strangles testing and results

jojo5 said:
Hi Fides, - I wish Liphook had agreed with you that 0.3 was in the negligible range - would have saved me loads of anxiety and £100! I was told 0.3 was the start of the range which needed to be re-tested, though I notice someone else on here was told 0.4? Not sure what you mean re the '200' - how does this relate to 0.2 etc? I do see what you mean by 'test variance' but this variance cost me a lot of heartache and money.
Click to expand...

Its frustrating isn't it? The difference between 0.2 and 200 is just as it sounds - a lot :( a titre of 2 means if you dilute it with an equal volume of diluent you still get a result, 4 - 4 times, 8 - 8 times. You get the picture... Yours is so low to be negligible :( this is assuming the did an ELISA test though.
 
My horse showed results of 0.2 and 0.3 on first test for routine check to get out and about- If I had known these were negligible I may have not bothered with all the extra costs! I guess there is always the risk of carrier status still though?

Does the risk of spreading infection depend on symptoms, as well as guttural pouch results etc? What about in a horse that shows no signs, has no symptoms, has not for 5 years and had positive blood test, but negative swab?
 
So, is there a vet HHO who can explain why some of us are asked to re test with what seems like a negligible reading? Not only does this mean extra cost, but an awful lot of stress for the owner, plus possibly difficult situations for some people if in between results become known before they are confirmed as negative -and do all labs request re-tests at the same level of initial result? Any vets out there could see from this thread that there is an awful lot of confusion for owners in this. Of course responsible owners will want test to be certain, but first of all we need general clarity about what is needed. ('...Climbs off soap box....')
 
Negligible is ELISA is the method used - less than 200 is considered low with ELISA which is the most sensitive method. OP didn't actually state which test used.
 
Fides said:
Negligible is ELISA is the method used - less than 200 is considered low with ELISA which is the most sensitive method. OP didn't actually state which test used.
Click to expand...

Is this the same as the blood test which measures antibody levels? If so, then yes the ELISA test was the one which was used. Excuse my ignorance- I am new to the whole strangles testing, although very aware of the nasty thing itself.
 
Fides said:
Negligible is ELISA is the method used - less than 200 is considered low with ELISA which is the most sensitive method. OP didn't actually state which test used.
Click to expand...

Personally, I wasnt informed exactly which test would be used - just told that results of 0.2 and 0.3 meant another test was required. I do feel like taking this up with Liphook....
 
Just a quick thought (possibly silly one!), but could flu vaccinations affect antibody levels?

Horse had first test and then flu jab. This blood test showed results of 0.3 and 0.2 so second blood test done again and results slightly higher- although nasal swab etc were negative. I am probably way off, but I just thought if they use a weakened strain of the flu virus to boost immunity, could this impact on other antibodies, especially those which are similar?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top