Pet Forum / Miscellaneous / Animal Health / July 2008

Could he have died of septic shock from a urinary infection? ((( I just
can't believe hes gone

HOWEDY dush, my overly sensitive little butterfly,

That's kindly of you, dush, CONsiderin the alternative might
be to spend ETERNITY in HEAVEN with sensitve animal
lovers like yourself <{}: ~ ) >

Dogs GET STRESS INDUCED AUTO-IMMUNE mediated
DIS-EASES and cruciate ligament failure and "idiopathic
seizures" a.k.a. The Puppy Wizard's Syndrome from traditional UNNECESSARY
INAPUPRIATE SURGICAL SEXUAL
MUTILATIONS, EXXXCESSIVE, UN-NECESSARY
INAPUPRIATE TOXIC VACCINATIONS  *(a.k.a. vaccinosis),
TOXIC veterinary prescribed parasite CON-TROLLS and
STRESS from JERKING CHOKING SHOCKING BRIBING
CRATING and INTIMIDATION just like HOWE you lyin dog
abusin NAZIS prefer.

                         LIKE THIS:

Newsgroups: alt.pets.dogs.labrador, rec.pets.dogs.behavior
From: "Dushichka" <pseudibawote...@sillynames.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:22:00 -0000
Subject: Biting Lab

I have a male lab puppy, five months old. He is lovely, good natured,
playful, gentle - all the things a lab should be. He is also the light of
my life, but I just cannot stop the mouthing/biting! He has toys to play
with, and does not seem to be a great chewer - nothing has been destroyed
yet!

I have tried all the usual things - yelping, ignoring, gruff *NO BITE*,
someone suggested sticking my hand down his throat a couple of times,
done that, tap under the chin, sticking a toy in his mouth - you name it,
I've done it.

Every time we play, he bites my hand, arm. Sometimes even when being
stroked. I have got to stop this, as he does it with my children too, and
my daughter who is nearly seven is becoming reluctant to play *just in
case he bites her*.

I know he is only a puppy, but I need to know if there is anything else
I can do.He loves to retrieve, and we play this a lot. He is always picking
things up such as socks, tea towels etc and bringing them to me.

He is bright, knows plenty of commands and follows them well, sit,
stay, down, paw, wait, he rings a bell at the back door to go out, so
he is not a dim dog.

Why can't he learn not to bite??!!

Is it usual to be so mouthy still at this age?

Dushichka*

REMEMBER, dush??

You can *(well, NOT *you*), ANY WON can *(well NOT *ANY
WON* here), but ANY NORMAL person *(i.e. NOT a NAZI) CAN
EXXXTINGUISH hyperactive behavior NEARLY INSTANTLY
simply by DOIN EVERY THING EXXXACTLY PRECISELY
OPPOSITE of HOWE you DOG an CHILD ABUSIN NAZIS prefer.

                        LIKE THIS:

From: Becky (Becky...@new.rr.com)
Subject: Re: Crate Anxiety
Date: 2002-04-04 12:56:23 PST

Try Jerry Howe's training manual and check out his Doggy
Do Right (And Kitty Will And A Rooster Did And A Cockatoo
Or Two Did Too) machine....it is for this.

Please do not listen to the others in here that don't like
him or his methods, they have never tried them....I  have
and it works!!!!

I broke my dog from nipping almost 100% in 1 day and
she usually does this SEVERAL times a day and actually
makes my kids bleed!

Try it or contact him!  The manual is at
the above website also, and it is free!

Becky

              -----------------

                   SEE?

           AND LIKE THIS:

Hi !
Our black lab girl is 3 months old (she
will be 4 months on the 30th).

When we first brought her home she had
a bad habit of trying to nip our faces (including
my 3 year old twins) during playtime.  It drove
everyone in the house nuts and it brought my
little girls to tears as you can imagine.

We tried saying no, and that would just get
her even more excited, so we would yell no
and that would just get her "scared" but still
excited.  In short it just wasn't working.

So we finally did what Jerry has suggested
to you. We used a sound do distract her and
we would immediately praise her.

I have to say that it worked great.  BUT she
then moved on to nipping at the feet LOL silly
little thing.

So again, we tried no, and then louder no,
but again it didn't work so we went for the
distraction and praise.

