Originally posted by dlh We've had similar experiences with two cats and a dog. I'm becoming increasingly suspicious of vaccines (mainly because of the excipients, rather than the vaccine itself) and the bug-and-worm-killer pills we've fed 'em. The dog, a five year old black lab mix (with boxer and bullmastiff) died of leukemia; granted, they don't last as long as some other breeds, but five years! I've suspected his liver was the real problem, and that because of having fed him pesticides.
It occurs to me recently that the flea and tick killer we feed to dogs doesn't really solve the problem (unless one see the "real problem" as having the dog come in the house ferrying live fleas and ticks). That is to say, those things have no effect unless and until they bite and start eating the dog. But that initial bite is when the parasite eggs and bacteria get into the dog. Fine, the stuff in the dog's blood kills the bugs, but I reckon that's just revenge. Question is, whether the cure is worse than the disease?
I know a good deal more biology than the average person, but certainly do not have deep knowledge of medicine either human or veterinary. However, I would suspect that major problems with liver would cause easily detected changes in the non-cellular components of blood.
Suspicion of human vaccines, especially their potential link to autism, is a consequence of one totally dishonest man who faked data and managed to get it published. When the fraud was discovered, the publication officially denounced the article and published an explanation, the "researcher" (really just a unscrupulous liar) was disgraced and dismissed from his position. Yet the mythology of the falsehood he managed to get published lives on.
I always wonder, if people distrust near universal medical advice and refuse to have their children vaccinated, why when the child gets deathly sick do they take them to the very medical system they think is untrustworthy?
Note my sign-off below.