"The medical establishment works closely with the drug multinationals whose main objective is profits, and whose worst nightmare would be an epidemic of good health. Lots of drugs MUST be sold. In order to achieve this, anything goes: lies, fraud, and kickbacks. Doctors are the principal salespeople of the drug companies. They are rewarded with research grants, gifts, and lavish perks.
The principal buyers are the public - from infants to the elderly - who MUST be thoroughly medicated and vaccinated...at any cost! Why do the authorities forbid alternative medicine? Because they are serving the industry, and the industry cannot make money with herbs, vitamins, and homeopathy. They cannot patent natural remedies.
That is why they push synthetics. They control medicine, and that is why they are able to tell medical schools what they can and cannot teach. That is a MAFIA!" Guylaine Lanctot, M.D
" 55% of all illnesses reported by participants occurred within the first three months of vaccination." Arthritis - Diarrhoea - Allergies -Dry eye/conjunctivits - Epilepsy - Loss of appetite Nervous/worrying disposition - Skin problems - Nasal discharges - Vomiting - Weight loss - Behavioural problems - Tumour or growth." Catherine O'Driscoll'
Rob Robertson, M.D. - "Nearly everything that goes wrong with us and our pets, with the exception of trauma - i.e. broken bones, etc., can be traced directly to an immune system failure".
Pollution, drug overload and nutrient-poor diets compromise our immune health. The key to self-healing is a strong defense system, which protects dogs and cats from everything from the flu germs to cancer cells.
More than their mainstream counterparts, holistic veterinarians believe that a weak immune system plays a key role in causing disease. Drugs aren't the answer for immune enhancement. The immune system is not responsive to drugs for healing.
Antibiotics fight infection, but they don't affect whatever weakened the immune system in the first place. This is why holistic veterinarians focus less on things that cause diseases and more on those that affect the body's defenses"
"Many (if not most) Over The Counter (OTC) or non-prescription flea control products are very toxic to cats and kittens- especially the ones only approved for use in dogs. Many people mistakenly buy these for their pet (it's not always their fault, the companies that make them want you to buy it, they don't really care about the dangers involved).
So it pays to be extra careful when buying flea control products ~ Brandon Brooks DVM
"You take healthy animals and often very quickly after you vaccinate, you can see simple things like itching of the skin or excessive licking of the paws, sometimes even with no eruptions. We see a lot of epilepsy, often after a rabies vaccination. Or dogs or cats can become aggressive for several days.
Frequently, you'll see urinary tract infections in cats, often within three months after their [annual] vaccination. If you step back, open your mind and heart,
you'll start to see patterns of illness post-vaccination epilepsy and seizure". Dr. Dee Blanco, D.V.M Holisitic Vet Santa Fe New Mexico
Animal Diseases And Their Natural Care
Over the past 40 years and 17 generations of dogs and cats we are seeing tremendous increases in chronic ill health in our pets that was rare back in the early 1960's.
Most of these illnesses revolve around breakdown in our pets' immune systems, and include chronic skin/ear allergies, digestive upset, thyroid/adrenal/pancreatic disorders, seizures, gum/ teeth problems, degenerative arthritis, kidney/liver failure, and cancer across all ages and breeds.
We are also seeing a record number of behavioral and emotional disorders including alarming and unexplained fears/aggression, as well as difficulty focusing/training and paying attention.
The analogy of these compared with escalating immune/behavioral diseases in children is quite disturbing. The two biggest factors in our pet's population health decline over these generations have been the severe overuse of multiple vaccines and nutrit poor and toxin filled commercial pet foods.
We have also failed to address the underlying cause of disease by only suppressing symptoms with antibiotics, cortisone and related drugs. So the disease progresses and goes DEEPER.
Homepathy offers a viable alternative in truly curing pets and making their bodies healthier~ Michael Dym VMD
"True learning begins at the point where common knowledge or conventional wisdom ends..." May you and your beloved companion animals benefit from these sites; so your intelligent choices will be based on information from all perspectives. ~ ToniQui Bono? Who Benfits?
We ALL have agendas, this site is dedicated to the rescue and rehoming of Rottweiler in EXCEPTIONAL homes...and to help create an environment where health flourishes....PERIOD. When making decisions that effect you or the health and welfare of those within your canine family, ask yourself NOT ONLY who will benefit from your consumer choice, but does it pass the "sniff" test of logic and natural health.
