The debate continues....I find truths and semi-truths in Fort Dodge's press
release, along with one "eyebrow raiser" (the bit about the contaminated
haircoats). Is this really a significant source of infection under normal
circumstances? Not to bash the company, but this reminds me of the PR they
put out for several years about canine borreliosis and their vaccine. If you
didn't know better (and how is the average layperson supposed to?), you would
have thought that every dog in America needed to be immunized immediately.
For a few years, I used some of their ads in a lecture I gave to veterinary
students about Lyme disease (the ads showed that dogs in 46/48 states in the
contiguous USA were at equal risk for acquiring the infection; I placed this
squarely in the "blatant exaggertions" category of advertisement). I know that
some very good science is done at Fort Dodge, but I'm concerned that in the
rush to capitalize on it, the truth gets bent somewhat.
Bob Garrison, DVM, MS
Diplomate, American Board of Medical Microbiology (parasitology)