I must say that she is doing great!

I hope that helps.
Edyta aka Ned

         -----------------------------

                   SEE?

Ahhh, perhaps the good doctor should look at the GENES?

                      LIKE THIS:

Subject: CORRECTION~! =
Re: Additional information about Labs and CSS
*(Canine Stress Syndrome) & Dog Pictures

HOWEDY FellHOWE Dog Lover,

The good doctor is *MISTAKEN* when he claims CSS is GENETIC:
"Because there appears to be a wide variability for expression of the
genetic mutation(s) leading to this disorder, some limitations may exist
for identifying dogs that experience only mild cases of CSS by this
method. Unfortunately, there is currently no genetic test available to
identify CSS or genetic carriers of the disorder. Dr. Bruce Smith at the
University of Auburn has identified a candidate gene for CSS and is
preparing to conduct breeding studies to verify the role of this gene in
CSS."

And dra. patricia mcconnell and professora melanie
chang are searching to find the genetic link:

         Melanie L Chang said in rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
         I try really hard not to yell.  The times that I have,
         Solo joined in and then lunged to the end of the
         leash.

   "Well, Jack Did Hit My Dog. Actually I'd Call It A Sharp
   Tap Of The Crook To The Nose. I Know Jack Wouldn't
   Have Done It If He Thought Solo Couldn't Take It.  I Still
   Crate Him Because Otherwise I Fear He Might Eat My
   Cat," Melanie Lee Chang *  mch...@lppi.ucsf.edu
   Canine Behavioral Genetics Project
   University of California, San Francisco
   http://psych.ucsf.edu/K9BehavioralGenetics/

                        SEE?

Those are *ALL* *CAUSED* *BY* using your PREFERRED
ABUSIVE NAZI TRAINING "methods", REMEMBER, dush?:

Newsgroups: alt.pets.dogs.labrador, rec.pets.dogs.behavior
From: "Dushichka" <pseudibawote...@sillynames.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:53:35 -0000

Subject: Re: Biting Lab

"ThePuppyWizard" <ThePuppyWiz...@netscape.net> wrote
in message news:3E54D8E3.70306@netscape.net...
<snip a load of gibberish>

How about writing in English, so that what you write can be read?

Naaaaah? SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE~!~!~!

Newsgroups: alt.pets.dogs.labrador, rec.pets.dogs.behavior

From: ThePuppyWizard <ThePuppyWiz...@netscape.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:01:53 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 20 2003 3:01 pm
Subject: Re: Biting Lab

HOWEDY dushicka,

You prefer I trainslate my post to your native language, Nazi?

HOWEDY People,

The followin is typical of the expert advice HOWER dog lovers
are givin new readers of The Puppy Wizzzard's FREE WWW
Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual Forum (rec.pets.dogs.
behavior), cordially hosted by the biggest printin press in the
Whole Wild World, where every last foul vowel is archived
FOREVER...as EVIDENCE IN THE CASE AGAINST fear force
deprivation intimidation punishment repression and confinement
as behavioral remedies for man or beast.

From: "Twzl, Sligo and Roy Happy Together" (algr...@panix.com)
Subject: Re: Thanks. Jerry
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs.behavior
Date: 2002-01-13 16:06:12 PST

In <rLo08.751$0H.535...@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> "melisande"
<melisand...@hotmail.com> writes:

 > verbal praise only.  It's so hard not to pet and stroke
 > the dog (especially our seven month old).  Can you
 > give me the rationale behind that?  It will
 > help me modify my own behavior.

Jerry's afraid of dogs, and has never owned or trained a
real one. he took all the stuff on his web site and in his
(sic) manual from people who have actually trained dogs,
and then ran it through his warped non-functional
mind.

Once you understand that, you'll understand why he
doesn't think people should touch dogs.

BTW, he's in my killfile so I won't see his response to this.
But since you'll read it, you may see why he is a known net-kook:

http://www.ratbags.com/ranters/howe010515.htm

        Curiously, that happens to be WON of The Puppy Wizzzard's
                                   BEST POSTS.

           Email the Ward Attendant: rants @ratbags.com

                             ( <{};~ }> )

Ann, Twzl, Sligo and Roy

             Pfhssssst!