Robert A. Mendelsohn, MD - "I believe my generation of doctors will be remembered for two things: the miracles that turned to mayhem, such as penicillin and cortisone, and for the millions of mutilations which are ceremoniously (and totally unnecessarily) carried out every year in operating rooms." Confessions of a Medical Heretic
Dr. Mercola - "We can solve well over 90% of the all chronic diseases with simple, inexpensive natural therapies. Following the eating plan and radically reducing grain and sugar intake while optimizing omega 6:3 fat ratio will likely reduce over 50% of the health problems Americans currently experience. I know this is true because I have successfully treated many thousands of patients from all over the country with these techniques."
This web site and my efforts with Happy Tails Rescue Association are devoted to the loving memory of my unforgotten and first Rottweiler, Ludwig. Ludwig and I travelled many miles together, shared both good and bad times, feast and famine, iced tea, Hollandaise sauce, pizza, laughter and tears; Ludwig taught me what unconditional love really meant. At times he had been my sole companion, solace, brave defender and my loyal buddy until his last breath. Other than parvo vaccines when he was a pup, Ludwig
was vaccine free his entire 13 years of life and would have been 14 his next birthday, had it not been for a freak incident/illness. Surpassing by several years what is considered a normal Rottweiler life span. My only lasting regret are those few parvo vaccines from my hand, in good conscience, I cannot vaccinate myself or any of my dogs, cats or horses. This photo was taken after his 10th birthday, still going strong!
PETS DON'T NEED SHOTS EVERY YEAR, April 22, 2002
by LEIGH HOFFER, copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle Medical Writer
Experts say annual vaccines waste money, can be risky
Debra Grierson leaves the veterinarian's office clutching Maddie and
Beignet, her Yorkshire terriers, and a credit card receipt for nearly
$400. That's the cost for the tiny dogs' annual exams, including heartworm
checks, dental checks and a barrage of shots. "They're just like our children," said the Houston homemaker. "We would
do anything, whatever they needed."
What many pet owners don't know, researchers say, is that most yearly
vaccines for dogs and cats are a waste of money -- and potentially deadly.
Shots for the most important pet diseases last three to seven years, or
longer, and annual shots put pets at greater risk of vaccine-related
The Texas Department of Health is holding public hearings to consider
changing the yearly rabies shot requirement to once every three years.
Thirty-three other states already have adopted a triennial rabies schedule.
Texas A&M University's and most other veterinary schools now teach that
most shots should be given every three years. "Veterinarians are charging customers $36 million a year for
vaccinations that are not necessary," said Bob Rogers, a vet in Spring who adopted a
reduced vaccine schedule. "Not only are these vaccines unnecessary,
they're causing harm to pets."
Just as humans don't need a measles shot every year, neither do dogs or
cats need annual injections for illnesses such as parvo, distemper or kennel
cough. Even rabies shots are effective for at least three years.
The news has been slow to reach consumers, partly because few veterinarians
outside academic settings are embracing the concept. Vaccine makers haven't
done the studies needed to change vaccine labels. Vets, who charge $30
to $60 for yearly shots, are loath to defy vaccine label instructions and
lose an important source of revenue. In addition, they worry their patients
won't fare as well without yearly exams. "I know some vets feel threatened because they think, `People won't come
back to my office if I don't have the vaccine as a carrot,' " said Alice
Wolf, a professor of small-animal medicine at Texas A&M and an advocate
of reduced vaccinations. "A yearly exam is very important."
The movement to extend vaccine intervals is gaining ground because of
growing evidence that vaccines themselves can trigger a fatal cancer in
cats and a deadly blood disorder in dogs. Rogers conducts public seminars on the subject with evangelical zeal but
thus far has been unsuccessful in persuading the Texas Veterinary Medical
Association to adopt a formal policy. "I'm asking the Texas attorney general's office if this is theft by
deception," said Rogers, whose Critter Fixer practice won an ethics
award from the Better Business Bureau in 2000. "They just keep coming out with
more vaccines that are unnecessary and don't work. Professors give
seminars, and nobody comes and nobody changes."
When rabies shots became common for pets in the 1950s, no one questioned
the value of annual vaccination. Distemper, which kills 50 percent of
victims, could be warded off with a shot. Parvovirus, which kills swiftly and
gruesomely by causing a toxic proliferation of bacteria in the digestive
system, was vanquished with a vaccine. Over the years, more and more
shots were added to the schedule, preventing costly and potentially deadly
disease in furry family members. Then animal doctors began noticing something ominous: rare instances of
cancer in normal, healthy cats and an unusual immune reaction in dogs.
The shots apparently caused feline fibrosarcoma, a grotesque tumor at the
site of the shot, which is fatal if not discovered early and cut out completely.
