70% false positives
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=Retrievedb=PubMedlist_uids=2551866dopt=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 http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+worldmkt=en-USform=QBRE
Re: 70% false positives
no, 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=Retrievedb=PubMedlist_uids=2551866dopt=Abstract *http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrievedb=PubMedlist_uids=2551866dopt=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.*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmedcmd=Retrievedopt=AbstractPluslist_uids=2557312itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus *J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1990 Jan 1;196(1):10-1.*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmedcmd=Retrievedopt=AbstractPluslist_uids=2295538itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus *Interpreting feline leukemia test results.* · *Romatowski J*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmedcmd=Searchitool=pubmed_AbstractPlusterm=%22Romatowski+J%22%5BAuthor%5D . 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!http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+worldmkt=en-USform=QBRE -- Spay Neuter Your Neighbors! Maybe That'll Make The Difference MaryChristine AIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCats MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 289856892
RE: 70% false positives
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 aroundi'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=Retrievedb=PubMedlist_uids=2551866dopt=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 DifferenceMaryChristineAIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCatsMSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 289856892 _ Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-ussource=wlmailtagline
Re: 70% false positives
i'm considering not paying my dsl bill, just so i can get some work done around the house--seems i can't ever get far enough away from my computer and all the needy little ones that come across my monitor!! argh... and if you're dealing with ferals, well. On 3/12/07, Stray Cat Alliance [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I totally understand! -- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:49:36 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: 70% false positives no, 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=Retrievedb=PubMedlist_uids=2551866dopt=Abstract *http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrievedb=PubMedlist_uids=2551866dopt=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.*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmedcmd=Retrievedopt=AbstractPluslist_uids=2557312itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus *J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1990 Jan 1;196(1):10-1.*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmedcmd=Retrievedopt=AbstractPluslist_uids=2295538itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus *Interpreting feline leukemia test results.* · *Romatowski J*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmedcmd=Searchitool=pubmed_AbstractPlusterm=%22Romatowski+J%22%5BAuthor%5D . 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!http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+worldmkt=en-USform=QBRE -- Spay Neuter Your Neighbors! Maybe That'll Make The Difference MaryChristine AIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCats MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 289856892 -- Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger Get it now!http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-ussource=wlmailtagline -- Spay Neuter Your Neighbors! Maybe That'll Make The Difference MaryChristine AIM / YAHOO: TenHouseCats MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 289856892
