This is really outrageous. As many of you know, I despise the fact that rabies vaccinations are required for dogs every three years and even annually in some states. I've read about all the adverse reactions and the belief of many holistic vets that rabies vaccinations confer immunity for a lifetime. Nobody would like to see the laws changed to allow dogs to be vaccinated for rabies less frequently more than I would. However, I draw the line at torturing animals in order to accomplish that.
Apparently, some people have no such scruples, such as two people whom I admired and respected up until recently, when I read the "Rabies Challenge Fund Charitable Trust Research Study" for which one of them is fundraising and the other is the principal investigator. In this study, two rather large groups of beagles (each with at least 35 members―it's not known exactly how many) will be isolated for five years or seven years, depending on the group; at least 25 of them will be vaccinated; and then they will all be injected with rabies virus to see who dies and who doesn't. The man doing the experiment is Ronald Schultz, D.V.M., chair of pathobiology at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine and an outspoken critic of the laws regarding rabies vaccinations, and the person raising the funds for the experiment is none other than W. Jean Dodds, D.V.M., a veteran of the holistic veterinary medical community. I find this terribly disturbing and hypocritical.
Death by rabies is ugly indeed. The virus infects the brain, causing encephalitis, and can also attack the spinal cord. There can be everything from fever and flu-like symptoms to anxiety, confusion, erratic behavior, aggression, disorientation, seizures, partial paralysis, coma, and death from respiratory arrest. One of the horrible aspects of the disease is that the jaw and throat become paralyzed, making it impossible to drink or even swallow one's own saliva, causing the characteristic drooling.
Of course, none of this is mentioned in Dodds' fundraising. I doubt that she would get a dime if it were. She is soliciting funds from dog lovers of all kinds, preying on their fears for their own dogs' health while totally misleading them. Her Web site and her flier contain not a single word about the negative aspects and gruesome details of the actual experiment. This is deceitful at best. The idea of torturing upwards of 70 dogs in order to improve the health of the rest of the dog population is no different from deciding to torture 70 children in order to improve the health of other children. Those 70 dogs matter! Each one matters! None of them wants to die a horrible death, be killed prematurely, or spend their entire life in a kennel.
We all want our own dogs to be healthy, but people with true compassion don't want that to be at the expense of any other dogs. I'm sorry to have to say it, but in this experiment, the ends, as laudable as they are, do not justify the means.
A better way to spend the $1.25 million being raised for these experiments would be to develop an acceptable serological method to test for rabies antibodies and immunity to the rabies virus.
If you agree, why not shoot Dr. Dodds an e-mail at hemopet@hotmail.com and let her know how you feel?



Comments ( 4 )
Hi, I just have a question, are rabies a matter of concern so big in the USA to justify doing this experiments? Or are these people only paranoid, just like the USA government was when they started the Iraq war?
Posted by Daniela | May 13, 2008 9:14 AM
Posted on May 13, 2008 09:14
It would not surprise me to see some breeder industry money pouring into the bank accounts of these two.
Breeders do not like mandatory rabies reporting becauses it flushes their breeding businesses out into the open, including all those dogs they claim they don't have and aren't breeding.
Breeders will do anything to keep their businesses secret. They hide the numbers of dogs they have and are breeding, and selling, and the income they are not reporting and the taxes they aren't paying. And the zoning laws they are breaking.
I'd be very curious to see who is donating money to these two psychopaths.
Posted by kelly | May 13, 2008 8:38 PM
Posted on May 13, 2008 20:38
I have just sent Dr. Dodds an email, per your suggestion KP, from both my husband and myself. I hope everyone that reads your post will do the same. It's critical to voice your aversion to those people still using live animals in the lab. Thanks for providing Dr. Dodds' email address!
Posted by Laura F | May 15, 2008 4:34 PM
Posted on May 15, 2008 16:34
Sorry, I don't agree. Dr. Dodds is NOT a psychopath - in fact she was one of the first to raise the issue of overvaccinating. The USDA sets the rules. Send your complaints to them. Dr. Dodds would love for you to succeed in persuading the USDA to allow alternative measures to confirm the theory that immunity lasts far longer than the current protocols.
Successfully changing the protocol to dramatically reduce the number of rabies vaccines required will be of tremendous benefit to the mental and physical wellness of animals.
>>>KP's Response:
Hi Melissa,
It's just that the ends don't justify the means. Would you inflict a baby with a horrible pediatric disease and let that baby go untreated even if it would be of "tremendous benefit to the mental and physical wellness" of 1,000 other babies? If not, what's the difference? I don't really see a difference.
I'm very disappointed in Dr. Dodds. Holistic practitioners should set a higher standard, in my view.
KP
Posted by Melissa M | July 27, 2008 2:31 AM
Posted on July 27, 2008 02:31