I totally understand!
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:49:36 -0400From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: 70% false positivesno, but this is interesting to keep around....i'm sorry, i haven't had a chance to look up the articles yet--i do rescue, and that's been consuming all my time lately!haven't forgotten, tho--thought about it last night, right before i fell asleep.... MC On 3/12/07, Stray Cat Alliance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ten House Cats, is this the link/info that you meant when you said that 70% of cats are false positives? Anita http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2551866&dopt=Abstract 1: J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1989 Oct 1;195(7):928-30. Links Comment in: J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1989 Dec 15;195(12):1680. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1990 Jan 1;196(1):10-1. Interpreting feline leukemia test results. · Romatowski J. Routine prevaccinal screening for FeLV has inherent statistical limitations owing to the magnification of false-positive test errors by the low prevalence of FeLV viremia in the general cat population. Positive ELISA test results obtained in a screening program should be interpreted with caution, because a high proportion--approximately 72%--of such are likely to be false-positive results. On the other hand, routine screening is an excellent method for ruling out FeLV viremia, because a false-negative result is likely to be obtained in only 1/1,000 tests. PMID: 2551866 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Explore the seven wonders of the world Learn more!-- Spay & Neuter Your Neighbors!Maybe That'll Make The Difference....MaryChristineAIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCatsMSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 289856892 _________________________________________________________________ Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline
