After my column on West Nile Virus (Sept. 22), it was pointed out to me that I had made an error. After describing adverse reactions to the vaccine in our own horses and those of close friends, and our experience with an unvaccinated, 30-year-old horse that survived the disease, I mentioned “a reported 30 percent fatality rate from the vaccine.” Wrong fact, wrong conclusion. Mea culpa.
I did not attribute this to “an unnamed source who spoke on condition of anonymity.” And since this doesn’t concern leaks and cover-ups among high government officials, I probably won’t be called to testify before a grand jury. Nor will I have to follow Judith Miller to jail for refusing to name my source. And that’s a good thing. Because I couldn’t name my source if I were facing a firing squad. It’s just not in my notes anywhere. And my recollection of it is wrong, my memory dimmed. Addled and befuddled by the sheer volume of hand-written notes of phone interviews and casual conversations, second-hand information and reams of computer printouts from a dozen Web sites.
Unlike Jayson Blair, who fabricated quotes and descriptions to cover skimpy or nonexistent on-the-scene reporting, my truth was buried in too much reporting, both anecdotal and attributable. At least I didn’t misquote a named source.
The error was called to my attention by a well-known and respected veterinarian, who even suggested that I might have transposed that 30 percent figure from a published fact that as many as 30 percent of horses who contract the disease die of the virus. This vet, who treats many local horses, had heard from his clients worried over the safety of the vaccine. He assured me that he knows of no fatalities caused by the vaccine and said it was possible horses that died within 48 hours of receiving the injection may have been exposed to the disease and were already incubating the virus at the time they were vaccinated.
We also discussed the differences between Los Angeles and Kern counties in reporting and testing procedures for West Nile Virus and other diseases. There seems to be no question that horse owners in L.A. County have better resources. The large population of expensive performance horses would likely ensure a higher standard of care and reporting. Kern County is ranch country and things are different here. The cowboy’s horse that dies of an adverse reaction to a vaccine will not receive a necropsy to prove the cause of death. No less loved and mourned than a top show horse, he is just as dead. A horse in the L.A. area would be hauled to the State Diagnostic Veterinary Lab in San Bernardino where the necropsy would be done with great care and the results reported promptly. Kern County has no state veterinary facility.
Consider the problem facing our friend who tried to report her horse’s death after the vaccination. She called the Bakersfield Veterinary Hospital and was rudely told the vaccine could not have caused the death. She was told the body would have to be hauled to their hospital for autopsy. How can she do this? UPS? Brown can’t do this for you. Nor can she get a 1,200 lb. carcass into her trailer. D&D Disposal can take as long as two days to pick up a dead animal and they would charge $900 to take it to Bakersfield. The hauling and testing would be done at her expense. She gave up and buried the horse on the property with the help of a friend. She was also told that Ft. Dodge Lab, maker of the vaccine, wasn’t interested in her story unless the attending veterinarian or the State Diagnostic Veterinary office reported the adverse reaction.
The stories of cowboys who have lost their horses are similar. The process for testing and reporting adverse reactions to vaccines is daunting. Well beyond the means of the average ranch hand whose horse dies often hundreds of miles from the nearest vet hospital.
I admit to a certain bias against drug manufacturers who go to great lengths to defend their products. There’s a long history of burying the results of studies that raise questions about safety (think Vioxx) and, in the case of veterinary products, by making the reporting procedure far too difficult and costly for the average person.
Our friend is still devastated by the thought that she could be responsible in some way for the death of her horse, the only possibility offered by her vet. I would hope that she and others, whose horses have had even nonfatal reactions, will at least write to the manufacturer, the USDA and other agencies. Their reports may go unheeded by the drug company, but perhaps they might spur new studies leading to safer drugs and the establishment of more realistic procedures for testing and reporting equine cases.