My small stand...am I silly?

[alohamonkey]

I agree Rattydog.  I still think rabies vaccination is important.

Kola, you bring up some good points and I will look into the info that you posted.  Thanks for posting it.  I'm definitely interested in learning more.  I'm definitely not a fan of the "coerced vaccination" system we have - with pets and especially with humans.  My only dispute with no vaccination requirement is . . . for every responsible pet owner that makes a choice not to vaccinate their animal (yourself), there are a multitude of irresponsible pet owners that would choose not to vaccinate their animal out of laziness or neglect.  The irresponsible pet owners are the ones that worry me.  Back in Ohio, I saw a squirrel infected with rabies and it was scary.  The animal was out of control and I have no doubt it would have attacked me if I was close enough.  If a Great Dane or a Doberman or the Malumat (sp?) down the street from me got infected with rabies, it would be a disaster.  My house in Manch is on a tiny lot and I have hundreds of neighbors within a half mile radius.  One infected animal could wreak havoc. 

As far as vaccinations causing the diseases they are developed to prevent . . . I've heard that before and will try to learn more about it.  I have issues with vaccinations and medications for humans.  I feel that they are developed to keep people sick to encourage more pharma use . . . so I assume it's probably not any different with animals.  I'll definitely read up on it.

[error]

The only thing that annoys me about dogs around here is their owners not cleaning up after they crap on the sidewalks.

[kola]

Many of the responses are based ONLY on what we have been led to believe.

Most people blindly accept the fact that vaccines are effective and have wiped out diseases.

Thus their statements such as " I have seen rabies and it is a terrible disease and this is why I am going to vaccinate my dog and everyone else should too."

I agree rabies is a terrible disease although I not convinced the vaccine works and I know for a fact the vaccine (alone) causes severe problems even death.

The Black Plague was a terrible disease yet there was no vaccine (and there is still no vax) yet the disease came and went after running its own natural course and with the help of the human immune systems adaptation. If a vaccine would have been developed for the Black Plague the vaccine industry would have taken credit for "wiping out the disease" AND it would give the CDC (and other pro-vax supporters) the "spin" to keep administering Black Plague vaccines in order to keep the plague from comig back. Sound familiar? 

To state that you will vaccinate based on the premise that diseases are dangerous indirectly shows that you accept that vaccines work. And what is your source for your belief system? The CDC? Merck and Glaxosmithkline (vax manufacturers)? These folks have a serious conflict of interest.

When seraching for truth, follow the money and find out who the bad guys are. Then do your own research before making a decision or stating your beliefs regarding vaccines.

Look at the Amish population and observe the health of them and their animals. They do not vax and there has never been one case of Autism in an Amish child. I like to use them as a great example of healthy folks that do not vax.
There seem to be a lot of self thinkers and freedom folks in this forum. Observe the Amish community as they are a great example of a community that has little need for government and all the other bureaucratic bs that goes with it.
To me, they have it damn good.

The truth is out there.

Kola   

[kola]

rattydog, where did you gather the info regarding the Amish and incest and abuse?

Kola

[kola]

No prob.

I have seen and read many of the allegations. I was just inquiring which ones, specifically. I grew up in Western NY where there are many Amish families and I had a lot of interactions and acquaintences with them. As a chiropractor, I also spent a lot of time treating them and getting to know them quite well.

Kola   

[J’raxis 270145]

This may all sound stupid and so small, but this is my first stand, this is the first time I've said "NO". Am I doing it right? I just want to go about all of this the right way. I have decided that I am a human being, that I have the right to say no...and I want to say no more often.

Does anyone have any thoughts? Is this a good place to draw a line....? Or are these bastards going to come and take my dog away?

It's not stupid at all, and I think you're doing it perfectly. It's the one small issue that finally pushed you past what you could stand from 'em.

I just moved up here to Manchester myself, from Massachusetts, on the last day of June. I had first joined the Free State Project in 2004, but for most of the time since then, I thought of actually moving as something I'd most likely do sometime in the indeterminate future, like so many plans and goals that people have that they never really follow through on for one procrastinatory excuse or another.

