HEALTH - Veterinarian Recognized as Person of National Significance

(Dr. Frank W. Schofield)

This week Parks Canada and the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada commemorated the importance of Dr. Frank W. Schofield as a person of national historic significance.

A special ceremony was held on September 30th in Guelph, Ontario with members of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, the University of Guelph and Ontario Veterinary College, the Schofield Memorial Foundation, and Dr. Chung, former Prime Minister of Korea.

Schofield was considered an outstanding veterinarian who was nationally and internationally known for his research in animal disease, in particular sweet clover poisoning of cattle, infections in young animals and viral mink enteritis, which led to improvements in both human and animal health.

His research explained bacterial, viral and toxicological ailments, which he found new ways to prevent or treat. He identified the dangers of Escherechia coli and developed Warfarin, still an important anti-coagulant.

Through his scientific, missionary and political work in Korea, he contributed to the democratic development of that country and is recognized there as a patriot.

He was closely involved with the independence movement by documenting the mass jailing, torture and deaths associated with the struggle for Korean sovereignty.

At the time of his retirement from the Ontario Veterinary College, almost 75% of all English speaking veterinarians in Canada had studied under Dr. Schofield.

Schofield is the only veterinarian to be recognized as a person of national significance by the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada.

Created in 1919, the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada advises the Minister of Environment and Climate Change regarding the national historic significance of places, people and events that have marked Canada’s history.

HEALTH - What Veterinarians Know That Physicians Don't

In a popular TedMed Talk, Dr. Barbara Natterson-Horowitz discusses how veterinarians and human medical doctors should work together more.

The Cardiologist explores the connection between humans and animals and how physicians and vets treat the same disorders such as arthritis, diabetes, depression, anxiety and compulsions, to name a few.

‘Why hadn’t I thought to check with veterinarians, read veterinary medical journals or attend a veterinary conference,’ she questions. Nor had her colleagues.

Natterson-Horowitz promotes a species-spanning approach to health and how it can improve the medical care of the human animal.

Her call to action is directly in line with the One Health movement.

One Health supporters believe veterinarians, physicians, molecular biologists, ecologists, environmental chemists, and others are better able to respond to existing and emerging concerns when they work together.

Another initiative bolstering the species-spanning approach is Zoobiquity.

Zoobiquity explores how human and non-human animal commonalities can be used to diagnose, treat, and heal patients of all species, and hosts a conference every spring which brings together leading clinicians and scientists in both human and veterinary medicine.

HEALTH - One Health Initiative: Uniting Human and Animal Medicine

With outbreaks of diseases such as avian flu, swine flu, and Ebola, there has been increased awareness of the risks associated with zoonotic diseases. (Zoonotic diseases are any diseases that can spread from animals to humans.)

 

Researchers are looking into how these diseases cross species barriers, spread through populations, and are impacted by environmental factors.

New research has made it clear that effective health management requires a holistic and integrated understanding of disease development and spread.

Each of the various disciplines involved – veterinarians, physicians, molecular biologists, ecologists, environmental chemists, and others – are better able to respond to existing and emerging concerns when they collaborate with each other.

The United States Department of Agriculture has taken a “One Health” approach for some time, meaning that they view human, animal, and environmental health as connected. In a recent blog post they state that health issues must “be solved through improved communication, cooperation, and collaboration across disciplines and institutions.”

As a step towards this communication, cooperation, and collaboration, they have recently launched a centralized web portal page to allow everyone, from stakeholders to the public, to access up to date information on programs, policies, and current issues.

Some of the topics that the USDA believes require a One Health approach are antimicrobial resistance, avian influenza, and influenza in swine.

Each specific topic is addressed in detail on the new site, with overviews, resources, and even links to information about research funding options.

The USDA partners with US Fish and Wildlife, US Food and Drug Administration, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Environmental Protection Agency, and tribal Nations, as well as working internally with each of its many branches.

The USDA’s One Health portal site is an important step for American integrative health management, and the concept of cross-discipline collaborative health management is gaining traction globally.

The One Health Initiative is a global initiative that also hopes to expand interdisciplinary collaboration for human, animal, and environmental health. Their website has been active since 2008, and although the One Health Initiative is separate from the USDA’s One Health portal, they also work with organizations such as the CDC and the USDA.

Other global initiatives include One Health Sweden, which works to integrate research about zoonotic infections from various disciplines, and the One Health Congress, which first met in February 2011 in Melbourne, Australia and has met every year since.

