I've had kittens go from negative to positive, and positive to negative.
Also had a double+ adult turn out to be only FIV+.His initial snap was
said to be a "light" positive and I know that term is highly debatable, but
for the record, he did not have a strong blue dot on the first test, but a
this is from joel, whom some of you will know from FIV stuff. while he and i
disagree VIOLENTLY (well, we're polite about it, but absolutely
diametrically opposed to one another's understanding of FIV), i greatly
respect his scientific knowledge, and his ability to follow a great variety
of streams
Thanks for this MC and Joel. I am curious as to what you so strongly
disagree on, but it's helpful to read this none the less.
You know it seems to me that the big problem when discussing felv treatment
is related to stage at which the disease is at when treatment is initiated.
I mean if you are
we (Hurricane Pets Rescue, in this case) have a little boy in NYC. he's an
adult, came into a city shelter. has tested positive for FeLV on his first
test, and we all know what that means. we've got him at our vet for his REAL
problems: he's unable to use his rear legs. he has superficial pain refl
i don't think that FIV is a good model for HIV/AIDS--the manner of
transmission is different, the ways the virus manifests is different, the
course is different. i don't like using human-based terminology for cats
does either species any good. cats do NOT get ARC (AIDS-related complex) in
my opinio
all these answers are right on: a single test, negative OR positive, means
nothing because of the fact that the test is for EXPOSURE. cat's body needs
adequate time to process the virus out of their systems if they're going to.
i, too, got into the FeLV community when a lovely darling who'd teste
jeni, i have NEVER seen or heard about mutated versions of FeLV--FeCoV, yes,
which mutates into FIP. but this is something completely new, and i would
like to see some backing for the statement.
there is significant research that implies that many truly positive FeLVs
NEVER become symptomatic, and
Yeah, it's felv type c. You know how there are three types A and B being
those transmitted and C being the mutated form that primarily causes
disease. Let me see if I can find a good paper.
Jenny
On 4/20/10, MaryChristine wrote:
>
> jeni, i have NEVER seen or heard about mutated versions of F
i do know that there are different strains, but really haven't encountered
this before--so anything you send to the list will be gratefully digested!
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:17 PM, jbero tds.net wrote:
> Yeah, it's felv type c. You know how there are three types A and B being
> those transm
Okay this is going to take awhile but here's a sort explanation from a pet
md website. I should clarify - type C being the mutation I most fear -
causes the severe anemia and rapid decline to death. It is what I have seen
multiple times.
FelV is a retrovirus, an enveloped RNA virus which uses s
FeLIX, indeed! however, having that info, a really quick search shows stuff
back from the early 2000s; i can't follow-up right now, but there were a
number of things that showed up in early research back then that has been
completely invalidated by further stuff.
anyone remember if FeLIX was menti
Okay, this is kind of technical but it basically supports the idea that
mutations (in this case deletions in DNA) result in a more virulent and
pathogenic virus worsening the disease state as these mutations are gained
by the virus. Here's the link.
http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/reprint/70/1/359.pdf
O
check the date: 1996. see my other note!
i found a link to a 2000 article in the same journal. is there anything
later than, say, 2005?
MC
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:31 PM, jbero tds.net wrote:
> Okay, this is kind of technical but it basically supports the idea that
> mutations (in this case d
Granted it is older, but I see nothing in the literature later to refute
this information.
On 4/20/10, MaryChristine wrote:
>
> check the date: 1996. see my other note!
>
> i found a link to a 2000 article in the same journal. is there anything
> later than, say, 2005?
>
> MC
>
> On Tue, Apr 20,
there's no mention of it in the 2008 AAFP guidelines, and i would expect it
to be there.
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM, jbero tds.net wrote:
> Granted it is older, but I see nothing in the literature later to refute
> this information.
>
> On 4/20/10, MaryChristine wrote:
> >
> > check the
15 matches
Mail list logo
