Action Alert Oppose SB 185

SB 185 317-232-9600 Main House number to tell your own Representative you oppose the vaccine portion.
Call/email these members of the Agriculture committee to tell them to remove the vaccine mandate, write an amendment to change the definition of seller, or kill the whole bill!

Don Lehe 317-234-3827
Steve Bartels 317-232-9802
Beau Baird 317-232-9981
Doug Gutwein 317-232-9815
Brad Barrett 317-232-9815
Dave Heine 317-232-9816
J.D. Prescott 317-234-3827
Christy Stutzman 317-232-9753 317-232-9753
Ethan Manning 317-232-9620
Melanie Wright 317-232-9794
Justin Moed 317-232-9794
Ross Deal 317-232-9976
Terry Goodin 317-234-9048

Indiana is on the verge of mandating the entire recommended pet schedule for all dogs and cats sold in the state with no ability to deviate from the recommendations. It already passed the Senate and now has a hearing coming up in the Agriculture committee of the House. That will likely be happening in the next week or so. We will keep you updated on the schedule.

SB 185 creates what many people call a “puppy lemon law”. It does have some good points in the law, such as not allowing dogs and cats to be sold until they are 8 weeks old. However, the main portion and reason for the bill is to force every dog and cat sold, even for $1, at any time in their lives to be fully up to date with the recommended animal vaccine schedule. This allows any new vaccines that get added to the schedule to be mandated. For adult cats, boosters are recommended every three years and that is not just the rabies vaccine that is recommended.

This is a BIG $$$$$ bill for big pharma. How many people in Indiana have purchased a dog or cat? If this passes, every single one of those pets will have to be fully up to day when sold/rehomed. That is A LOT of money spent. Pet vaccines are big money. Purdue is behind this bill. The author has 12 veterinarians that are supporting this that he deems as experts, and basically said that he is going to listen to the vets over his constituents who called in opposing this since the vets are the experts.

Senator Alting said that 27 or 28 other states have this bill. But upon review of several other state laws, SB 185 is more restrictive than the majority of these “puppy lemon laws” in other states. When speaking about the bill, the author has repeatedly used the term “breeders” when he is talking about who this law applies to. BUT the actual wording does not only apply to breeders. It defines a “Seller” as anyone who sells a dog or cat (companion animal is defined as dog or cat if you read the bill). That includes every person that sells a dog or cat for any amount of money at any time in the animals’ lifespan. Several other states do not apply this law to people who sell one litter a year or sell less than 9 animals a year. Several states do not include small hobby breeders having one litter a year. Many states exclude the common person selling their pet to rehome them. Otherwise, there could be negative consequences to pet owners.

For example, Tom is moving from Indiana to Hawaii. He can’t afford to take his 9-year-old pet cat. So, he advertises his cat with a fee of $50. Advertising a free cat leaves the cat open to be taken and tortured or used for bait, so it is never a good idea to advertise a free pet. Sue buys the cat for $50. She takes the cat to the vet who says the cat is not up to date on the three-year booster vaccines except for the rabies. The vet informs Sue that it was against the law for Tom to sell her this cat without being up to date with the recommended vaccine schedule. Tom had been getting the rabies vaccine for his cat but nothing else since the cat had finished kitten shots years ago. Sue makes an issue out of this and files for charges against Tom. Tom is already in Hawaii and now must deal with a $500 fine for selling his $50 cat without the recommended booster vaccine. Tom’s cat had never been sick, and this was never an issue for his indoor only cat. It would have been cheaper for Tom to just set the cat free outside.

Ask them to remove the vaccine requirement or at least amend to change the bill to redefine seller as those selling more than one litter a year or more than 9 animals instead of every single person in the state being labeled as a seller and required to follow this vaccine mandate. Changing the definition of seller will align with wording in some other states that have a similar law.

We are also concerned that once this requirement passes, in the future the veterinarians will get a law that makes each dog or cat get a vet check and that only vets can administer the vaccines, just like how the rabies vaccine is now. Currently, animal vaccines can be purchased at local farm stores. That was brought up in the hearing, and the vet didn’t sound super excited that people are able to buy vaccines on their own but did say it is currently possible. Mandatory vet checks for each vaccine schedule is also going to very lucrative for the vets pushing this bill.

Here is a good article written by a Veterinarian who is fighting to save the pets. Dr. Rob. This was his response to other mainstream veterinarians who claim there is no dose dependent size needed regardless of animal weight.

“Lies and Propaganda

As we move towards victory in protecting the pets, lies and propaganda, are the only “evidence” the money hungry Veterinary Establishment has.

First of all I am not monitored at all and own my own hospital practicing the new standard of vaccination.

The new standard, based on science, is to lower the dose by weight and give the minimal number of vaccines to produce a protective titer and stop there, periodically monitoring the titer to insure continued immunity.

As veterinarians around the world are adopting this standard pet lives and suffering from overdosing and over vaccination is being minimized.

I have been practicing for 35 years and have yet to have a pet get any disease I have vaccinated for, however I have saved countless lives by decreasing vaccine reactions.

Since lymphocytes, the cells of the immune system, are the same size in a Great Dane and a Chihuahua of course you have a much smaller immune system in the Chihuahua since there are less lymphocytes. Therefore you can give less vaccine volume, less antigen, to vaccinate smaller pets. Scientific studies, all available on my website, have shown two things:

1) Vaccine reactions go up as the weight goes down if all pets are given 1 cc of vaccine.

2) Titers go up as the weight goes down if all given 1 cc of vaccine.

The conclusion is clear and I am demonstrating it in my practice- lower the volume by weight and measure the titer to verify protection.

I have done this and found that I can achieve the same titer for a small dog administering a lower volume as a large dog getting 1 cc.

This author gives no data to back up her “information” but I have facts, available on my website:

Of course the pharmaceutical companies and the Veterinary Establishment are not going to stop. They have made billions of dollars by overdosing and over vaccination pets and won’t give up the money, despite a trail of dead pets and grieving pet owners in their wake.

However we the people, we the pet owners now know the truth!

We won’t stop until every pet is protected!

On to Victory! Together and united to protect the pets!

God bless you all, love, Doc”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s