisional results do raise the alarm concerning vaccines and
confirm many of the fears previously outlined in my book.
Indeed, we have been able to scientifically 'prove' a definite link between
vaccination and the onset of a number of specific illnesses.
Conclusions
The following published provisional conclusions have all satisfied
mathematical or inferential statistical tests at a level of confidence of 99%
or better. That is, we have rejected, unless otherwise stated, any result with
a z alpha of less than 2.56. In mathematical terms, an alpha score of 4 would mean
that the chance of a false conclusion is less than one in 33,000. In many
cases, the data we have is greatly in excess of 4, making the following
conclusions a certainty for all practical purposes.
For the purposes of this survey, we asked all participants to list their
dogs' illnesses, and tell us how soon they started after the date of
vaccination. Our aim was to test whether there was a timeframe bias between
vaccination and the start of illness. This in itself would enable us to see
whether illnesses which developed within three months after vaccination might
be vaccine-linked.
The hypothesis is that, if vaccination has no adverse effect or even bearing
on subsequent illness, then illnesses will occur in equal numbers at any time
during the twelve months after vaccination. In fact, the results so far
gathered show a distinct skewness or bias towards illness occurring within the
first three months after vaccination.
No data was recorded in respect of lupus, lyme disease or rabies. Some
diseases showed a distinct bias towards occurring at nine months or more after
vaccination had taken place. These are arthritis, heart conditions, and CDRM.
We ask why these illnesses should all be clustered together at around the nine
month period? It may, in fact, suggest that it takes longer for these illnesses
to manifest overt symptoms, and consequently for diagnosis to take place. If
vaccination had no bearing, then there should by rights be an even spread of
occurrence throughout the twelve month period.
In fact, in a paper published in the Journal of Veterinary Internal
Medicine, Vol 10, No 5, September/October 1966, entitled 'Vaccine-Associated
Immune-mediated Haemolytic Anaemia in the Dog', the authors state:
"Because vaccine components can remain in the body for extended periods of
time, chemical reactions caused by these vaccine components may continue to
occur later than with other drugs that are excreted or metabolised more
quickly." This statement in its own right would appear to support the
belief that vaccines can cause reactions some time after the jab.
The interim survey results indicate that the following diseases are not
connected with vaccination: asthma, leukaemia, meningitis, pancreas problems
and thyroid disease, although research does exist in the human field to link
these illnesses with vaccination. However, thyroid disease is very commonly
undetected in the dog and therefore undiagnosed, and diseases like leukaemia
may have varying incubation periods depending upon the inherent health of the dog.
Additional data (more completed questionnaires) may clarify this provisional
conclusion.
Overall, 55% of all illnesses reported by participants occurred within
the first three months of vaccination. If the vaccine had no bearing on the
illness, you would expect to see no more than 25% occurring within that three
month timeframe.
Arthritis
2.7% of all dogs surveyed had arthritis. Of these, 71.8% were diagnosed nine
months plus after vaccination. Arthritis in humans has been positively linked
to vaccines. The fact that the onset of arthritis clusters at the nine month
period indicates that vaccine-induced arthritis has a longer incubation period,
or takes longer for overt physical symptoms to manifest.
Diarrhoea
Where dogs had diarrhoea, 68% of cases occurred within the first three
months after vaccination. 4.9% of dogs surveyed had diarrhoea at some stage.
This could be a mild anaphylactic reaction. Anaphylactic reactions can be an
indication that encephalitis might follow. My book explains how encephalitis
(inflammation of the brain) has been shown to follow vaccination, even where no
overt reaction has occurred.
Allergies
Where dogs had allergies, 55.6% occurred within the first three months after
vaccination. 3.8% of dogs surveyed had allergies. This indicates that vaccines
do, indeed, 'sensitise' an organism.
Colitis
Where dogs had colitis, 56.9% occurred within the first three months after
vaccination. 2.7% of dogs surveyed had colitis. This finding may help current
research seeking to establish the vaccine/colitis/irritable bowel link in
humans.
Dry eye/conjunctivits
Where dogs had dry eye or conjunctivitis, 56.9% occurred within the first
three months after vaccination. 2.5% of dogs surveyed had this complaint.
According to the homoeopathic vet Richard Pitcairn, the vaccine has induced
chronic (long lasting) conjunctivitis, rather than distemper-induced
conjunctivitis.
Epilepsy
Where dogs had epilepsy, 65.5% occurred within the first three months after vaccination.
