| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name
 | Date | Lines | 
|---|
| 909.1 | It's Not A Death Sentence | LJSRV2::FEHSKENS | len - reformed architect | Fri Jun 30 1995 06:56 | 7 | 
|  |     
    The folks at the Pat Brody shelter have a lot of experience with Feluk
    positive cats; some of the cats have lived long more or less healthy
    lives.  Maybe Sandy Merrit can offer some advice.
    
    len.
    
 | 
| 909.2 |  | USCTR1::MERRITT_S | Kitty City | Fri Jun 30 1995 07:16 | 9 | 
|  |     Len...I did send Jim some info off line regarding my
    experience and the shelters experience with Felv 
    positive kitties!!!  
    
    Your right...it is not an immediate death sentence and
    alot of vets no longer recommend putting them down
    immediately.
    
    Sandy
 | 
| 909.3 | Do a second Opinion Please! | USCTR1::TRIPP |  | Fri Jun 30 1995 08:13 | 23 | 
|  |     STOP!!  I say have the furball retested before sentencing them to a
    death sentence.  I speak from experience, somewhere in here is my note
    of when we took in Barney and he tested positive for FIV at a regular
    vet in Worcester and we were told to destroy  him!   I'm glad I didn't
    listen, I called Tufts and asked to find out as much info onFIV, and
    found they are doing reasearch on this.  Ok a little off the subject
    but I do feel strongly about a "second opinion"!
    
    Take the animal to another vet, I'm not sure if you're local but Tufts
    is a great place for "difficult" cases and second opinions.  (Be aware
    they are a little higher priced than your average vet) They used a
    different method of blood testing with a higher accuracy rate, and it
    came back negative!  Barney is fine, thank God I didn't listen to the
    first vets advise.
    
    If the retest does come back still positive, Tufts would probably be
    the best place for state of the art treatment, and maybe even you could
    fall into a research grant (like I almost did) and get some treatment
    at reduced or no cost.
    
    Keeping our paws crossed for better news!
    Lyn, Barney, Bandit and The Fluffs!
    
 | 
| 909.4 | Hold on there! | PCBUOA::FALLON |  | Fri Jun 30 1995 08:48 | 10 | 
|  |     WAIT!!!  
    Retest the cat before you do anything other than isolation!! 
    Actually, retest BOTH cats.  This disease is spread by 
    saliva, don't remembe if it's in the poops or not. 
    
    Also, the vaccine will do NOTHING for a positive kitty and
    will only protect up to 80% the rest.
    Karen
    Moonsta
    
 | 
| 909.5 |  | JULIET::CORDES_JA | The smallest feline is a masterpiece. | Fri Jun 30 1995 09:30 | 14 | 
|  |     There is hope.  My mom had 1 FELV+ cat (Jesse) and 1 FELV- cat 
    (Mom Kitty) living together for many years.  Mom Kitty was 
    vaccinated for FELV regularly after Jesse came to live under
    the same roof.
    
    Jesse died of causes that may have been complicated by FELV (we're 
    not totally sure).  He was about 18 years old when he died.  
    
    Mom Kitty died of something totally unrelated to FELV.  She was 
    somewhere around 15 when she died.
    
    Jan
    
    P.S.  Add my voice to the ones calling for a second opinion too.
 | 
| 909.6 | *I* don't want to put her down either!! | TALLIS::PARADIS | There's a feature in my soup! | Fri Jun 30 1995 10:01 | 18 | 
|  |     Thanks for all the responses... here *and* offline!
    
    Believe me, I *don't* want to put her down.  The only reason I thought
    it might be an option is that if (a) she might infect my other furballs
    *and* (b) I couldn't find a good home for her (because she's "damaged
    goods"), then I couldn't see any other options.
    
    My other seven kitties are all vaccinated, but the vet told us that
    the vaccine doesn't provide complete protection.  That's why I was
    worried.  But you're right about re-testing.
    
    BTW - we had her tested at Shrewsbury Animal Hospital... I was under
    the impression that they had all their labwork done at Tufts anyway.
    Is this correct, or what?  (Tufts knows us very well; I'll post that
    story someday 8-) )
    
    --jim
    
 | 
| 909.7 |  | HELIX::SKALTSIS | Deb | Fri Jun 30 1995 10:02 | 6 | 
|  |     Also, aren't there two tests? One the more common one can give a false
    positive (but never a false negitive), and the more expensive one
    (ELIZA?) that can never give a false positive? Or am I thinking of
    somthing else?
    
    Deb
 | 
| 909.8 | Absolutely have a re-test! | AMCUCS::SWIERKOWSKIS | If it ain't broke, we'll break it. | Fri Jun 30 1995 10:12 | 29 | 
|  | Definitely go for the second test.  I won't go into our very painful 
experiences last summer, but our vet automatically did a second test on 
the family we rescued just to be sure.  The first test that most vets do is
done in the office; the second test is sent out.  If that second test is
positive, you have some difficult decisions ahead.
I don't want to alarm you, but it is spread through body fluids.  Food and 
water bowls, litter boxes, hissing, scratching, etc.  I hope when you let 
the FeLV+ kitty out of isolation that all access to food, etc is blocked.
This is a highly contagious disease and you are risking your healthy ones.
Having said that, I know many people, including a vet, who keep FeLV+ kitties 
with healthy ones.  The vet tests and vaccinates the healthy one several 
times a year instead of the usual once-a-year vaccine.  Verrry expensive if
you can't get it at cost.
Last year, I ran into several people in California who were trying experimental 
drugs and vitamin C.  Risky, and you have to find your way into the underground.
It is possible, your kitty could live to be 20 yrs old; it's also possible, it
will become sick very soon and/or infect others.
If you choose to keep this kitty (if a second test comes back positive), you 
will have to make sure it never gets outside - to keep from spreading the 
disease in your neighborhood.  If you don't keep it isolated from all your 
other kitties, you'll have to make sure none of them ever get out either, just
in case they become positive.
I wish you and all your kitties good health.
			SQ
 | 
| 909.9 |  | OOTOOL::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Fri Jun 30 1995 13:56 | 7 | 
|  |     Re: .4
    
    >will only protect up to 80% the rest.
    
    Well, 80% of the approximately 60% who are not able to develop natural
    immunities.  (According to a poster at the vet's, some 40% are able to
    resist the disease on their own.)
 | 
| 909.10 | Some are carriers though. | AMCUCS::SWIERKOWSKIS | If it ain't broke, we'll break it. | Wed Jul 05 1995 16:00 | 10 | 
|  | >    Well, 80% of the approximately 60% who are not able to develop natural
>    immunities.  (According to a poster at the vet's, some 40% are able to
>    resist the disease on their own.)
I don't have the statistics, but some of the cats that develop natural 
immunities are carriers, according to one of the research DVMs at a customer
site I support.
			SQ
 |