Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I spoke to my vet at length about vaccines last week when Callie was brought back to have her spay incision checked for a slight swelling. It was nothing serious and her sutures will be removed tomorrow. He said the shots are no longer causing cancer in cats due to a change in the products (I forgot the exact word he uses) they contain. He also said they learned that only certain cats with a genetic predisposition were developing these cancers. Something like one cat going bonkers over cat nip and others having no reaction at all to nip. I allowed her to be vaccinated.
I can't seem to find any NEW information on cat vaccines.
Vaccines include something called an adjuvant, which helps stimulate immune response. It has been speculated that adjuvants are what cause the sarcoma. There are adjuvant free vaccines available, but without the adjuvant, the immunity gained is lessened, resulting in the need for more frequent vaccination. Some states don't accept the adjuvant free rabies vaccine for this reason, or because they consider it too new and are unsure of the immunity gained.
The above is why the non-adjuvant vaccine is not yet standard across all veterinary offices (even though it really should be!) And some vets are just slow to adopt and don't consider vaccine related sarcoma to have a high even risk to bother worrying about.
However, sarcomas have also been seen at the site of general injections that cause inflammation to the tissue, like steroid injections. We KNOW the adjuvant has a strong link to sarcoma, but any inflammation has the potential- I suspect though that the potential is much less if the adjuvant is not involved.
So while sarcoma has been seen with non-adjuvant vaccines, the risk is lower.
And he is correct about the genetic factor- some cats (like Jonas) has an immune system that generates more of a inflammatory response. This is why we removed his right eye. In cats, a badly damaged eye can develop post traumatic ocular sarcoma, which is similar to vaccine-related sarcoma in that it results from an out-of-control inflammatory response. Because he has a strong inflammatory response to vaccines, the risk of ocular sarcoma was higher in his case...while another cat might have a lower risk.
But while we know there is a genetic factor, I don't believe there's anyway for a regular vet to determine which cats have a higher genetic risk, which makes it rather academic. If we don't know, every cat should be treated as if their risk factor were the same.
Thank you JJCat. Your post was very informative. Apparently then, he's not using the adjuvanted vaccines. He said it was about 1 in 10,000 cats developing cancer from the vaccines.
It sometimes feels like there's a choice between taking a chance on disease sickening and maybe killing them or the vaccines to prevent that from happening giving them a fatal cancer.
If Jonas eye was badly damaged and there was a chance of cancer, he's better off without the eye - you did the right thing.
Thank you JJCat. Your post was very informative. Apparently then, he's not using the adjuvanted vaccines. He said it was about 1 in 10,000 cats developing cancer from the vaccines.
It sometimes feels like there's a choice between taking a chance on disease sickening and maybe killing them or the vaccines to prevent that from happening giving them a fatal cancer.
If Jonas eye was badly damaged and there was a chance of cancer, he's better off without the eye - you did the right thing.
1 in 10,000 is the usual quoted number, but it's kind of strange...I've heard so many vets quote this number, then say they themselves have seen it very rarely- only 3 or 4 times. Unless they saw 40,000 cats, I'm thinking the actual incidence might be a tad higher than thought. The problem is the reporting- if a vet doesn't bother to report every case, or misdiagnoses it for a different cancer...you can see how the percentages will be thrown off.
It is clear that the incidence HAS dropped since non-adjuvanted vaccines starting being made.
Thank you for saying that about Jonas- it was actually a really difficult decision because he still had some sight in that eye. Probably nothing more than light and dark, but I was still making the choice to blind my cat. To top it off, after the surgery he became very depressed and basically refused to move for three full weeks- I felt like the worst pet owner on the planet. It got to the point I couldn't look at him without bursting into tears. There was also someone at work who was making me feel completely awful by telling me everyday that I made the wrong choice and how could I be so cruel, etc. etc.
It turned out he had an infection developing in the eye socket (we did blood tests several times, but his white counts were normal.) They had to go back in and clean everything out...the night he came home after the second operation, he was back to my normal bratty kid. So it wasn't the blindness making him depressed, just a hidden infection.
1 in 10,000 is the usual quoted number, but it's kind of strange...I've heard so many vets quote this number, then say they themselves have seen it very rarely- only 3 or 4 times. Unless they saw 40,000 cats, I'm thinking the actual incidence might be a tad higher than thought. The problem is the reporting- if a vet doesn't bother to report every case, or misdiagnoses it for a different cancer...you can see how the percentages will be thrown off.
I can see that. Most likely no one knows the exact numbers. My vet said he's in practice for 10 years and never seen one case of vaccine caused cancer.
Quote:
It is clear that the incidence HAS dropped since non-adjuvanted vaccines starting being made.
Thank you for saying that about Jonas- it was actually a really difficult decision because he still had some sight in that eye. Probably nothing more than light and dark, but I was still making the choice to blind my cat. To top it off, after the surgery he became very depressed and basically refused to move for three full weeks- I felt like the worst pet owner on the planet. It got to the point I couldn't look at him without bursting into tears. There was also someone at work who was making me feel completely awful by telling me everyday that I made the wrong choice and how could I be so cruel, etc. etc.
That thoughtless person doesn't know any better. Blind and almost blind cats can have rich satisfying happy lives. They can still enjoy the warmth of a sunbeam or their owner's lap. They enjoy their owner's voice speaking to them and being petted . They can enjoy their scratching post and a nice long nap somewhere soft and warm. They still enjoy their food and listening to the birds and insects outside their favorite window. They can enjoy sniffing the breeze to see what's outside. A squirrel maybe? The neighbor's dog? Some enjoy the sound of soft music played at a low volume. Their favorite chair is still their favorite chair. A blind cat has much to live for.
Quote:
It turned out he had an infection developing in the eye socket (we did blood tests several times, but his white counts were normal.) They had to go back in and clean everything out...the night he came home after the second operation, he was back to my normal bratty kid. So it wasn't the blindness making him depressed, just a hidden infection.
So thanks for that.
You love him and he gets the best of care and that will account for a lot where he's concerned. Much better this way than getting cancer or some of the other problems seen with damaged eyes in cats. Once the socket is healed there will be no more inflammation or infection or irritation - no pain in that eye ever again for Jonas. His little life will go on.
However, there are some studies that these have just as much if not more of a risk of sarcoma. In the end you have to do your own research figure out how you feel about it. It's a lot of research and there is good and bad info on the web.
Regardless of types of vaccines, our vet follows a protocol where shots are given toward the extremities, and each vaccine has a specific leg. That ensures 2 things if sarcoma occurs: 1. if sarcoma occurs, the the leg can be amputated, and 2. the source of the vaccine can be tracked and reported.
They seem to favor the non-adjuvanted vaccines. Maybe we'll never learn the whole truth about these vaccines. Look at the controversy over vaccinating human children. I'll stick with the Pure-Vacs. To not vaccinate them at all seems too chancy to me. I know stray cats sometimes come up on the deck where they're outdoor enclosure is. We can bring something in on our shoes......
Regardless of types of vaccines, our vet follows a protocol where shots are given toward the extremities, and each vaccine has a specific leg. That ensures 2 things if sarcoma occurs: 1. if sarcoma occurs, the the leg can be amputated, and 2. the source of the vaccine can be tracked and reported.
He said most cats are now vaccinated in the leg or tail. Why can't safe vaccines be made?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
