Do you trust your vet? How much? It turns out your answer may well be a good predictor of how likely your dog or cat is to be appropriately vaccinated.
The hesitancy and misinformation about vaccines that has been growing for decades has influenced pet owners as much as parents with human children. I have written repeatedly about the evidence for the safety and efficacy of veterinary vaccines, the problem with vaccine hesitancy among pet owners, and the role of mistrust and misinformation in reducing confidence in, and use of, vaccines.
A couple of years ago, I talked about a research study evaluating vaccine hesitancy among dog owners. Some of the conclusions of this study were these-
- “a large minority of dog owners consider vaccines administered to dogs to be unsafe (37%), ineffective (22%), and/or unnecessary (30%).
- A slight majority of dog owners (53%) endorse at least one of these three positions.”
- 48% of dog owners opposed mandatory rabies vaccination and agreed with the statement, “The decision to vaccinate dogs that are kept as pets should be left up to individual pet owners.”
These views were less likely in those with a college education, and more common in those who also held misinformed views about vaccination for children.
A new study has looked at this issue again, in both cat and dog owners.
Haeder SF. Trust in veterinarians and association with vaccine information sources and vaccination status among dog and cat owners. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2025 Jan 31:1-11.
The findings support and amplify messages from previous work, showing that while most pet owners trust their vet and rely on them as the main source of information, all too many are still less trusting and more influenced by less reliable sources of information. The basic findings were these-
- Overall, 62.9% of dog and 61.2% of cat owners were classified as trusting their veterinarians.
- The longer people know their vets, the more confidence they have in them.
- Vets were the primary source of information about vaccines for dog and cat owners, followed by the internet (Figure 1)
- Owners with less trust in vets were more likely to turn to other sources, especially the internet, for information.
- People who trust their vets are more likely to have their pets properly vaccinated than those who don’t.
- Those who rely more on the internet for information are less likely to have their pets properly vaccinated.
Other variables, such as political affiliation and education level, were inconsistently associated with reliance on vets as a primary information source.
This is not a revolutionary study, but one that supports the broad understanding we already have about the role of personal relationships built over time in establishing trust and support clients in making science-based decisions about their pets’ health. It also highlights the unsurprising deleterious role of the internet as a source of information about vaccination (and many other topics!).
In my presentations on mistrust and misinformation, I have emphasized that trust in vets and science remain high overall, though it is eroding among some segments of society. We still have the confidence of many pet owners, and we can still help them protect their pets from the mistakes encouraged by sources of anti-scientific information. But we cannot blindly rely on that confidence, and we must continually nurture the relationships with our clients that allow us to help them resist the rising forces of mistrust and misinformation.
Figure 1.
I don’t have a specific vet, but I do trust the practice I use to be science based, and find that the vets I see are; the exception being recommending glucosamine and chondroitin for an arthritic dog, but they admitted the evidence base was not good and it wasn’t raised again. That said I have always taken veterinary recommendations on vaccination, partly because my mother instilled in us the value of vaccination for us and our pets. She had had polio in the 50s before a vaccine was available, she had had to learn to walk again without the use of the usual balance system, which restricted what she could do. I have to be careful to respond civilly if someone raises anti-vaccine points as I can get angry very quickly on the subject, and I know that you get better results if you don’t just tell people they are idiots.
when i try to talk people into vaccinating who are what the politically left now likes to call a antivaxer i use the story of my three cousins who got vaccinated like i did at school for polio but their mother did not and she died that summer of polio. One day one of these “antivax” people told me my cousins mother probably got polio from the vaccines her children got at school. If you know enough about polio you know that at that time in the usa the polio vaccines we got were live virus vaccines and what the antivaxer said could have been true. Most of the unvaccinated people in the usa who get polio get the virus from people who have been vaccinated out of the country with live vaccine. How can we stop making vaccination a political football?
chatbot says
Your personal experience with polio vaccination highlights a complex issue that intertwines public health with political and social beliefs. Here are some strategies to address the politicization of vaccination:
Education and Transparency:
Historical Context: Explain how vaccines have evolved. The polio vaccine initially used in the U.S. was indeed the live-virus oral polio vaccine (OPV), which could lead to vaccine-derived poliovirus in rare cases. However, since 2000, the U.S. has switched to the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), which does not carry this risk.
Current Science: Clarify that the current vaccines used in many developed countries, including the U.S., are safer in terms of not causing vaccine-derived polio. This can help dispel myths about modern vaccines.
Addressing Misinformation:
Fact-Checking: Engage with antivaxxers by providing accurate information from reliable sources. Use examples where vaccines have eradicated or significantly reduced diseases like smallpox, measles, and polio.
Acknowledge Concerns: Recognize their fears or questions without immediately dismissing them. This can create a more open dialogue.
Depoliticizing Health:
Bipartisan Messaging: Encourage health messages that come from a broad spectrum of political figures. When leaders across the political divide support vaccinations, it can reduce the perception that vaccines are a partisan issue.
Focus on Health, Not Politics: Frame the conversation around personal health, community safety, and global health achievements rather than political ideology.
Building Trust:
Community Engagement: Use local leaders, doctors, and community figures to advocate for vaccinations, as trust in local figures can often transcend political divides.
Transparency in Data: Share clear, accessible data on vaccine safety and efficacy. Highlight how vaccines are rigorously tested and monitored even after approval.
Empathy and Understanding:
Personal Stories: Sharing personal stories like yours can be powerful, but it’s crucial to also address the counterarguments with facts. Explain how the scenario of your aunt’s case would be unlikely with today’s vaccines.
Listen: Sometimes, simply listening to why someone is hesitant can open doors for more constructive conversations.
Regulatory Confidence:
Highlight Oversight: Explain the roles of agencies like the FDA and CDC in ensuring vaccine safety, which can help reassure people about the oversight and science behind vaccine development.
Legislation and Policy:
Avoid Mandates as Political Tools: If vaccine mandates become necessary, ensure they are framed as public health measures backed by science, not political agendas.
By focusing on these areas, you can help shift the conversation from one of political division to one of shared public health goals. Remember, the goal is not just to convince but to educate, understand, and build a consensus on the importance of vaccinations for community health.
Ask anything
No file chosen
I belong to German Shepherd groups. The distrust and fear mongering against veterinarians are enormous as well as frustrating. People love to post certain holistic vets’ theories, even though some of them are absolutely ridiculously outrageous and has been disproven time and again. These people accuse veterinarians of improprieties such as basing their decisions for financial gain only and not the health and well-being of their patient. It is a constant in those groups to feed raw, no vaccines or flea and tick preventatives. My dog has tested positive for Ehrlichiosis for the past nine years because she wasn’t on preventatives when I adopted her. She now has kidney disease, and I take her to see a nephrologist for treatment. I belong to a veterinary site where people can ask questions and get advice free of charge. I’ve seen so many dogs lose their life on that site because their owners didn’t believe in preventatives. Your site is mentioned frequently in a nutrition group I belong to, and I love reading all the information you provide.
I’m so sorry you have to face this when seeking science-based care for your dog. The current wave of anti-science sentiment hurts people and pets even if they aren’t personally a part of it!