URGENT SUPPORTIVE ACTION NEEDED --
On June 8th 2010, Monica Wagoner, the Deputy Director of the California
Department of Public Health (916) 440-7502, sent a letter to legislators
opposing the revised medical exemption bill AB 2000, which The Rabies Challenge
Fund now supports. The Health Department letter states: "There
is no scientific evidence that canine rabies vaccines are associated with
severe or a high rate of vaccination reactions. ...Modern canine rabies
vaccines are safe ...."
PLEASE make a brief call or send a short e-mail
to the Senate Health Committee members below and tell them you support
"Molly's Bill" AB 2000 and ask everyone you know to do the same.
Opposition to this bill from the Health Department will require a very
strong show of public support to overcome, and The Rabies Challenge Fund
does want this rabies medical exemption bill to pass. A hearing is
set for June 23rd before the Senate Health Committee.
PERMISSION GRANTED TO CROSS-POST THIS MESSAGE.
Senate Health Committee Members:
Elaine Alquist (Chair) senator.alquist@sen.ca.gov
(916) 651-4013
Tony Stickland (Vice-Chair) senator.strickland@sen.ca.gov
(916) 651-4019
Samuel Aanestad Senator.Aanestad@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4004
Gilbert Cedillo (916) 651-4022
Dave Cox senator.cox@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4001
Mark Leo
senator.leo@senate.ca.gov (916) 651-4003
Gloria Negrete McLeod senator.mcleod@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4032
Fran Pavley senator.pavley@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4023
Gloria Romero senator.romero@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4024
REVISED CALIFORNIA RABIES BILL
AB 2000 -- PLEASE SUPPORT June 4, 2010
Responding to the public outcry, the quarantine
clause in AB 2000 inserting a medical exemption in California's rabies
law has been removed
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1951-2000/ab_2000_bill_20100602_amended_sen_v97.pdf
,
and The Rabies Challenge Fund is asking dog owners to voice their support
for this bill. The bill has a hearing set for June 23rd in the Senate
Health Committee. Please contact the members of the Senate Health
Committee below and ask them to pass the bill.
Also below is a copy of the letter that I sent
to the Senate Health Committeee on behalf of The Rabies Challenge Fund.
Thanks to everyone who called and wrote the Rules Committee, this bill
is now one we can support -- great work!
PERMISSION GRANTED TO CROSS-POST
Senate Health Committee Phone: (916) 651-4111
http://www.senate.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/STANDING/HEALTH/_home1/PROFILE.HTM
Elaine Alquist (Chair) senator.alquist@sen.ca.gov
Phone: (916) 651-4013, Fax: (916)-324-0283
Tony Stickland (Vice-Chair) senator.strickland@sen.ca.gov
Phone: (916) 651-4019 Fax: (916) 324-7544
Samuel Aanestad Senator.Aanestad@senate.ca.gov
Phone: (916) 651-4004 Fax: (916) 445-7750
Gilbert Cedillo Phone: (916) 651-4022 Fax:
(916) 327-8817
Dave Cox senator.cox@senate.ca.gov Phone: (916)
651-4001 Fax: (916) 324-2680
Mark Leo senator.leo@senate.ca.gov Phone:
(916) 651-4003 Fax: (916) 445-4722
Gloria Negrete McLeod senator.mcleod@senate.ca.gov
Phone: (916) 651-4032 Fax: (916) 445-0128
Fran Pavley senator.pavley@senate.ca.gov Phone:
(916) 651-4023 Fax: (916) 324-4823
Gloria Romero senator.romero@senate.ca.gov
Phone: (916) 651-4024 Fax: (916) 445-0485
Bill Co-Sponsor Assembly Member Curt Hagman
Assemblymember.Hagman@assembly.ca.gov Phone: (916) 319-2060 Fax:
(916) 319-2160
Letter from The Rabies Challenge Fund
June 4, 2010
Senator Elaine K. Alquist, Chair
Senate Health Committee
State Capitol, Room 5080
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Revised Rabies
Medical Exemption Bill AB 2000
Greetings Senator Alquist:
The Rabies Challenge Fund strongly supports
the June 2nd revision of AB 2000, which will insert a medical exemption
clause for dogs into Section 121690 of
California’s Health and Safety Code, and
we respectfully request that the Senate Health Committee vote to support
this bill.