By Tiffany Sostar

Tiffany is a writer, editor, academic, and animal lover who came late to her appreciation of pets. At 18, a rescue pup named Tasha saved her from a depression and she hasn't looked back. She has worked as the canine behaviour program coordinator for the Calgary Humane Society, and was a dog trainer specializing in working with fearful and reactive dogs for many years. She doesn't have any pets right now, but makes up for it by giving her petsitting clients (and any dogs she comes across on her frequent coffee shop adventures) extra snuggles.

HEALTH - Canine Cancer Treatment With "Mind-blowing" Results

Imagine scientists being able to unleash a dog's own immune system to attack cancer.

Then imagine the potentially life-saving treatment, (which would allow cancer-stricken canines to avoid more conventional side-effects of chemotherapy,) being downright affordable.

It's much more than a pipe-dream for Melbourne scientists behind a free clinical trial being conducted Down Under which is already proving to have what Dr. Noam Pik calls “mind-blowing” early results.

(Dr. Noam Pik, photo: Chris Eastman)

Pik, head of the veterinary division at West Melbourne biotechnology research group Biotempus, told the Herald Sun if the trial proves effective, the plan is to offer it as treatment to ailing canines within the next two years and “then continue to humans.”

Essentially, the treatment sees dogs take a pill to thwart cancer's bid to kill.

In the year-long trial being done at 20 vet clinics in Australia, dogs are given a single dose of chemotherapy, that's one tablet, designed to decimate T-Regulatory cells within the pooch's own immune system.

These cells suppress the cancer-fighting mechanism of the immune system's T-Effector cells.

Mere months into the trial, researchers say they have already seen several dogs with early signs of remission.

“If the T-Regulatory cells can be selectively killed, the T-Effector cells can get on with the job of eliminating cancer undisturbed,” Pik told the Herald Sun.

Part of reaching that goal has been accomplished by the team's discovery that a dog's immune system, which moves in cycles, can be mapped.

With that in mind, blood samples are taken every second day allowing researchers to determine when suppressor cells are most vulnerable and then delivering chemotherapy at the optimal juncture.

Not only are there promising results, so far, but the prospect of honing in on a cancer-fighting treatment which is affordable would make any cancer-fighting coups that much more accessible to pet owners trying to get help for their dogs.

Researchers say prohibitively high canine cancer treatment costs, which can run in the tens of thousands, could be dramatically reduced and severe chemotherapy side-effects, such as nausea, would not be associated to the low-dose tablet.

“If this works ... it will save animals from having to go through a lot of nasty chemo,” says Swan Street Veterinary and Wellness Centre’s Dr Kathryn Farquharson.

Pik and his partners, although buoyed by the potential research findings which could lead to a breakthrough in human treatment, are cautiously optimistic.

“The results have been very exciting but we want to remain skeptical. We’re trialling it over the next year — compiling data, publishing in scientific journals,” Pik says.

Dr. Maureen Cooper, a Melbourne veterinary oncologist, says the field of immunotherapy – using a patient's own immune system to combat cancer – has seen much progress in recent years and she she is anxious to see if Biotempus findings add to that wealth of knowledge.

“I believe that in order to improve outcomes in cancer patients, novel treatments and treatment approaches are needed,” Cooper told the Herald Sun.

“We now believe the contribution of the tumour micro-environment is immense and has been previously largely underestimated. Thus, we believe it is important to aim treatment at both the tumour itself and the tumour environment with the aim of achieving more effective and durable cancer treatments.”

Sadly, it seems the disease has taken a stronghold on Carol Veldhoven's eight-year-old dog, Jack.

When she learned a broken leg was in fact symptomatic of aggressive bone cancer, Veldhoven invested more than $10,000 towards vet care but stopped short of having Jack endure amputation or chemotherapy.

It might be too late for Jack, but because the dog is enrolled in the Biotempus clinical cancer trial held in January, he may leave behind quite the legacy – being part of ground-breaking research which will benefit dogs facing a similar plight in future.

“We’re not expecting anything,” Veldhoven told the Herald Sun. “It’s more about helping others down the line.”

By Nadia Moharib

Nadia Moharib is an animal lover who has adopted everything from birds to hamsters, salamanders, rabbits, fish and felines. She has written about all-things-pets for years and was a long-time editor of a pet magazine in a daily newspaper which featured a Q & A column, Ask Whit, penned by her pooch (ghost written, of course.) The serial dog owner lives in Calgary, Alberta and most days can be found at a dog park picking up after her rescue pooch, Scoots.

HEALTH - Vaccine Debate Part Two: The Controversy

Vaccine controversies are almost as old as the practice of vaccination itself, at least on the human side of the issue.