2.1% of the dogs surveyed had epilepsy. Epilepsy is essentially a neurological
condition; scientific evidence is quoted in my book to explain that vaccines
can cause brain palsy and lesions, leading to epilepsy (this is tied in with
encephalitis, admitted by vaccine manufacturers to be a possible effect of
vaccination).
Loss of appetite
Where owners reported a loss of appetite in their dogs, 79.8% were within 3
months after vaccination. 3.4% of dogs surveyed suffered a loss of appetite at
some stage.
Nasal discharges
Where dogs showed nasal discharges, 84.1% occurred within 3 months of
vaccination. 1.7% of dogs surveyed had nasal discharges.
Nervous/worrying disposition
Where dogs exhibited a nervous or worrying disposition, 54.8% began to do so
within three months after vaccination. 2.8% of dogs surveyed suffered from this
complaint.
Skin problems
Where dogs had skin problems, 46.2% started within three months after
vaccination. 5.4% of dogs surveyed had skin problems. This, again, supports the
contention that vaccines sensitise an organism.
Vomiting
Where owners reported vomiting in their dogs, 72.5% occurred within 3 months
of vaccination. 3% of dogs surveyed were reported to have vomited. This, of
course, can be described as an anaphylactic reaction which can develop into
encephalitis. Dr JA Morris, a leading US infectious disease expert declared:
"We only hear about the encephalitis and the deaths, but there is an
entire spectrum between fever and death, and it's all those things in between
that never get reported".
Weight loss
Where owners reported weight loss in their dogs, 63.1% were within three
months after vaccination. 2.5% of dogs in the survey had lost weight.
Behavioural problems
Where owners reported behavioural problems, 55.4% occurred within three
months after vaccination. 2.5% of all dogs surveyed had behavioural problems.
This, then, supports Dr Harris L Coulter's hypothesis that much human violence,
sociopathy and criminality is vaccine linked, and has its basis in brain damage
caused by vaccines.
Tumour or growth at vaccination site
Where dogs had tumours or growths at vaccination site, 67.9% occurred within
three months of vaccination. 1.1% of all dogs surveyed suffered from this
occurrence. It is well recorded in the medical/veterinary literature that
cancers/tumours can (and do) grow at vaccine sites.
All of the above figures had z alpha scores of greater than 5, and showed a
distinct tendency to occur during the first three months after vaccination.
This means that there is a link between vaccines and the above illnesses which,
in turn, means that the vaccine/illness link is a certainty.
To increase statistical confidence, we need more completed questionnaires to
study the patterns of each of the following diseases, although the interim
figures do give rise for concern:
Cancer - 31% within 3 months Chorea - 63.2% within 3 months Encephalitis -
75% within 3 months Heart conditions - 26.8% within 3 months Kidney damage -
40.5% within three months Lameness - 52% within three months Liver damage - 47%
within three months Paralysis of abdomen - 64.7% within three months Short
attention span - 68.4% within three months Autoimmune diseases - 54.8% within
three months
Dogs contracting the diseases they were vaccinated against:
Hepatitis - 63.6% occurred within three months of vaccination Parainfluenza
- 50% occurred within three months of vaccination Parvovirus - 68.2% occurred
within three months of vaccination Distemper - 55.6% occurred within three
months of vaccination Leptospirosis - 100% of dogs contracted leptospirosis
within three months of vaccination
With the exception of distemper and leptospirosis, where not enough dogs
with the disease were recorded, all of the above satisfy a z alpha score of
more than three. This means that we are 99.53% certain that there is a strong
causal link between vaccination and the onset of the diseases.
In all cases, at least half of the dogs with each of the viral diseases
contracted them within three months of vaccination. This supports the view that
vaccines either don't protect, or can cause the disease itself.
Probability of vaccine reaction
Although we need more dog owners to participate in the survey, we are able
to make tentative prognoses regarding the likelihood of a vaccine reaction in
an individual dog.
Critics might say that the survey attracted dog owners whose dogs appeared
to have experienced a reaction, thereby creating a bias in the survey. This is
answered by the fact that a good number of people with perfectly healthy dogs
participated; many participants were approached at random (by knocking on
doors); and many participants had several dogs, only some of whom, and in some
cases none, were said to be ill.
At this date, we know that 55% of illnesses reported in the survey occurred
within the first three months after vaccination. We have compared this data
with the total number of dogs (2,628) in the survey.
One vaccine manufacturer claimed that 15 adverse reactions occurred in three
million administered doses (.000005 probability). If this is realistic, then
our personal experience of having six dogs (100%) experience a vaccine reaction
is mathematically impossible.
