From:
"Chris and Tara Palaski"
Date: 2005-10-19 13:16:36 UTC
Subject: Re: [ferrethealth] ADV test q's
To: <ferrethealth@smartgroups.com>
Hi Kevin
> Randy's mention of ADV in Ontario on the FML reminded me of a question I
> had with regards to tests and their perceived reliability.
>
> I have heard the following from multiple sources, all based on anecdotal
> evidence:
> - The United CEP test is the best generally-available one out there,
> though it can generate false positives
****I have done litterally hundreds of ADV tests and I have never seen
United generate a false positive. In every case the positives have been
cofirmed to be truely positive either through repeat testing at United or
other labs or through necropsy. If you get a positive on United it is a
real positive in all my experience and all the experiences of everyone I
know. I have seen United give false negatives. *****
> - The Avecon ELISA saliva test isn't bad, but it has been known to
> generate false negatives
*****I have seen false positives and false negatives both on this test. It
generally agrees with United ( I believe that 95% of the time is the
percentage commonly quoted).*****
> - The Avecon ELISA quick-check home test is unreliable and should be
> avoided
****I do not use these tests due to the unreliability factor******
>
> My question, then: Are there any real and publicly-available studies to
> back up these anecdotally-backed-up rules? Has anyone called up Avecon or
> United and asked them about their own experimentation that (presumably)
> verifies the validity of their tests?
****You can contact Dr Stephon at Avecon and he should be able to provide
you with his study results. I would think the same would be true for
United, but I don't remember off-hand if there studies use ferrets or only
mink.****
>
> Now for a slightly different question: Both of the tests perceived as
> being less reliable share their use of saliva in common. If these tests
> really are less reliable, is it because of the use of saliva, or is it
> because it's easier to introduce contamination while taking a saliva
> sample as opposed to blood? Is there a "better" way of sampling saliva to
> protect against contamination?
****Dr Stephon has tried using blood with his tests and that is where the
majority of his issues started. The blood results have not shown themselves
to be anywhere near as reliable as the saliva results using his ELISA
testing method. Rule of thumb is swab thoroughly, do not feed or give any
sort of treats prior to swabbing ( removes risk of debris issues), and swirl
the swab thoroughly in the saline to get a good sample.
*****
>
> Hope you follow my questions well enough. I've read a fair amount of
> ADV-related text on the net and none of them seem to quite get to the
> point on this -- I was considering calling up the companies myself to see
> if I got anywhere on my concerns, but thought I'd consult here first. (By
> the way, I've used the United CEP test on my ferrets and plan to continue
> to do so in the future.)
****Testing is very important and kudos to you for your research efforts and
continued testing! Alternating tests is an idea that many
owner/shelters/ferretries follow, as what one doesn't catch hopefully the
other will. Testing and using common sense precautions in keeping your
ferrets safe from exposure is key.****
Tara
====================================================================<<<
Whatever you Wanadoo, click below:
http://ads.smartgroups.com/adclick/CID=000000b7c79a99a500000000
====================================================================>>>
--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/ferrethealth
To leave the group, email: ferrethealth-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D1423922&mid%3D15740