                -------------------------

Since beginning this Whole Wild World FREE Wits' End
Dog Training Method Forum four years thirty eight days
and 18 hours ago approximately (ciphers ain't TPW'S
strong suite), The Puppy Wizzzard has carefully groomed
his DEMONSTRATORS to provoke the same responses
in them, as they get from their pets through their relentless
MANAGEMENT and CORRECTIONS.

The Puppy Wizzzard GENEROUSLY THANKS HIS Mrs.
Puppy Wizzzard for making this all possible. Despite HER
sacrifices WE couldn't have done this without YOU and all
YOUR support and dedication to making US and HOWER
FAMILY BUSINESS #1.

The CONSISTENTLY REPEATABLE 100% TOTALLY
AMAZING MIRACULOUS NEARLY INSTANTLY
SUCCESSFUL OBSERVABLE RESULTS YOU
PERSONALLY HAVE WITNESSED AND TESTIFIED
TO, CAN ONLY MEAN WON THING...

ALL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS ARE CAUSED BY
MISHANDLING AS TAUGHT BY HOWER UNIVERSITY
TRAINED SCIENTISTS AND BEHAVIORISTS.

INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF of this phenomena means
The Puppy Wizzzard has DISCREDITED every traditionalist
since descarte skinned his first kat alive to see HOWE it purrs.
The Puppy Wizzzard's work makes that of Pavlov and Skinner
look like child's play in the sandbox...

Well, we don't got to poison fifty rats to know that poison is
gonna kill ya. The Puppy Wizzzard is DEATH on hurtin stuff.

EXCEPT UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS WHO TEACH HOWER
KIDS TO HURT AND DEPRIVE AND PUNISH AND KILL WHEN
THEY RUN OUTTA IDEAS AND INFORMATION...OR NEED DATA.

The DATA is IN. The matter is going to courts of law and the
pubic will be INFORMED. The Puppy Wizzzard is looking
foeward to engaging the biggest and the best in the industry
and TRASHIN THEM, THEIR METHODS, THEIR DEGREES,
REPUTATIONS, PUBICLY, THOROUGHLY, and VICIOUSLY.

The Puppy Wizzzard OWES NOBODY NUTHIN but
the VERY BEST INFORMATION IN CREATION.

HOWER entire society WILL change, or WILL DIE.

Trust The Puppy Wizzzard on THAT.

The time has come to release the good news to the
entire world before flying monkeys start comin outta
HOWER butts all at WONCE.

                   -------------------

                        SEE, dush?

                    THANK YOU~!

Perhaps you should just KILLFILE him, eh, dush?

                             LIKE THIS:

Newsgroups: alt.pets.dogs.labrador
From: "Dushichka" <pseudibawote...@sillynames.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:29:59 -0000

Subject: Re: Biting Lab

"Lori E. Smith" <dirtydogho...@smithandwest.net> wrote in
message news:b33d20$1eis62$1@ID-141594.news.dfncis.de...

Thanks Lori, have done it!

INDEED? Are you SHORE you won't FEEL too EMBARRASSED?

Here's ALL the INFORMATION you need, dush. JUST ASK if
you  want me to TRAINslate it to your native language, "NAZI":

*(CONtinued from the article quoted above):

The purposes of this lecture will be to review shortly this new
paradigm and to discuss how to evaluate the immune status
and immune response of dogs affected by leishmaniosis.

The old paradigm and the change Until now, key facts
about canine leishmaniosis were:

1.  The prevalence of the disease in the Mediterranean area was
1-5% and the seroprevalence 5-15% (higher in some foci).

2.  Most infected dogs develop the disease, sooner or later.

3.  Infected animals become seropositive.

Two research lines have changed this paradigm. First, immunologists
demonstrated, investigating the experimental infection of mice with L.
major, that the immune response plays a key role in the evolution of the
infection. In mice genetically deficient in the cellular immune response
(BALB/c, for instance) the infection progresses and a severe systemic
disease appears. These mice develop a humoral immune response (Thelper-2,
production of antibodies) which is inefficient in controlling the infection.
Contrarily, mice belonging to other lines (C3H), control the infection by
means of a cellular immune response (Thelper-1). In this last case CD4+ T
cells are activated and produce gamma-interferon, which activates
macrophages for the elimination of the parasites. Genetics, in consequence,
is a key factor in the control of the immune response, which is the key
factor for the evolution of the disease.

