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: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org
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

Reply via email to