Highlights From World Small Animal Veterinary Association Congress

The 32nd Annual World Small Animal Veterinary Association (WSAVA) Congress was held in Sydney, Australia in mid-August. Animal experts spoke on various topics from vaccine guidelines to behavioral problems.

One of the main topics in discussion was vaccine guidelines. Overall, the recommendation is to increase the number of pets vaccinated, and to cut down on how frequently a pet needs to be vaccinated. A common concern is adverse reactions to vaccines which is why the vaccine guidelines have been put into place.

Veterinary behaviorists also spoke about dominance in dogs. Some believe that dogs don’t necessarily want to be dominant; they simply want to be social and have positive interactions with humans. They recommended ways of how to show your love to your dog in a constructive manner.

Animal experts and veterinarians were also able to answer questions from pet owners at the conference. They told pet owners how to get a cat off of the counter, how to calm an excited dog down when people walk by, how to help an overweight cat shed some pounds, and to help a dog not bark when the phone rings.

While in Sydney, many animal experts were able to see intriguing animals in the land down under. One different animal is the southern Cassowary, a very large flightless bird and the largest land creature in Australia. Another interesting animal found in Australia is the Lumholtz tree kangaroo. These kangaroos have adapted to living their daily lives in trees.

Source: Steve Dale’s Pet World

5 Responses to “Highlights From World Small Animal Veterinary Association Congress”

  1. Anonymous says:

    “Overall, the recommendation is to increase the number of pets vaccinated, and to cut down on how frequently a pet needs to be vaccinated. A common concern is adverse reactions to vaccines which is why the vaccine guidelines have been put into place.”
    ……………………………..

    My pets are DONE with vaccines, now that I know how much a vet practice’s profits come from vaccine markups. I’m sure my pets will be visiting the clinic far more than once per year, and I’m not being cheap by not wanting the vaccines because I’m sure the titer tests will cost quadruple what a vaccine would cost. And I don’t care.

    According to my vet, I can have antibody tests run for rabies (and other diseases), and if my dogs do bite someone, they will have to be quarantined for two weeks. I’d rather have my dogs away from me for two weeks than have them contract some debilitating life-long ailment as a result of the vaccines. Apparently, the vaccine rules differ by state, so check with your local vet.

    My name didn’t show up today? Purringfur

  2. Pukanuba says:

    Purringfur: I agree about those yearly shots. I’m required by law to vaccinate against rabies every three years but the yearly ones are not mandatory. My dog got all her puppy shots & her rabies shot a year later but I told the vet no other shots. I can do the titer next year……& I would rather pay for that than keep pumping her full of poison. My vet said that they are starting to lean towards some shots every three years & some every five…..the manufacturers are starting to agree with this schedule. I’m sure this was a huge moneymaker for them for years but people are wising up.

    My last Lab got really sick the last two years I brought her in for her shots……she’d be lethargic & sometimes throw up for at least two days afterwards so I swore no more. She’s no longer with me but the Lab I have now will never get yearly shots. I think they’ve known for a long time that these shots weren’t necessary but they were making big bucks so why stop it? Screw the pet owner when you can. I believe these yearly shots were actually giving her overdoses of the stuff which is why she got so sick.

  3. Lis says:

    My current and previous two vets–that’s fifteen years and two states–have not recommended annual shots for pretty much anything, except that my dog gets the bordatella intranasal vaccine, and that’s twice a year. This year, for instance, my cats were not due for anything at all–no shots.

    I guess it’s pure freak coincidence that three different veterinary practices in two different states so lack the pervasive greed of the rest of the profession…or maybe not. Maybe most vets really are in it for the good of the animals, and make their recommendations based on both what they believe is in the best interests of the animal, and local law. And possibly a belief that many of their clients would be unable, and most might be unwilling, to pay the significantly greater cost of titers in order to avoid vaccines which may have negative effects, over a lifespan that the pets wouldn’t reach the nether end of, if vaccines didn’t exist.

  4. Anonymous says:

    ON THIS POST: Maybe most vets really are in it for the good of the animals, and make their recommendations based on both what they believe is in the best interests of the animal, and local law.

    …could be, but how does an uninformed petowner know if a random vet belongs to the “most” cagetory? Answer: they don’t. And so unless petowners seek out the facts about vaccine dangers IN ADVANCE, there will be no way to guage this. Consumer pays up front. Pet pays in the end. And don’t forget that debilitations caused by vaccines cost the consumer and vets profit from ALL of this. Test case: Maybe most of the petfood industry is in it for the good of the animal? How many vets sell petfood?

    THEN: And possibly a belief that many of their clients would be unable, and most might be unwilling, to pay the significantly greater cost of titers in order to avoid vaccines which may have negative effects, over a lifespan that the pets wouldn’t reach the nether end of, if vaccines didn’t exist.

    First, if more consumers became aware of the dangers of these abusive practices that profit vets and big pharma, more would refuse vaccines and vets would be motivated by income loss if nothing else, to offer titering. and w more demand for titers, price would come down. the average petowners has never heard of this and takes “most vets” word for everything as gospel.
    Secondly, there’s plenty of very easily available evidence that overvaccination does the exact opposite of extending a pets life. Thirdly: since vaccines are common practice how do you know pets would never reach the nether end? There is far more evidence available to prove the opposite point.

    I think it’s fair to say the poison petfood scandal has done a great job of convincing petowners that safe is better than sorry.

  5. Anonymous says:

    if vets were in it for the animals they’d have put in time studying how to build health, looking at food as part of that. if they were in it for the animals they would not have been giving these dangerous vaccines for so many years KNOWING they were dangerous.

    that answers it for me.


Close
E-mail It