Later on it was demonstrated that the situation in the dog was very
similar to those described in mice: not all infected dogs develop the
disease. Furthermore, dogs which developed the disease showed a
humoral immune response, contrarily to the resistant dogs which
showed a cellular immune response (similar to helper type-1).

Dogs affected by the disease are strongly immunedepressed as can be
demonstrated by lymphocyte proliferation tests or by the low production
of cytokines by PBMCs after stimulation. The number of circulating
CD4+ cells and the CD4+/CD8+ ratio drop during the disease.

The number of circulating CD4+ seems to be correlated with
the severity of the clinical signs and with the infectivity.

A recent paper demonstrates that besides immune response other
resistance factors are important in controlling susceptibility to
leishmaniosis in the dog (Altet and co-workers, 2002).

These authors have mapped and sequenced the canine RAMP1
gene (Slc11a1) and demonstrated that dogs susceptible to canine
leishmaniosis have mutations in this gene which controls an ion
transport protein involved in the control of intraphagosomal
replication of parasites. This paper together with a previous study
demonstrating that Ibizian hounds (a breed authoctonous of the
Balearic islands) present a predominantly cellular and protective
immune response against Leishmania infection have pointed out
the major role that genetics play in the outcome of Leishmania
infection in the dog.

At the same time, epidemiological studies showed that the incidence
of the prevalence of the infection is much higher than the prevalence
of the disease. For instance, a study performed in Mallorca using the
PCR techniques on different tissues demonstrated that Leishmania
infects 2 out of 3 dogs. In this study, most infected dogs showed no
clinical signs. Similar studies performed in France and Portugal found
similar results.

Finally, both research lines melted when it was demonstrated that
infected but asymptomatic dogs had a cellular, effective cellular
immune response, contrarily to symptomatic dogs which had a mainly humoral
immune response (although the situation is not so polarised
as it is in mice). In short, the new paradigm was born.

The new paradigm

Prevalence of infection is much higher than traditionally thought. In
endemic areas probably over 50% of dogs become infected.

Most infected dogs do not develop the disease and remain free of
clinical signs. Prevalence of the disease ranges between 3 and 10%.

Infected animals without clinical signs show a cellular immune
response against Leishmania and usually are seronegative or weakly
seropositive (borderline titres).

The infected and ill dogs show a humoral immune response but a
weak cellular immune response. In general these dogs are strongly
immunedepressed and show very low numbers of circulating CD4+ cells.

A given dog can change from resistant to sensible to the disease and
inversely. Drugs, infections, parasitic infestations, neoplasia, can induce
the change.

Implications of the new paradigm for the diagnosis of the disease

The diagnosis of the disease is a complex task. The results of each
technique have to be interpreted adequately. For instance, a positive PCR
means, only, that the animal is infected (as a positive bone marrow smear).
A positive means infection and humoral immune response, which usually
is linked to development of clinical signs (especially if the titres are
high).

The diagnosis, at the end, is always a clinical decision. Based on several
analysis, but clinical. No one single test can establish a definitive
diagnosis of leishmaniosis.

Diagnostic tests (serology, PCR, intradermal skin test with leishmanin)
should be used when a dog show clinical signs compatible with the disease.
The clinical behaviour to be followed in infected but clinically healthy
dogs is, at the present moment uncertain. A periodic follow-up is, in any
case, mandatory.

In most cases, several diagnostic techniques have to be combined to
establish adequately the diagnosis. The techniques to be used in a given
case depend on the clinical signs (for instance, a skin biopsy is usually
very useful when cutaneous lesions are present).

In many patients, the disease is associated with a hidden cause which
has depressed the immune response (drug treatments, parasitism, infection,
chronic diseases...). In fact, scientific literature is full of case reports
of leishmaniosis associated to different diseases (haemangiosarcoma,
lymphoma, pemphigus foliaceous, ehrlichiosis,...).

A plausible explanation would be that these dogs were chronically
infected animals that developed leishmaniosis when an event (treatment,
infection, neoplasia,...) change their immune response.

Especially in middle-aged and old dogs affected by leishmaniosis
the presence of hidden causes has always to be investigated.