Common misconceptions about human vaccines include the idea that the immune system may be ‘overloaded’ by multiple vaccines, that ‘natural’ immunity is better than the immunity given by vaccines, or that vaccines cause other issues, like autism.

These misconceptions lead to something researchers are calling “vaccine hesitancy,” and the World Health Organization (WHO) guest-edited a special edition of the journal Vaccine in August of last year addressing this issue.

According to WHO, vaccine hesitancy “refers to the delay in acceptance or refusal of safe vaccines despite availability of vaccination services” and it’s a big problem for global human health.

It’s also not a new problem.

(historyofvaccines.org)

Smallpox vaccination in the UK started in the early 1800's, with mandatory vaccination legislated in The Vaccination Acts of 1853 and 1867.

Two anti-vaccination Leagues were formed shortly thereafter, and their rallies and public demonstrations, including the Leicester Demonstration March in 1885, resulted in exemptions for “conscientious objectors” in the 1896 Vaccination Act.

That’s old history, but it’s a story that continues to play out today.

In fact, an overview of anti-vaccination movements over the last two centuries by the National Centre for Biotechnology Information found that the arguments haven’t changed significantly in the last two hundred years, and theorized that they likely won’t change anytime soon.

And there is a link between anti-vaccination rhetoric and vaccine hesitancy in humans, and pet owner refusal or delay of vaccines in dogs and cats.

Fears about over-vaccination, vaccine toxicity, and other issues all impact pet owners’ willingness to vaccinate their pets.

These fears about vaccination are not new in the pet world. In the early 1930's, shortly after the introduction of the canine distemper vaccine, many pet owners refused the distemper vaccine for fear of vaccine-caused illnesses and these fears echoed anti-vaccine sentiment among humans. 

Dr. Danny Joffe, National Medical Director for Associate Veterinary Clinics says, “Unfortunately, there are lots of ideas out there, and they haven’t been proven or  based on science. The one thing we can say is that dogs are living longer than they were 20-30 years ago, and the reason they’re living longer is a combination of good veterinary care, including good vaccination, and proper nutrition. We’re finding the balance between protection and over-vaccinating. The benefits of vaccinating way outweigh risks.”

And there are risks, just like with any medicine or medical treatment.

Some studies have linked vaccination to joint problems such as arthritis in dogs, and this is part of why vets have moved from vaccination every year to vaccination every three years for many vaccines.

Dr. Joffe says, “Vaccines are biological, and there can be adverse reactions to any vaccine. We’ve shifted to vaccinating every three years, and that’s a more positive way to go.”

Humans can also experience adverse reactions to vaccination, particularly immunocompromised or otherwise vulnerable individuals.

Some of the fears are entirely unfounded. For example, vaccines do not cause autism, and that controversy is, itself, a complex and challenging issue that brings up questions of autism acceptance and stigma.

Other fears are less clearly wrong, and this is where questions of public health vs. individual autonomy become relevant.

Among both people and pets, herd immunity is a critical defense against the diseases that used to cost so many lives.

Think of canine distemper, or of polio. These are diseases that standard vaccination has drastically reduced. These vaccines are saving lives and by vaccinating the majority of the population, those who are unable to be vaccinated are more safe.

Public health professionals must weigh the risk of outbreaks and epidemics in the general population against the risk of an adverse reaction in a small percentage of the population.

Part three of this series will look at the question of herd immunity among pets and humans.

By Tiffany Sostar

Tiffany is a writer, editor, academic, and animal lover who came late to her appreciation of pets. At 18, a rescue pup named Tasha saved her from a depression and she hasn't looked back. She has worked as the canine behaviour program coordinator for the Calgary Humane Society, and was a dog trainer specializing in working with fearful and reactive dogs for many years. She doesn't have any pets right now, but makes up for it by giving her petsitting clients (and any dogs she comes across on her frequent coffee shop adventures) extra snuggles.

HEALTH - Vaccine Debate Part One: The History

(Variolation - pbs.org NOVA)

Vaccine history is unexpectedly fascinating and complex.

It is older than Louis Pasteur finding a vaccine (and cure) for rabies in 1885, older even than Edward Jenner’s 1798 use of cowpox to confer smallpox immunity.

Humans have been using infected material to inoculate domesticated animal populations, and themselves, for much longer than the practice has been documented.

The history of vaccination, and of the symbiotic interplay between human and veterinary medicine, offers insight into yet another way that our relationship with domestic animals enhances our lives.

Veterinary vaccines protect human health by limiting the spread of zoonotic diseases – those diseases, such as rabies, that can be transmitted from animals to humans – and there is a long history of the two fields of medicine learning from one another.