Then, they did this.

As a Massachusetts resident, I already refused to drive a car because I'm not paying for mandatory insurance, and now they go and pass a law requiring people to buy mandatory health insurance just for being a resident of their state. So, that was the last straw for me. I signed up to the First 1000 pledge, and finally moved out of Massachusetts on the very last day before this new health insurance law went into effect. I actually have health insurance through my employer in Massachusetts, but I will not live in a state where they're forcing people to do business with private companies of any kind, especially a sector as notoriously shady as the insurance industry.

So, there's my line drawn, the point at which I said I'm not going to put up with their crap anymore—and here I am in New Hampshire now.

[J’raxis 270145]

Is it that, enough people have finally come up from The Circus Massachusetts that we are slowly going to turn into The Circus, too??

Hey, hey, I just moved from Massachusetts. And I'll be doing whatever I can to counter any of the collectivists immigrating from there.

What part of, "if you don't like smoking, don't come here" don't people understand?

Ah, but you see... it's unhealthy, so naturally I can tell you not to do it—even if you're only doing it to yourself! And in states with state-mandated health insurance, you giving yourself cancer is making my premiums go up, so I even have a semi-rational, economic excuse to demand you stop smoking now!

[J’raxis 270145]

I read something that the people from MA... lean more to the 'right'.
It is the people from NJ, NY, ME, and CT that are the lefties.

Don't forget Vermont, they tend to swing left. I love Vermont and never met a person from Vermont I didn't like. I don't know how it is to live there though and don't know much of their politics.

Vermont's leftist slant might be a very good thing for us.

[Roycerson]

I have decided that I am a human being, that I have the right to say no...and I want to say no more often.

Does anyone have any thoughts? Is this a good place to draw a line....? Or are these bastards going to come and take my dog away?

Liberating, isn't it.  Any place is a good place to draw a line if the alternative is not drawing a line.  They might take your dog away.  Unfortunately, those who choose to expose the violence inherent in the system are almost always on the receiving end of that violence.  It can be far from pleasant at times but it has it's rewards.

I think everyone around here who has done the CD thing would do things a little differently if they had it to do over again but I haven't heard anyone say they wouldn't have done it at all if they'd known how it was going to turn out.  For example my current situation.  It occupies a great deal of my mental energy, keeps me up at night, kinda fucked up my nerves when it comes to being around people in uniform.  I might very well spend some time in jail.  I feel good about what I'm doing.  If I had stopped and kissed that cops boots like he wanted I would regret it right now.  I've been in similar situations before and cooperated fully.  I didn't get arrested, didn't experience any physical pain, didn't positively influence anybody, didn't have one person come around from "that was stupid" to "I think you're doing this for all the right reasons and have a new respect for you and your cause because of it".  It's worth it.

[KBCraig]

Back to the topic... it occurs to me that NH is a small state, and there are veterinarians in MA, ME, and VT. I imagine it's possible to have your hounds vaccinated without using the NH "mandatory snitch" program.

The rabies threat is real, and any possible risks posed by vaccination are very slight when compared to the benefit. Already this year the news has reported rabid foxes (and one woodchuck) biting people in NH. Dogs are more likely to encounter such wildlife in an up-close way, so they are at greater risk for exposure.

[kola]

The rabies threat is real, and any possible risks posed by vaccination are very slight when compared to the benefit.

All "threats" are "real" if that is what you believe. Vax risks being "very slight" are highly questioned and it is difficult to track and sadly, there has never been one single study comparing unvax vs vaxed people or animals.  It took 60 years to figure out mercury from vaccines was causing Autism. (JAPS Vol 8 Geier and Geier).

KB, I respect your personal opinion on the subject though.

The terrorist threat is real too. 

Kola

[mvpel]

Kola,

When 13 vaccinated dogs and 13 unvaccinated dogs are exposed to live rabies, and the 13 vaccinated dogs survive while the 13 unvaccinated dogs die, then to deny the rabies vaccine is to deny that A = A.

