Agents of truthful science
In the age of free information, misinformation, and incomplete information, it’s often challenging for the info-hungry consumer to distinguish evidence-based facts from alternative facts, and truthful reporting from fake news. This concept is not new for you, readers. Collectively, we regularly debunk myths that threaten the integrity of our work, from correctly defining GMOs to preserving and defending appropriate farm animal welfare.
When I was in small animal practice, my top priority was to foster two-way conversation with my clients about their pet's health, especially when discussing the internet’s latest controversial pet care topics. We, the experts, have the resources and foundational knowledge to redirect the often redundant conversations and lay the groundwork for public trust in our sharing of knowledge.
In practice, I leaned on my public health interests to guide my recommendations for pet owners. I didn’t just recommend an annual fecal exam because the dog might have picked something up that could require treatment; I recommended it because the dog could carry a zoonotic parasite that could infect the family’s young children. I didn’t just recommend regular flea prevention for the cat to protect against nuisance ectoparasites and flea allergic dermatitis; I also recommended it to reduce the family’s risk of cat scratch fever (also known as bartonellosis, a re-emerging disease). I was transparent with my clients about my objectives: my job was simply to protect animal and human health using evidence-based methods.
Playing it cool with hot button topics
Health and nutrition trends that become popular in human health eventually trickle into companion animal medicine, from grain-free pet foods to CBD oil specifically marketed to control seizures. Although research into these particular trends is growing, the standard pet owner discussion applies: while it’s possible these products may not be harmful, we don’t yet know if they’re entirely harmless. But, how do we approach more impassioned opinions about trends we know can be harmful for pets and public health, like the anti-vaccination movement? Professionally and with science.
Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provided an update on measles in the United States. Since January 1, there have been 228 reported measles cases and 6 outbreaks across 12 states. The majority of cases were unvaccinated.
I won’t rehash what you might already know about the anti-vaccination movement in the U.S., so I’ll summarize it in two sentences. It was largely driven by a celebrity’s claim that a vaccine caused her son’s autism, an opinion she supported with a debunked article written by an ex-physician in a prominent medical journal. The “anti-vaxxer” movement has enabled parents to refuse important vaccinations for their children on the basis of various personal reasons, increasing health risks for susceptible individuals who rely on herd immunity for protection.
In veterinary medicine, it’s not about the measles.
It’s about the momentum these unscientific, fear-inciting claims gain; momentum that causes misinformation spillover that affects our best-practice approaches to providing ethically and medically-sound veterinary care.
Although there are anecdotal reports of pet owners’ concerns about “canine autism” (there is no evidence to support that this disease exists), most concerns involve whether vaccines are safe for small dogs, whether the post-inoculation side effects are not worth the protection, and whether some vaccines are necessary for certain pet lifestyles. In my experience, I’ve also received unmet requests to give perceived safer alternatives like half doses of vaccines or expired vaccines.
There’s no question these concerns arise from a place of love and compassion, which is why I encourage practitioners to engage concerned pet owners in respectful conversation, regardless of how strong our opinions are (and trust me, when you witness enough young puppies die from preventable diseases, that opinion becomes strong). It’s not enough to stubbornly stick to standard vaccination protocols anymore. Pet owners want to be informed, but it’s up to us to navigate the wealth of misinformation and fill in important knowledge gaps. It’s up to us to provide best-practice recommendations and offer reasonable alternatives if met with fear and mistrust.
The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) provides detailed answers to frequently asked vaccination questions, including vaccine titers, common side effects, and the difference between core and non-core vaccines. The American Animal Hospital Association’s canine lifestyle vaccination calculator allows pet owners to determine which vaccines are recommended for their pet’s lifestyle.
Lauren Bernstein
Lauren received her BS in Animal Science from the University of Tennessee. Following a Rotary International site visit to South Africa as an undergraduate student, she decided to focus her prospective veterinary career on public health, specifically on issues involving diseases at the human-animal-environment interface. She completed her veterinary education at the University College Dublin, School of Veterinary Medicine. When she's not in the office, she enjoys yoga, embracing the outdoor activities in Minneapolis, and finding excuses to talk about her rescue cat.