Sincerely,
Kris L. Christine
Founder, Co-Trustee
THE RABIES CHALLENGE FUND CHARITABLE TRUST
www.RabiesChallengeFund.org
ledgespring@lincoln.midcoast.com
cc: W.
Jean Dodds, DVM
Ronald D. Schultz, PhD
Assembly Member Curt Hagman
PERMISSION GRANTED TO POST AND
CROSS-POST - May 16, 2010
CALIFORNIA--Medical Exemption Bill AB 2000 ACTION
ALERT!
On 12/21/09 California State Public Health Veterinarian,
Dr. Ben Sun (916) 552-9744, designated ALL COUNTIES in California as "rabies
areas" for 2010 http://www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/discond/Documents/2010_LHD_Rabies_Declaration_Letter.pdf
The declaration states: "The Director
of the Department of Public Health has declared all counties in California
as 'rabies areas' in 2010. This declaration is based on the ongoing
cyclic nature of rabies in California wildlife, and the resulting threat
of exposure to domestic animals, livestock, and humans."
An
April 5, 2010 amendment to AB2000 which seeks to add a medical
exemption clause for sick dogs in designated "rabies areas," would included
the following language: "(2) A dog exempt from the canine antirabies
vaccination shall be kept quarantined as directed by the local health officer,
until the dog's medical condition has resolved and the administration of
the canine antirabies vaccine occurs."
This bill is currently in the Senate Rules Committee
for consideration.
Under current law, the Department of Public
Health is authorized to require annual rabies vaccinations in designated
"rabies areas," which includes ALL counties in California for 2010.
With the passage of AB2000 as amended on April 5th, dogs with medical exemptions
would be required to be quarantined, which could be in an off-site pound
or facility as determined by the local health officer, until their medical
condition resolves or they are given a rabies vaccine.
At the bottom of this action alert is a copy
of the letter I sent on behalf of The Rabies Challenge Fund on this issue.
What You Can Do to Help
Call the Senate Rules Committee and call or
send an e-mail to all its members telling them to withdraw Paragraph (2)
of the amendment pertaining to quarantining medically exemption animals
and strike language in Section 121690 (b) of the law authorizing the Health
Department to impose annual or biennial rabies vaccinations in "rabies
areas."
The phone number for the California Senate Rules
Committee is (916) 651-4120
Chair of the Committee is Senator Darrell Steinberg
e-mail: Senator. Steinberg@senate.ca.gov
Phone: (916) 651-4006
Vice-chair Sam Aanestad Senator.Aanestad@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4004
Gilbert Cedillo Senator.Cedillo@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4022
Robert Dutton Senator.Dutton@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4031
Jenny Oropeza Senator.Oropeza@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4028
Bill Co-Sponsor Assembly Member Curt Hagman
Assemblymember.Hagman@assembly.ca.gov
(916) 319-2060
Letter from The Rabies Challenge Fund
May 15, 2010
Senator Darrell Steinberg, Chair
Senate Rules Committee
State Capitol, Room 205
Sacramento, CA 94248-0001
RE: Amended Rabies Bill
AB2000
Greetings Senator Steinberg:
The Rabies Challenge Fund Charitable Trust respectfully requests that the
Senate Rules Committee withdraw Paragraph (2) of the April 5th amendment
to AB2000 which mandates that “A dog exempt from the canine antirabies
vaccination shall be kept quarantined, as directed by the local health
officer, until the dog's medical condition has resolved and the administration
of the canine antirabies vaccine occurs.” This amendment seeks
to address a public health threat which does not exist in the canine community,
and which will, if passed, pose a life-threatening risk to dogs whose health
is already compromised.
California’s Department of Public Health (CDPH) statistics clearly demonstrate
that bats and other wildlife pose the greatest rabies threat to the public,
not dogs. From 2001 through 2008, the CDPH reported 2 cases of human
rabies contracted in the state, both of which were transmitted by bats.
Further, according to data contained in the annual Reported Animal Rabies
by County and Species issued by the CDPH, from the period of 2001 through
May 7, 2010, (throughout which time all counties had been designated “rabies
areas”), dogs were among the species with the least number of rabies cases
in California. During the cited surveillance period 1,440 bats, 462
skunks, 74 foxes, 11 cats, and 5 dogs were reported as rabid.