The scientific method is the Swiss Army Knife of the rational mind - it is a versatile tool which takes things out of the realm of opinion and into the realm of fact.

[kola]

mvpel,

The 13 dog experiment sounds quite simple and would be advantageous in proving efficacy.

It is my understanding that the statement and your "Swiss Army Study" is just your opinion..or was this an actual study?

Kola

[kola]

Here is a interesting piece. They say their "old vax" for rabies was not very good but the "new" one shows great promise. (sacarstic tone) Um OK guys, lets keep at it until we get it right..but I thought the last "new" dose was going to be effective and safe.   

Surprise discovery helps tackle rabies
Disease/Infection News
Published: Thursday, 5-Jan-2006 
   Printer Friendly      Email to a Friend

 

In an unexpected discovery, scientists at Jefferson Medical College have found that a tiny change in a rabies virus protein can turn a "safe" virus extremely deadly. The finding has enabled the researchers to refine a vaccine they previously created against rabies in wildlife, making it safer and more effective.
"We have identified a molecular mechanism involved in making the rabies virus pathogenic and lethal, and have developed a very safe vaccine for the immunization of wildlife," says Bernhard Dietzschold, DVM, professor of microbiology and immunology at Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, who led the work. "As a result, we think we have engineered a virus which is nonpathogenic and extremely stable."

Reporting recently in the Journal of Virology, Dr. Dietzschold, Matthias Schnell, Ph.D., associate professor of microbiology and immunology at Jefferson Medical College, and their co-workers identified a mutation in a rabies virus gene that changes a single amino acid in the virus's outer coat. The alteration was enough to turn a "safe" virus into a deadly version, making the virus unusable for vaccination.

Wildlife rabies is a substantial health problem in the United States. It is particularly prevalent along the East Coast, where more than 90 percent of reported cases occur in wildlife. Raccoons are the most affected, with skunks a close second. Worldwide--and especially in underdeveloped nations--rabies takes a large human toll; more than 60,000 deaths a year. In the United States alone, more than $1 billion is spent annually for control, treatment and prevention of rabies.

kola note: I did not find a source citation for the above statement. Usually the CDC makes these types of claims. I have a mountain of evidence to prove that the CDC has serious conflicts of interest when it comes to reporting the truth regarding vaccines and diseases.

The Jefferson scientists uncovered the mutation, during the testing of a virus they thought was suitable for use in vaccinating wildlife. The virus is first altered so that it will not cause disease, yet will arouse the immune system's defenses. Because viruses such as rabies have high mutation rates, researchers typically "passage" the virus through mice. That is, they inject it into the animals, recover it, and then put into a second mouse. This is repeated at least five times. Five generations, Dr. Dietzschold explains, is usually enough to see whether the virus will either mutate and turn dangerous, or show genetic stability.

The research team has tested the current virus in 10 passages in mice, and it remained safe while retaining its potency. Dr. Dietzschold notes that the likelihood of a mutation occurring is extremely low. While different varieties of rabies virus exist, they maintain enough similarities in the all-important outer glycoprotein, that a vaccine that takes advantage of immune reactions to this protein can be effective.

Dr. Dietzschold explains that the current wildlife rabies vaccine used in the United States is ineffective in a chief carrier: skunks. The vaccine developed by his team is much broader, showing efficacy in such animals as raccoon, skunk and mongoose. One of the problems with current vaccines is the fact that several varieties are used, depending on the particular species of animal. The scientists hope their vaccine will prove useful for rabies prevention in several species.
The newer virus and vaccine currently are being evaluated by Molecular Targeting Technologies, Inc., of West Chester, Pa. The researchers are asking for permission from the United States Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency to perform field trials. These would entail placing food baits containing the vaccine in the wild, then later capturing and testing animals for antibodies against the rabies virus.

http://www.jeffersonhospital.org/

[error]

And the moral of the story: Don't get bitten by a skunk.