1 2
Dr. Rogers' suit does cite various sources for other parts of his claim, but since that one that adult cats are immune to FeLV is not supported, or at least not in the document shown. I'd like to know the disposition of this case, and how the state responds.
I find it hard to believe, since I know of adult cats

that have contracted FeLV.

So do most of us who actually work with real live cats.. Liz is what's known as an armchair commando... No actual experience... She just regurgitates others' information with her own spin on it... valid or not as long as it supports her agenda..

Well, I looked at Dr. Rogers' own site and I think his statement on FeLV immunity is derived from the AVMA VAS Task Force. The chart on non-core vaccines (FeLV) notes in the comments section that 87% of cats over the age of one year are immune. Again, I'm not sure where that data comes from. They do recommend vaccinating "high risk" cats, so it's confusing as to whether any cat more than one year in age could still be high risk.

I wonder if Dr. Rogers is overstating the case here, because he implies that no adult cat needs to be vaccinated against FeLV. I am only wondering about the FeLV statement itself for the rest of it, he seems to be pretty much in line with the veterinary association recommendations on vaccination protocols. I also do not disagree with his general argument that many pets have been and are still being over-vaccinated. Especially when I walk into clinics with posters on their walls promoting the FIV or FIP vaccines.
fraud by

That's a perfect description of Liz's usual modus opereandi!
by silence, and undue influence

Liz just loves hyperbole and sensationalism, and exaggeration. She especially loves to perpetuate rumors and innuendo about mainstream veterinary medicine... Don't forget her gross exaggeration if not down right lie about a "direct link" between vaccines causing CRF... The authors made no such conclusion.... She conjured up that conclusion in one of anti-mainstream vet med frenzies....
cited No surprise... Liz has a long established history of ... even said she includes "facts" the originalauthors "should have" included....

Dr. Rogers' suit does cite various sources for other parts of his claim,

Typical au naturel modus openandi - Take a little truth, mix in it with a lot of au naturel *** and the finished product has a somewhat believable ring to it....
but
since that one that adult cats are immune to FeLV is not supported, orat least not in the document shown. I'd like to know the disposition of thiscase, and how the state responds.

Probably laugh... Who would take a nut case trying to sue every vet in the state, seriously... except another nut case... Rogers should be prosecuted for malicious prosecution and harassment.... Unfortunately, I'm sure he has a flock of idiots who swear he's an au naturel guru... like the one who posted his nonsense...
I find it hard to believe, since I know of ... it... valid or notas long as it supports her agenda....

Well, I looked at Dr. Rogers' own site and I think his statement on FeLV immunity is derived from the AVMA VAS Task Force.

I don't think so... The AVMA/VASF is very clear about which cats should be vaccinated....
"The individuals most at risk of infection are outdoor cats, indoor/outdoor cats, and cats exposed to such individuals. Cats living in households with FeLV-infected cats or with cats of unknown infection status are also at risk. Indoor-only cats with no exposure to potentially infected cats are extremely unlikely to become infected. FeLV vaccines are recommended for all cats at risk of exposure to the virus."
http://www.avma.org/vafstf/rbbroch.asp
Nope... Nothing about all cats over a year old being immune...
The chart on non-core
vaccines (FeLV) notes in the comments section that 87% of cats over theage of one year are immune.

Even *if* that were true... which of course it isn't.... What about the other 13%? Does this nut case realize how astronomically high a 13% incidence is?
Besides, that's not how it works in nature.... As the risk of exposure increases, the cumulative rate of infection is opposite that of antibody production. IOW, as exposure to FeLV accumulates with age, susceptibil­ity to infection simultaneously decreases. This age-related resistance isn't absolute because you know and I know that many FeLV- adults* can and *do serocovert to FeLV+ if they're housed together with FeLV+ cats regardless of their age.... although younger cats are more susceptible.
Again, I'm not sure where that data comes from.

Probably manipulated from an older and unrelated but highly regarded Rojko & Hardy FeLV text regarding FeLV testing methods and interpretations.