According to the Pet Food Manufacturers Association, the UK dog population
is approximately 7 million, a figure that we believe from other data to be on
the high side, but which we will use for the purposes of the argument.
We also extrapolated that the maximum number of dogs whose owners were aware
of the survey was about 270,000. Assuming that out of this population, only 607
dogs had any illnesses and the healthy dogs' owners therefore decided not to
participate (an extremely unrealistic hypothesis), then the probability of a
vaccine related illness or reaction drops to .0077778. Even at this highly
unlikely level, this means that the risk of adverse reaction to vaccination is
at least 1,556 times greater than admitted by one manufacturer.
In reality, we can be reasonably sure that the probability of a vaccine
related illness is vastly under reported/admitted by manufacturers and
authorities such as the Veterinary Medicines Directorate. It demonstrates
clearly the need for a proper system of verification and compliance regarding
the use of vaccines and other manufactured medicines.
Looking at the reactions/illnesses reported after vaccination in the survey,
we have a probability of .7990868. In view of some of the above statistics, it
is not unreasonable to conclude that the probability of a vaccine-related
disease occurring is in the order of 1% (i.e., one in a hundred).
Age and illness
It is commonly believed that, as a dog gets older, the incidence of illness
will increase. This has not been our personal experience, and the vaccine
survey does not support this view, either.
The data we have relates to dogs ranging from a few weeks old to over 19
years of age. The conclusion from this survey is that a dog can become ill at
any age - there was no statistical bias between the incidence of illness and
the ages of the dogs covered in the survey.
Neither was there a correlation between the number of illnesses per dog and
their respective ages. This suggests that vaccine reactions may not simply be a
hereditary/genetic problem, as is often suggested by vaccine manufacturers, but
more related to environmental factors. It might also support the statement by
Dr Ronald D Schultz, that these reactions are a result of "the
accumulation of many antigens over many years. I believe that adverse effects
are increasing because we are putting more and more components into these
animals."
Environment
The majority of respondents were UK residents (England, Scotland and Wales).
The remaining respondents were from the USA, Canada, New Zealand and the
Channel Islands.
Comparing the experience of illnesses in Scotland with those of dog owners
in England or Wales, it appears that Scottish owners are likely to have
healthier dogs. This statement is made at a confidence level of 98%. This
suggests once again that environmental factors may need to be considered when
evaluating the vaccine risk. More data from dog owners around the world will
help us to clarify this point.
Dogs who were never vaccinated
A small number of dogs in the survey had never been vaccinated. We need more
data about unvaccinated dogs, including dogs protected exclusively with
homoeopathic nosodes, before conclusions can be drawn.
Dog ownership
A person who has kept dogs for many years is just as likely to experience
illness in their dogs as a person who has had a dog for a short time,
indicating that experienced husbandry has little bearing on the rate of
illness.
Type of vaccine used
We analysed the number of illnesses reported against the type of vaccine
used. Statistically significant was the fact that the incidence of illness in
dogs treated with more than one vaccine at the same time (multiple live
modified and killed vaccines) are more likely to have problems than dogs which
have either been given a single killed vaccine or single live vaccine. The
cocktail effect appears to be significantly more hazardous than a single viral
or bacterial dose, with a confidence level of higher than 99%.
We also analysed whether it might be better to give annual boosters, or to
give a puppy its initial course of vaccines and none thereafter. At a 90% level
of confidence, it seems that annually boosted dogs are more likely to be ill
than those who are not boosted annually, although participants in the survey
did report illness and death in puppies following vaccination.
We believe that this interim report demonstrates the significant value of
dog owners comparing their experiences, and hope that it prompts other dog
owners to participate. Participation in the CHC vaccine survey is free and
should take only a little of your time.
Additional analysis needs to be performed, as we require considerably more
completed questionnaires if mathematically valid conclusions are to be made
across the board. A great deal more analysis could be done - and a great deal
more could be discovered - if we had more completed questionnaires to add to
the database. Dog lovers are therefore invited to take advantage of this
opportunity to gain valuable insight for the benefit of dogs and dog owners.
Vaccine questionnaires are available from the CHC at the address below - please
enclose a large (12" x 9") stamped, self-addressed envelope.
Veterinary surgeons interested in this work are also invited to participate
and are urged to study their own patient records to see whether a similar
pattern can be established.
Canine
Health Concern, c/o Longnor SPO, Longnor, Derbyshire SK17 OJD 
Index
Participate in the
Vaccine Survey
Further
information about this book and order details.
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.