The Center for Disease Control documented 32 cases of domestically-contracted
cases of human rabies in the U.S. from 1995 through 2008 – 30 illnesses
were transmitted by bats, 1 by fox, and 1 by raccoon. Since
1995, there have been no reported cases of human rabies from exposure to
an indigenous dog in this country, and no demonstrated need exists for
the California Legislature to pass harsh rabies regulations targeting dogs.
Further, The Rabies Challenge Fund asks that the Committee strike the following
bolded, underlined language in the current law under Section 121690 (b)
which is reiterated in AB2000 as follows: “(b) Every dog owner,
after his or her dog attains the age of four months, shall, at intervals
of time not more often than once a year, as may be prescribed by the department,
procure its vaccination by a licensed veterinarian with a canine antirabies
vaccine approved by, and in a manner prescribed by, the department, unless
a licensed veterinarian determines, on an annual basis, that the dog may
have a potentially lethal reaction to the canine antirabies vaccine. is
currently immune compromised or has a documented medical record of a preexisting
condition, including, but not limited to, an immune mediated disease, or
a serious adverse reaction to a prior canine antirabies vaccine.”
Mandating rabies vaccinations more often than
once every 3 years, even in designated “rabies areas,” goes against the
recommendations of all the national veterinary medical associations, including
the American Veterinary Medical Association [1] and the Center for Disease
Control’s National Association of State Public Health Veterinarian’s Compendium
of Animal Rabies Prevention and Control 2008 which states that, “Vaccines
used in state and local rabies control programs should have at least a
3-year duration of immunity. This constitutes the most effective method
of increasing the proportion of immunized dogs and cats in any population.”
Section 121690 (b) of the Health and Safety
Code may violate California’s Consumer Protection Law by requiring pet
owners to pay for a veterinary medical procedure from which their animals
derive no benefit and may be harmed. The section of the law requiring
biennial or annual rabies boosters in “rabies areas” may have been intended
to achieve enhanced immunity to the rabies virus by giving the vaccine
more often than the federal 3-year licensing standard, but, more frequent
vaccination than is required to fully immunize an animal will not achieve
further disease protection. Redundant rabies shots needlessly expose
dogs to the risk of adverse effects while obligating residents to pay unnecessary
veterinary medical fees. The American Veterinary Medical Association's
2001 Principles of Vaccination state that “Unnecessary stimulation of the
immune system does not result in enhanced disease resistance, and may increase
the risk of adverse post-vaccination events.”
The 3 year rabies vaccines currently licensed
by the USDA for dogs all have a minimum duration of immunity of 3 years
proven by challenge studies (the definitive standard in vaccine research)
conducted according to the licensing standards set forth in USDA Title
9 Part 113.209. Serological studies performed by Dr. Ronald
Schultz of the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine show
a minimum duration of immunity of 7 years. According to the Center
for Disease Control, "A fully vaccinated dog or cat is unlikely to become
infected with rabies…. In a nationwide study of rabies among dogs and cats
in 1988,….no documented vaccine failures occurred among dogs or cats that
had received two vaccinations. " [2]
Immunologically, the rabies vaccine is the most
potent of the veterinary vaccines and associated with significant adverse
reactions such as polyneuropathy “resulting in muscular atrophy, inhibition
or interruption of neuronal control of tissue and organ function, incoordination,
and weakness,”[3] auto-immune hemolytic anemia,[4] autoimmune diseases
affecting the thyroid, joints, blood, eyes, skin, kidney, liver, bowel
and central nervous system; anaphylactic shock; aggression; seizures; epilepsy;
and fibrosarcomas at injection sites are all linked to the rabies vaccine.[5]
[6] It is medically unsound for this vaccine to be given more often
than is necessary to maintain immunity.