Dogs developed a vaccine-related disease in which the dog's body rejects
its own blood. "That really caused people to ask the question, `If we can cause that
kind of harm with a vaccine ... are we vaccinating too much?' " said Ronald
Schultz, a veterinary immunologist at the University of Wisconsin School of
Veterinary Medicine. "As you get more and more (vaccines), the possibility
that a vaccine is going to cause an adverse event increases quite a bit."
Less frequent vaccines could reduce that risk, Schultz reasoned. Having
observed that humans got lifetime immunity from most of their childhood
vaccines, Schultz applied the same logic to dogs. He vaccinated them for
rabies, parvo, kennel cough and distemper and then exposed them to the disease-causing organisms after three, five and seven years. The animals
remained healthy, validating his hunch. He continued his experiment by measuring antibody levels in the dogs'
blood nine and 15 years after vaccination. He found the levels sufficient to
Fredric Scott, professor emeritus at Cornell University College of
Veterinary Medicine, obtained similar results comparing 15 vaccinated cats
with 17 nonvaccinated cats. He found the cats' immunity lasted 7.5 years
after vaccination. In 1998, the American Association of Feline
Practitioners published guidelines based on Scott's work, recommending vaccines every
three years. "The feeling of the AAFP is, cats that receive the vaccines every three
years are as protected from those infections as they would be if they were vaccinated every year," said James Richards, director of the Feline
Health Center at Cornell. "I'm one of many people who believe the evidence is
Texas A&M's Wolf said the three-year recommendation "is probably just as
arbitrary as anything else," and nothing more than a "happy medium"
between vaccine makers' recommendations and the findings by Schultz and Scott aimed
at reducing vaccine-related problems. But many vets are uncomfortable making a drastic change in practice
without data from large-scale studies to back them up. There is no animal
equivalent of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which monitors
outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease in people, thus keeping tabs on
a vaccine's effectiveness.
Federal authorities require vaccine makers to show only that a vaccine
is effective for a reasonable amount of time, usually one year. Richards
notes that studies to get a feline vaccine licensed in the first place are
typically quite small, involving 25 to 30 cats at most. There is no federal requirement to show a vaccine's maximum duration of
effectiveness. Arne Zislin, a veterinarian with Fort Dodge Animal
Health, the largest animal vaccine maker in the world, said such studies would
be expensive and possibly inhumane, requiring hundreds of animals, some of
them kept in isolation for up to five years. "I don't think anyone with consideration for animals would really want to
go through that process," said Zislin, another vet who believes current
data are insufficient to support an extended schedule.
Diane Wilkie, veterinarian at Rice Village Animal Hospital, said she
tells pet owners that vaccines appear to last longer than a year, but her
office hasn't officially changed its protocol yet. She said 20 percent to 30
percent of her cat patients are on the extended schedule. "It's kind of a hard situation. The manufacturers still recommend a
year, but they're the manufacturers," Wilkie said. "It's hard to change a whole professional mentality -- although I do think it will change."
In Houston, yearly pet examinations typically cost $50 to $135, with shots
making up one-third to half of the expense. A dental check, heartworm
test, fecal check and overall physical are usually included in the price.
Without the shots, vets could expect to lose a chunk of that fee.
But an increasing number of vets are emphasizing other services, such as
surgery. Wolf said savings on vaccines might prompt pet owners to get
their pets' teeth cleaned instead. An in-house test to check antibody levels is
in development. "I definitely think there's a profit issue in there; don't get me
wrong," Wilkie said. "(But) people are willing to spend money on their pets for
diseases. Although vaccines are part of the profit, they aren't that big
a part. We just did a $700 knee surgery."
Please keep in mind we do NOT and will NOT vaccinate so our "findings" are based on decades of living, healthy animals that consistantly outlive vaccinated ones. Shelters kill dogs for kennel cough, we rarely treat even the most aggressive cases, or treat with traditional therapies, all are cleared up within a few days or week at the most, just like a "cold"
We do appreciate all of the compassionate, life saving Vets and their valuable expertise and genuine concern in treating emergencies, spaying, neutering and other important procedures. Considering the new important findings from ALL Vet schools in the U.S., it would seem logical that most vets, if well informed, would welcome the educational opportunity, wouldn't you agree? Once a dog has been with us and detoxified from the heavy metals and pesticides found in pharmaceuticals & vaccines, they are just the picture of robust health, they never get kennel cough or other minor diseases.
