Thanks for the info Sally ;-))
Cherie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is a given that false negatives (failing to detect antigen from virus that
is actively replicating) to an ELISA test, which is sensitive enough to
detect very early stages of infection, are highly unlikely. A "false negative"
would more likely be due to error on the part of the technician performing the
test.
Cats which initially test positive on an ELISA, but later test negative, have
either cleared the virus, which is a likely scenario with a healthy adult cat
who becomes exposed and is only transiently infected, but it is also possible
that after the initial infection, the virus has become latent, or dormant,
and sequestered in the bone marrow. Only a bone marrow reactivation test (and
maybe the PCR which tests for the virus in a cat's DNA??) can detect a latent
infection.
As giving any vaccine is a stress to a cat's! immune system, I would not go
ahead and vaccinate a cat who was initially positive, then retested negative,
without first determining whether or not the cat had cleared the virus; I would
want to be sure that the infection had not become latent.
There is little point in vaccinating a positive cat for the infecting virus,
it is stressing an already-compromised immune system, which could be harmful.
It will certainly not provide any protection from a virus which has already
infected the cat.
It is questionable whether or not an immunocompromised cat can benefit from
any vaccines, period. If a cat's immune system has been compromised by a virus
like FeLV or FIV, then its body cannot be expected to respond to the
vaccination process as would a healthy cat. While it is claimed that it is impossible
for a cat to succumb to an illness from a "killed" vaccine, any kind of
stress to a compromised immune system can have a negative ef! fect. And if there is
enough cumulative stress, opportunistic pathogens can more easily gain a
foothold.
Sally in San Jose