A “killed” vaccine, the rabies vaccine contains
adjuvants to enhance the immunological response. In 1999, the World
Health Organization “classified veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV
carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk,"[7] and the results of
a study published in the August 2003 Journal of Veterinary Medicine documenting
fibrosarcomas at the presumed injection sites of rabies vaccines stated,
“In both dogs and cats, the development of necrotizing panniculitis at
sites of rabies vaccine administration was first observed by Hendrick &
Dunagan (1992).” [8] According to the 2003 AAHA Guidelines, "...killed
vaccines are much more likely to cause hypersensitivity reactions (e.g.,
immune-mediated disease)." [9]
On behalf of The Rabies Challenge Fund Charitable
Trust and the many concerned California pet owners who have requested our
assistance, I strongly urge you to withdraw Paragraph (2) of the April
5th amendment to AB2000 and strike the language in the current law cited
in the bill authorizing the CDPH to impose annual or biennial rabies boosters
in “rabies areas.”
Sincerely,
Kris L. Christine
Founder, Co-Trustee
THE RABIES CHALLENGE FUND
www.RabiesChallengeFund.org
ledgespring@lincoln.midcoast.com
cc: W. Jean
Dodds, DVM
Ronald D. Schultz, PhD
Assembly Member Curt Hagman
[1] American Veterinary Medical Association,
Veterinary Biologics, June 2007, “Rabies Vaccination Procedures”
[2] Immunization Practices Advisory Committee,
Rabies Prevention—United States, 1991 Recommendations of the Immunization
Practices Advisory Committee, Center for Disease Control Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report March 22, 1991/40(RR03);1-19
[3] Dodds, W. Jean Vaccination Protocols for
Dogs Predisposed to Vaccine Reactions, The Journal of the American Animal
Hospital Association, May/June 2001, Vol. 37, pp. 211-214
[4] Duval D., Giger U.Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated
Hemolytic Anemia in the Dog, Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 1996;
10:290-295
[5] American Veterinary Medical Association
(AVMA) Executive Board, April 2001, Principles of Vaccination, Journal
of the American Veterinary Medical Association, Volume 219, No. 5, September
1, 2001.
[6] Vascelleri, M. Fibrosarcomas at Presumed
Sites of Injection in Dogs: Characteristics and Comparison with Non-vaccination
Site Fibrosarcomas and Feline Post-vaccinal Fibrosarcomas; Journal of Veterinary
Medicine, Series A August 2003, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 286-291.
[7] IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic
Risks to Humans: Volume 74, World Health Organization, International Agency
for Research on Cancer, Feb. 23-Mar. 2, 1999, p. 24, 305, 310.
[8] Vascelleri, M. Fibrosarcomas at Presumed
Sites of Injection in Dogs: Characteristics and Comparison with Non-vaccination
Site Fibrosarcomas and Feline Post-vaccinal Fibrosarcomas; Journal of Veterinary
Medicine, Series A August 2003, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 286-291.
[9] American Animal Hospital Association Canine
Vaccine Task Force. 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines, Recommendations, and
Supporting Literature, 28pp. and ibid. 2006 AAHA Canine Vaccine Guidelines,
Revised, 28 pp.
May 5, 2006
Urgent action is needed!
The New York Legislature has introduced
misguided bills -- S02164 and A14253 -- which would require boarding kennels
and grooming facilities to obtain proof of ANNUAL VACCINATION “against
distemper, hepatitis, para influenza, leptospirosis, parvo and bordetella
during the previous year” for dogs and “against
feline viral rhinotracheitis, feline calicivirus,or feline panleuopenia
within the past year” for cats engaging their services (http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi
insert S02164 in the box at the top after "Bill No.", click "2006" and
check the "text" box to read the text of the bill).
If these bills pass, companion
animals in New York will be required by law to be overvaccinated
in order to board or groom their animals. PLEASE copy the e-mail
addresses of the NY legislators below in my "TO:" line and send them an
e-mail urging them to vote against this irrational legislation.
Greetings Senators
and Assemblypersons:
I am writing
to strongly urge you to vote NO on Senate Bill S02164 and Assembly
Bill A04253 which would legally mandate that New York boarding kennels
and grooming facilities require proof of vaccination “against distemper,
hepatitis, para influenza, leptospirosis, parvo and bordetella during the
previous year” for dogs and “against feline
viral rhinotracheitis, feline calicivirus,or feline panleuopenia within
the past year” for cats engaging their services.
