FIV Myths

angeline

I have a very healthy FIV cat who I love to bits and who has given me such love and affection. She had FIV when I got her but has had no health problems and is now over 5 years old. Anyway, I was dropping an abandoned kitten to a rescue centre where this lady deals with abandoned cats around the clock. I though it would be nice to bring some big fluffy blankets there as I have loads at home. They were clean having been washed at 60 degrees. To my surprise the lady refused to take them knowing that my cat had FIV saying it would be safer not to. She knew FIV was transmitted via bites but I could not believe a shelter would refuse them or am I being over sensitive...

anniehoo

No you're not being over sensitive, it's actually amazing the lack of knowledge and understanding of FIV, even with people who should know better. It seems to be lumped into this big confusing bracket of diseases that automatically warrant a cat being euthanased which isn't the case.

wrote:

a positive FIV antibody test by itself should never be used as a criterion for euthanasia

I've recently taken on an FIV+ cat who bar testing positive is very healthy. I also have an FIV- cat and the amount of people who think I am completely mental for mixing the two is unreal. The European Advisory Board on Cat Diseases (ABCD) states:

wrote:

A number of factors can influence the risk of transmission of FIV between cats within a household. . . . FIV is mainly transmitted through biting and fighting, and if no fights occur due to the stability of social structures, FIV will probably not be transmitted. In follow-up studies of households with FIV-infected cats, few additional cats became FIV-positive over time; some households exist in which no transmission has occurred over many years. It is advisable that all cats in these households be neutered, and it is crucial not to introduce new cats, as this might lead to fights and hence transmission may occur, even between cats that have lived peacefully together for a long time. [European]

You might ask why I would put my cat at risk in the first place?My FIV+ will be indoor only from now on but my FIV- cat does go outside. I figure that my negative cat has more of a risk contracting it from interacting with the feral cats outside than indoors with my positive cat who he lives very happily with. Transmission by mutual grooming is rare too. I've weighed up the risks and for me they are minimal. FIV is not an automatic death sentence either with cats living up to 20 years with it.,although this is more the exception than the rule I think. Many owners, especially those who let their cats outside don't even realise their cat even has it until the latter stages.

maggiepip

I found a stray cat years ago, couldn't find an owner and decided to keep him. Brought him to the vet to get him neutered and they said they would also need do an FIV test and if he was positive he needed to be euthanized. Luckily he was negative because I didn't know a lot about FIV back then, and would have just thought the vet was right.

angeline

Wow. Amazed they would euthanize an FIV cat. My vet is amazing and works only with cats. My cat has her bloods taken every year and she is doing so well. I have read many articles of owners who have both FIV positive and FIV negative cats living together for many years and the other cats have never been affected. I would imagine a lot of people don't even know their cats are FIV positive as they may never show any symptoms. I don't know how she thought completely clean fleecy blankets would transmit the virus

Rips

I found a stray cat years ago, couldn't find an owner and decided to keep him. Brought him to the vet to get him neutered and they said they would also need do an FIV test and if he was positive he needed to be euthanized. Luckily he was negative because I didn't know a lot about FIV back then, and would have just thought the vet was right.

I think vets get a lot of bad press on this though, a lot of the time when stray FIV+ cats are brought in, its because someone has noticed they have some (usually grisly) outward sign of the disease.

And if its a stray, they need to make their standpoint clear as far as costs go.

For example, some people may be willing to keep or try and rehome a stray thats healthy, or FIV+ and *healthy but not if they find out that its FIV, has an immediate problem that's going to cost €100+ to fix and then have potential life long problems.

My current cat was a stray, and he had problems ... the first thing I did was have him tested for FIV (well along with blood tests) and I'm not ashamed to say that if he was positive, I wouldn't have persisted with his treatment. Not when there were healthy cats looking for homes as well.

I personally wouldn't run the risk of taking in an FIV+ cat, to live with my healthy cat.

I've never yet had to deal with a cat that had to be put down solely because it had FIV. I have seen a lot of cats, strays and ferals put down due to complications of the disease though.

Most ferals come from colonies which are in some way monitored, TNR and testing and most one off strays come in where they had been lost, dumped or abandoned, or picked up when they are because they have been ravaged by the disease. The incidence is much lower among cats coming from households, pets, rather then ferals.

It leads me to believe it would not be difficult to eradicate or substantially lessen its prevalence, and therefore I get just as angry at those who consider it 'no problem' as to those who overreact.

Most people I know who keep FIV+ cats with FIV- cats, treat the negative cats as if they have the disease (or regularly screen them) which means, keeping them indoors, and warning people that they come from an FIV household.

The blanket thing however, is ridiculous.

angeline

I disagree. It would be difficult to eradicate due to the sheer amount of cats with FIV. Really, my first cat did not have FIV but had constant health problems and was eventually knocked down and killed at only 2. My 5 year old FIV cat has had no health problems whatsoever and has not been sick once. FIV may never affect her. Most vets are well informed in my experience and know that they can live for many many years and not be affected by the virus.

boomerang

Studies show that FIV is no more prevalent in the feral/stray population than in owned, pet cats. And the number of cats in either population infected with the virus is very small. The number of cats infected with FeLV is smaller still. I'll supply references to the relevant scientific papers if anyone is interested.

Rips

boomerang wrote: »

Studies show that FIV is no more prevalent in the feral/stray population than in owned, pet cats. And the number of cats in either population infected with the virus is very small. The number of cats infected with FeLV is smaller still. I'll supply references to the relevant scientific papers if anyone is interested.

Studies from where and when?
(Not being smart, but unless they are recent, from this country, or perhaps the UK, don't go to the trouble!)
It varies per country, in some countries (developed countries even ) the opposite is true and until we have data for this country, I will base my personal opinions on my own experience.

Though I agree, generally the prevalence is small, as little as ~2% and yet increases to ~20% depending on the population studied.

My post was anecdotal, sure, I am only speaking of my personal preferences based on my experience but it was not based on two cats, it was based on hundreds of cats, in an area where there are very active TNR groups and proactive testing.