Gosh, it does make one wonder, doesn't it? Since vaccines are harmful for animals, and vaccines CAN'T help against viruses, one wonders the consequences of vaccines on humans, and do we really appreciate being FORCED consumers as pharmaceutical guinea pigs?
Perhaps it comes down to the decision of whether we own our bodies or have we also relenquished that basic freedom to someone else? QUI BONO?
Here is a message from Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, also a medical doctorTexas Straight Talk directory, Project FREEDOM, Rep Ron Paul Web Pages, a man of courage dedicated to civil liberties and our freedom
Government Vaccines - Bad Policy, Bad Medicine
Simply put, it is not ethical to give a medicine that will kill and maim persons for no demonstrable benefit. Assuaging fears about vulnerability to a potential disease is not a benefit any physician should accept. Dr. Jeffrey S. Sartin, MD
A controversy over vaccines, specifically the smallpox vaccine, is brewing in Washington. The administration is considering ordering mass inoculations for more than one million military personnel and civilian medical workers, ostensibly to thwart a smallpox outbreak before it occurs.
Yet dangerous side-effects from the vaccine, ranging from mild flu symptoms to gangrene, encephalitis, and even death, cause many to question the wisdom and need for such inoculations.
As a medical doctor, I believe mandated smallpox vaccines are bad medicine. The available vaccine poses significant risks, even though the more serious complications affect only a statistically small number of people. As with any medical treatment, these risks must always be balanced against the perceived benefit. Remember, not a single case of smallpox has been reported, despite the near-hysteria that characterized recent news reports.
Even if some individuals became infected, smallpox spreads only with very close contact. Those in the surrounding community could then decide to accept vaccines based on a much more tangible risk.
As a legislator, I believe mandated smallpox vaccines are very bad policy. The point is not that smallpox vaccines are necessarily a bad idea, but rather that intimately personal medical decisions should not be made by government. The real issue is individual medical choice. No single person, including the President of the United States, should ever be given the power to make a medical decision for potentially millions of Americans. Freedom over one’s physical person is the most basic freedom of all,
and people in a free society should be sovereign over their own bodies. When we give government the power to make medical decisions for us, we in essence accept that the state owns our bodies.
The possibility that the federal government could order vaccines is real. Provisions buried in the 500-page homeland security bill give federal health bureaucrats virtually unchecked power to declare health emergencies. Specifically, it gives the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services- in my view one of the worst of all federal agencies- power to declare actual or potential bioterrorist emergencies; to administer forced "countermeasures," including vaccines,
to individuals or whole groups; and to extend the emergency declaration indefinitely. These provisions mirror those found in the Model Emergency Health Powers Act, a troubling proposal that was rejected by most state legislatures last year. That Act would have given state governors broad powers to suspend civil
liberties and declare health emergencies. Yet now we’re giving virtually the same power to the Secretary of HHS. Equally troubling is the immunity from civil suit granted to vaccine manufacturers in the homeland security bill, which potentially could leave individuals who get sick from a bad batch of vaccines without legal recourse.
Politics and medicine don’t mix. It is simply not the business of government at any level to decide whether you choose to accept a smallpox vaccine or any other medical treatment. Yet decades of federal intervention in health care, including the impact of third-party HMOs created by federal legislation, have weakened the doctor-patient relationship. A free market system would allow doctors and patients to make their own decisions about smallpox inoculations, without the federal government hoarding, mandating, nor prohibiting the vaccine.
Instead, we’re moving quickly toward the day when government controls not only what vaccines patients receive, but what kind of health care they receive at all.
Since vets are still "practicing" medicine, these are their current "findings"
Vaccination findings. Veterinary research challenges the notion that pets need to be
vaccinated every 12 months. Some of the findings:
* Dog vaccines/Minimum duration of immunity
* Canine rabies 3 years
* Canine parainfluenza 3 years
* Canine distemper (Onderstepoort strain) 5 years
* Canine distemper (Rockborn strain) 7 years
* Canine adenovirus (kennel cough) 7 years
* Canine parvovirus 7 years
* Recommendations for dogs
* Parvovirus, adenovirus, parainfluenza, distemper: Following initial
puppy shots, provide booster one year later, and every three years thereafter.
* Rabies: At 16 weeks of age, thereafter as required by law. (What about the health of your pet instead?)
* Bordatella: Use prior to boarding; may be repeated up to six times a year.
* Coronavirus: Not recommended in private homes. Prior to boarding, may be
given to dogs 8 weeks or older, and repeated every six months.
* Lyme: Not recommended.
* Giardia: Not recommended.