Requiring proof
of annual vaccination with vaccines with much longer proven durations of
immunity is ill-advised and reckless – it would put companion animals at
needless risk of adverse reactions without their boosting immunity and
incur unnecessary expense to their owners.Veterinary medical
schools do not recommend annual booster vaccinations for distemper, hepatitis,
parvovirus, and feline panleukopenia, so why would the New York Legislature
introduce bills that do?It would be akin to requiring New
York residents to be vaccinated annually
against polio and/or tetanus.
The core canine
distemper, hepatitis, and parvo vaccines (see Duration of Immunity to
Canine Vaccines by Dr. Ronald Schultz http://www.cedarbayvet.com/duration_of_immunity.htm)
have demonstrated durations of immunity beyond 7 years.The
American
Animal Hospital Association’s (AAHA) 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines
(http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm) stateson
Page 18 that:“We now know that booster injections are
of no value in dogs already immune, and immunity from distemper infection
and vaccination lasts for a minimum of 7 years based on challenge studies
and up to 15 years (a lifetime) based on antibody titer.”They
further state that hepatitis and parvovirus vaccines have been proven to
protect for a minimum of 7 years by challenge and up to 9 and 10 years
based on antibody count.
The
first entry under Appendix 2 of the AAHA Guidelines (http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm)“Important
Vaccination ‘Do’s and Don’ts” is “Do
Not Vaccinate Needlessly – Don’t revaccinate more often than is needed
and only with the vaccines that prevent diseases for which that animal
is at risk.”They
also caution veterinarians: “Do
Not Assume that Vaccines Cannot Harm a Patient – Vaccines are potent medically
active agents and have the very real potential of producing adverse
events.”
The American
Veterinary Medical Association’s
(AVMA’s) Principles of Vaccination(http://www.avma.org/issues/vaccination/vaccination.asp)
states that “Unnecessary stimulation
of the immune system does not result in enhanced disease resistance,
and may increase the risk of adverse post-vaccination events.” (page
2)They elaborate by reporting that: “Possible
adverse events include failure to immunize, anaphylaxis, immunosuppression,
autoimmune disorders, transient infections, and/or long-term infected carrier
states.In addition, a causal association in cats between injection
sites and the subsequent development of a malignant tumor is the subject
of ongoing research.”
Perhaps New
York’s Legislators
have been confused by vaccine manufacturer’s labels.According
to AVMA’s Principles of Vaccination (http://www.avma.org/issues/vaccination/vaccination.asp), “..revaccination
frequency recommendations found on many vaccine labels is based on historical
precedent, not on scientific data … [and]
does not resolve the question about average or maximum duration of immunity [Page
2] and..may fail to adequately
inform practitioners about optimal use of the product…[Page
4] .”As
the Colorado State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital states it:“…booster
vaccine recommendations for vaccines other than rabies virus have been
determined arbitrarily by manufacturers.”
In
an April
3, 2006Newsday article
by Denise Flaim entitled Annual
Vaccinations May Harm Your Pet (http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-adcova4687741apr03,0,3250447.column?coll=ny-rightrail-columnist,
one of the world’s leading experts on veterinary vaccines, Dr. Ronald Schultz,
is quoted as follows regarding vaccine labels:"The
label means nothing," Schultz says simply, noting that vaccines licensed
for one year and three years are often the same product. "The label has
an arbitrary and capricious annual revaccination requirement, and it takes
an act of Congress to take it off" - literally. Schultz says the Department
of Agriculture has applied to remove the language, a legislative process
that he estimates will take seven years.
On
Page 5 of the 2000 Report
of the American Association of Feline Practitioners (http://www.aafponline.org/resources/practice_guidelines.htm
(click on “Feline Vaccination Guidelines”), they state under “Feline
Panleukopenia” that “Both serologic and challenge exposure
data indicate that a parenteral FPV vaccine induces immunity that is sustained
for at least 7 years.Therefore, following the initial series
of vaccinations and revaccination 1 year later, cats should be vaccinated
no more frequently than once every 3 years.”
Again,
I urge you all to VOTE NO on SB02164 and A04253.If
you have any questions or would like me to e-mail you a full copy of the
AAHA Guidelines, please e-mail me.
Respectfully
submitted,
Kris
L. Christine
Alna, ME04535
cc:Dr.
W. Jean Dodds
Dr.
Ronald Schultz