Farmers and nomadic herders, like the Tulani in Africa, have inoculated herd animals against diseases such as sheep pox for centuries. Animal inoculation was mentioned in the notes of European explorers and colonizers in Africa as early as the 16th Century.

There is evidence of human variolation, which is a similar type of inoculation via infectious material, in China at 1000 CE, and in 1706 a British minister learned of variolation against smallpox in Turkey.

Although the origins of the practice are not known, it is likely that human variolation was a result of applying successful veterinary techniques to human health care.

Variolation was effective but unpredictable. Smallpox variolation involved introducing infected human material taken from smallpox scabs or the fluid in pustules into healthy humans, often via an open vein. Although it offered solid immunity, there was a significant risk of post-inoculation mortality.

Smallpox vaccination, in contrast, used cowpox to inoculate humans, and this procedure, which was pioneered by Edward Jenner (1749-1823), was much safer. It was also less effective over time, and though the post-inoculation mortality rate was lower, revaccination was often necessary.

The history of smallpox vaccination perfectly demonstrates how human and animal vaccination have overlapped and intertwined.

Variolation likely started among animals, and was transferred to humans, and the development of vaccination as a safer alternative to variolation happened simultaneously among human and veterinary physicians.

The practice of vaccination itself went through multiple iterations including using humans as vaccine reservoirs, then back to using cows as the vaccine source, and many attempts to transport the vaccine outside of a living body.

This complicated interplay between human and animal medicine continues throughout vaccine history, and extends even into our current context.

Louis Pasteur expanded the understanding of viruses and vaccines, and worked with veterinarians and livestock farmers to develop his first two virus vaccines - against fowl cholera and anthrax. He eventually turned his attention to rabies, and this work would not have been possible without his collaboration with veterinarians.

These collaborations continue today.

When a disease affects both human and animal populations, sometimes the human vaccine comes first and sometimes the animal vaccine does, but there is always collaboration happening between the two fields of medicine.

The history of inoculation among both animals and humans extends further back than most people realize, and so do the controversies surrounding vaccine use.

Part two in this series will look at vaccine controversies, from anti-vaccination arguments in the 1880’s to today.

By Tiffany Sostar

Tiffany is a writer, editor, academic, and animal lover who came late to her appreciation of pets. At 18, a rescue pup named Tasha saved her from a depression and she hasn't looked back. She has worked as the canine behaviour program coordinator for the Calgary Humane Society, and was a dog trainer specializing in working with fearful and reactive dogs for many years. She doesn't have any pets right now, but makes up for it by giving her petsitting clients (and any dogs she comes across on her frequent coffee shop adventures) extra snuggles.

Goats Provide Non-Toxic Weed Control

(City of Calgary)

With health and safety concerns growing around chemical weed control, individuals and cities are looking for non-toxic, environmentally friendly options.

This week the city of Calgary, Alberta launched their goat grazing pilot project.

A herd of approximately 100 goats was introduced to a portion of Confluence (West Nose Creek) Park. For the next few weeks, the herd will dine on invasive weed species, including Canada thistle.

“We know that grazing has the potential to offer several benefits for managing landscapes in Calgary,” Chris Manderson, Urban Conservation lead for Calgary Parks, said in a release. “Targeted grazing for weeds is environmentally friendly and sustainable, and there’s evidence from other cities that indicates that it can also be cost-effective.”

Goats provide an alternative to pesticide use, their droppings fertilize the soil, and their hooves work the earth helping to till, aerate and condition the ground.

The project has been taken on by Baah’d Plant Management and Reclamation who provide not just the goats but a shepherd, horse, one herding dog and three guardian dogs to do the work.

Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh are examples of other cities that have used goats for weed control.

But weed control isn’t the only function of the vegetation-clearing critters. Goats have also been used to clear hiking and biking trails and create fire breaks.

RESEARCH - Dogs May be Able to Detect Malaria in Humans

(medicaldetectiondogs.org.uk)

Dogs help to keep us healthy.

Beyond getting owners out for a walk, and the healing benefits of petting, dogs are a significant part of many people’s healthcare routines.

Dogs are used as service, assistance and therapy animals and there are even dogs trained to detect blood sugar levels and alert diabetic individuals of an imminent crash.

Now, dogs are also helping with another piece of the healthcare puzzle.

Following last year’s NHS approval for the use of cancer detection dogs in a medical trial, dogs’ highly sensitive noses are being turned to malaria detection.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has focused on malaria eradication for years, has backed new research starting later in 2016 at Durham University.

The University, with Prof. Steve Lindsay leading the project, will partner with Medical Detection Dogs, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the Medical Research Council Unit, the Gambia. 

