Can you please state the first paragraph in another way. I'm don't know what you mean by "the stats are that 70% can be adequately exposed until to test positive, and either never do so, or process the virus out of their system." This is very important to me because I have a very healthy cat who tested POSITIVE one year ago. He was a stray. This is the second year I'm taking him to have his teeth cleaned because the vet said she can see signs of FELV+ by his teeth (not her exact words).
So what percentage of the 70% and the 30% are the cats who become ill? I began giving my cat the MEGA C a little over a year ago. Thanks very much. Susan -----Original Message----- From: felvtalk-boun...@felineleukemia.org [mailto:felvtalk-boun...@felineleukemia.org] On Behalf Of MaryChristine Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:25 PM To: email@example.com Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] FeLV Re-testing for kittens/Tommy Update in adult healthy cats, the stats are that 70% can be adequately exposed until to test positive, and either never do so, or process the virus out of their system. they also know that some percentage of that 30% who do remain viremic, never become symptomatic, and are not contagious, even tho they continue to test positive. vets consistently forget, and we must consistently remind them, that the SNAP (and IFA, actually) test not for antibodies/infection, but for antigens/exposure--so a confirmatory test is literally vital. sadly, there is just not enough research to say what the percentages are in kittens--back in 2002, it was presumed that ALL kittens of positive moms (many of whom probably weren't positive to start with) were be definition positive themselves, and all were killed. when mom wasn't there to test, if one kitten in a litter tested positive, or the litter's blood was mixed (heaven forfend!) and was positive (again, remember, to ANTIGENS only), all were most likely killed. asymptomatic positive adults were most likely to be given a chance, while kittens were far less lucky. hence no research pool. in sanctuary settings, anecdotally it seemed that asymptomatic kittens--especially of asymptomatic moms--who made it past six or seven months of age (when mom's antibodies wore off? don't know, but kept happening), and again past about 18-22 months (absolutely NO ideas on why that's an important mark) would survive--these were UNretested cats, remember. kittens of sickly moms, or kittens who were themselves sickly -- not necessarily REALLY sick, but just not as thrifty as others their age/developmental stage--tended to do less well. with retesting recognized as a necessity, with an IFA done at an interval long enough to let the virus work itself out of kitty's system, the majority of kittens tested negative. still do. just no real data to 'prove' it. paolo, have you seen this? *http://tinyurl.com/AAFP-Retrovirus-Guidelines* * * MC -- Spay & Neuter Your Neighbors! Maybe That'll Make The Difference.... MaryChristine Special-Needs Coordinator, Purebred Cat Breed Rescue (www.purebredcats.org) Member, SCAT (Special-Cat Action Team) _______________________________________________ Felvtalk mailing list Felvtalk@felineleukemia.org http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org _______________________________________________ Felvtalk mailing list Felvtalk@felineleukemia.org http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org