"We would like to emphasize that it is not necessarily desirable for any FeLV test to detect early or local tissue FeLV infections without persistent viremia, since it is known that most cats (42 percent in nature, up to 85 percent in the laboratory setting) will reject their initial local infections and become FeLV-free and immune ".
They do
recommend vaccinating "high risk" cats, so it's confusing as to whetherany cat more than one year in age could still be high risk.

Nothing confusing about "FeLV vaccines are recommended for all cats at risk of exposure to the virus." No ambiguity in that statement... None, zilch, nada...
I wonder if Dr. Rogers is overstating the case here, because he impliesthat no adult cat needs to be vaccinated against FeLV.

That's an easy question... Just ask yourself, how many au naturel fanatics present their cases in a rational and prudent fashion....? They're usually extremists and sensationalize, exaggerate - not to mention throwing in their usual scare tactics to get their point accross. ....Suing all vets in Texas for malpractice.... LOL! I sure as hell wouldn't want a vet with that mentality anywhere near my cats!
Yes, that's a far cry from stating that all cats over one year of age are naturally immune.
Besides, that's not how it works in nature.... As the risk of exposure increases, the cumulative rate of infection is ... serocovert to FeLV+ if they're housed together with FeLV+ cats regardless of their age.... although younger cats are more susceptible.

Again, I'm not sure where that data comes from.

Probably manipulated from an older and unrelated but highly regarded Rojko & Hardy FeLV text regarding FeLV testing methods and ... up to 85 percent in the laboratory setting) will reject their initial local infections and become FeLV-free and immune ".

Okay, thanks, Phil. That's what I was trying to find out where was Dr. Rogers getting that "87% of cats over one year of age are naturally immune" figure.

While the majority of healthy adult cats will probably overcome exposure to the FeLV virus, it still seems prudent to vaccinate adult cats who are at risk of exposure.
They do

It will be interesting to see what comes of his suit, if anything.
I believe I remember reading that adult cats do not ... tired right now but I´ll try to look it up.

Found it... The recommendation of annual Feline Leukemia Vaccine for adult cats, and cats that are not at risk is ... year of age, if not previously infected, are immune to Feline Leukemia virus infection whether they are vaccinated or not.

I understand (via directly questioning one of my vets about it) that kittens & cats up to approx. 18 months of age are much more likely than cats older than 18 months to develop FeLV if exposed, but not that cats over 12 months are completely immune. And, of the cats who are infected, that some never show signs of the illness, another portion live relatively normal lives but w/ periods of illness, & that the remaining cats succumb to the illness.
2. Adjuvanted Feline leukemia vaccine can cause Injection Site Fibrosarcomas, a fatal type of cancer. This type of cancer is ... vaccinated against Feline Leukemia virus. A reasonable client would not elect this vaccine for their cat if given this information.

If I had a cat who went outside & could interact w/ other cats, having no idea if any of those cats were possibly ill w/ FeLV, I'd presently elect to have them vaccinated.
Cathy

"Staccato signals of constant information..."
("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon
3. Only cats less than one year of age and ... elect this vaccine for their cat if given this information.

If I had a cat who went outside & could interact w/ other cats, having no idea if any of those cats were possibly ill w/ FeLV, I'd presently elect to have them vaccinated.

The statement contradicts the previous statement that cats more than one year of age are immune to FeLV whether vaccinated or not. That implies that no cat more than one year old is "at risk", yet the second statement recommends vaccinating cats more than one year old who are at risk.

I agree with you our cats do go outside on a leash, and although our vet said she does the same thing with her cats but does not vaccinate against FeLV, we elected to do it. We were glad we did when we rescued a stray. Even though the risk would have been small and she did later test negative for FeLV, it was one less thing to worry about. Of course, the fact that the cat clinic we use has never had a case of vaccine related sarcoma also gives us some sense of reassurance.
There is a recent study I just read about in either Catnip or CatWatch, which found that the temperature of the vaccine (whether or not it's kept refrigerated) may have some relationship to vaccine related sarcomas. They also noted that there is a slightly higher risk of sarcoma associated with long-acting injectable medications like penicillin and prednisolone, so in fact it may not be the nature of the vaccine itself that results in sarcoma.