Current malaria testing requires blood collection and lab testing, which is time intensive and costly.

If this research is fruitful, malaria dogs could detect the presence of the disease from urine and sweat samples, and could work much faster than lab testing of blood allows.

The dogs could also be used in mobile units, or at points of entry to an area, which would help increase access to testing, and treatment.

They will be sniffing for the presence of specific odours that humans produce after being infected with the malaria parasite.

Dr Claire Guest, CEO of Medical Detection Dog, an organization that specializes in training dogs for medical purposes, told The Independent, “Dogs have an extraordinary sense of smell. They can detect parts per trillion; that is equivalent to one spoon of sugar in two Olympic-sized swimming pools. In training trials, they have proven themselves to be 93 per cent reliable at detecting cancer. I feel confident they will learn to detect the odour of malaria.”

Malaria is a significant global health concern, with an estimated 214 million cases and 438,000 deaths globally in 2015.

By Tiffany Sostar

Tiffany is an animal lover who came late to her appreciation of pets. At 18, a rescue pup named Tasha saved her from a depression and she hasn't looked back. She's written for a variety of publications and facilitates writing workshops for marginalized writers. She's particularly interested in animal behaviour, and working with trauma recovery for four-legged and two-legged animals.

RESEARCH - Canine Genetic Study Can Help Breed Healthier Dogs & Fight Disease in People

Domestic dogs share hundreds of diseases with humans and ground-breaking research out of Cornell University relying on canines might lead to discoveries in fighting disease in people.

The largest genetic study of dogs conducted by the university, recently published in the journal Nature Communications, saw the genetic analysis of 4,200 dogs.

And the findings are a coup considered it could offer a viable lead to help link genetic markers of disease with the responsible gene.

“The more we know about the genetic basis of diseases, the better we are at keeping pure-bred dog populations genetically healthy,” says Adam Boyko, assistant professor of biomedical sciences at Cornell’s College of Veterinary Medicine and the paper’s senior author.

The study investigated 180,000 genetic markers, DNA sequences with a known physical location on a chromosome – ultimately offering “a big step toward efficiently mapping genes responsible for complex disease in dogs, most of which are very similar in humans, thereby accelerating our understanding of human genetic diseases.”

Researchers say that by identifying important genes and proteins in dogs for diseases and traits, it may be possible to then test those homologous genes in humans.

In the study, samples were taken from more than 150 purebreds, 170 mixed-breed dogs and 350 free-ranging village dogs from the Cornell Veterinary Biobank with the work taking place over several years.

From hip dysplasia to lymphoma, dogs share more than 350 diseases with humans and similar pathways and genes associated – making mutts increasingly popular as model subjects for studying human disease.

As well genetics in dogs are far more simple than in humans making relying on them as research tools a “useful and underused way to understand genetic diseases from a human perspective,” Boyko says.

Existing research has made links between standard poodles and squamous cell carcinoma, German shepherds at atopic dermatitis and canine compulsive disorder in Dobermans, the study cites, while stating “domestic dogs” are “excellent animal models for human disease.”

In the Cornell study, for instance, hundreds of genes contribute to body size in humans while the research proved much easier with canine subjects.

“We found 17 genes for body size in dogs, and by looking at those genes we can predict a dog's size with 90 percent accuracy,” Boyko says.

For complex diseases, researchers identified areas on the genome associated with elbow dysplasia, hip dysplasia, lymphoma, mast cell tumour, granulomatous colitis and idiopathic epilepsy, which is often described as epilepsy without cause and often used to describe genetic epilepsy.

In addition to body size, researchers also succeeded in identifying genes which influence traits like fur length and shedding.

Human disease-mapping studies generally include genotyping tens of thousands of individuals and looking at 1 million markers across the genome.

In this study, Boyko says, researchers conducted simulations to show that “in dogs, we expect to be able to identify genetic risk factors for most major diseases with 1000 individual dogs and 1000 controls.”

The study was funded by Zoetis Animal Health, the Cornell University Center for Advanced Technology in Life Science Enterprise, the National Geographic Society, National Institutes of Health, The American Kennel Club and the Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine.

By Nadia Moharib

Nadia Moharib is an animal lover who has adopted everything from birds to hamsters, salamanders, rabbits, fish and felines. She has written about all-things-pets for years and was a long-time editor of a pet magazine in a daily newspaper which featured a Q & A column, Ask Whit, penned by her pooch (ghost written, of course.) The serial dog owner lives in Calgary, Alberta and most days can be found at a dog park picking up after her rescue pooch, Scoots.