After establishing the diagnosis, it is very important to evaluate the
immune system of the patient and the type of specific immune response
against Leishmania. This evaluation has to be continued during and
after the treatment. Dogs immunedepressed and dogs which show a
strong specific humoral immune response but a weak specific cellular immune
response have worse prognosis.

The evaluation should include-if possible-number of circulating
CD4+lymphocytes, lymphocytes CD8+ and CD4+/CD8+ ratio,
specific immune response (intradermal skin test, lymphocyte
blastogenesis, production of gamma-interferon) and specific
humoral response (proteinogramme, titre of antibodies).

Counts circulating blood lymphocytes (CD4+, CD8+) using flow cytometry

Flow cytometry is an everyday technique for monitoring immunologic function
in human beings, for example in HIV infection, but it is still a
research tool in veterinary medicine. However, the technique and the
markers are already in the market and very soon standardised protocols
will be developed.

Flow cytometry permits the counting of the different subpopulations of
lymphocytes: CD3+ or CD5+ (T cells), CD21+ (B cells), T helper (CD4+), T
cytotoxic (CD8+).

In the healthy dog, according to our results and to published data, the
percentages and counts of the different lymphocyte subpopulations are:

    Bourdoiseau et al, 1997
    Byrne et al, 1999

     Lymphocytes
    2315 cells /uL (100%)
    100%

     T (CD3+CD5+)
    1800 cells/uL (78%)
    83%

     Thelper (CD4+)
    975 cells/uL (42%)
    45%

     Tcytotoxic (CD8+)
    410 cells/uL (18%)
    28%

     CD4+/CD8+ ratio
    2,37
    1,9

     B cells
    415 cells/uL (18%)
    13%

In dogs with leishmaniosis, the number of circulating CD4+ cells
decreases (also the CD4+/CD8+ ratio), and also the number of B
cells (CD21+) (Bourdoiseau et al, 1997; Guarga et al, 2000, own
results).

Most dogs in the acute phase of the disease are lymphopenic
and all counts are disminished.

    Percentage

     Lymphocytes
    100%

     T (CD3+/CD5+)
    90%

     Thelper (CD4+)
    10-30% (decrease)

     Tcytotoxic (CD8+)
    5-30% (increase)

     CD4+/CD8+ ratio
    1,5-1,8 (decrease)

     B cells
    6% (decrease)

This decrease in the number of CD4+ lymphocytes and of the
CD4+/CD8+ ratio is clearly associated to the clinical signs.
During therapy and clinical improvement there is a significant
increase in the number and percentage of circulating CD4+
lymphocytes (Moreno et al, 1999). In consequence, CD4+
count and percentage and CD4+/CD8+ ratio are good prognostic
indicators.

Furthermore, it has been demonstrated a higher infectivity to sand
flies amongst dogs with lower proportions of T helper cells (CD4+)
(Guarga et al, 2000).

Evaluation of the specific cellular immune response

1.  Leishmanin skin test (Montenegro test, intradermal skin test with
leishmanin) is a useful tool for the evaluation of the cell-mediated
immunity in Leishmania infection in human beings and dogs. The
technique is easy and inexpensive and it is well correlated with the
intensity of the cell-mediated immune response.

A recent paper (Solano-Gállego et al, 2001) describes the standard-
isation of the technique. However, the lecture is quite subjective, it
needs two visits to the patient and the reagents are not in the market
for diagnostic purposes (only for research).

2.  Lymphocyte blastogenesis test (lymphocyte lymphoproliferation after
stimulation with Leishmania antigen has been described as useful in the
evaluation of cell-mediated immunity in canine leishmaniosis. However, in
our hands, the correlation between this test and the clinical signs and
other indicators of cell-mediated immunity is low. Furthermore, the test is
very complex and the use in every-day practice would be very difficult.

3.  Measurement of the production of gamma-interferon by peripheral
blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) after stimulation with Leishmania
has been described as a useful technique in the evaluation of the
cell-mediated immunity. The production of gamma-interferon seems to be
correlated with the protective cell-mediated immune response.

At present time, interferon levels, however, can only be measured
(estimated) using a quite complex bioassay, not useful for the practice.
Very probably in the future ELISA tests will be available to detect the
production of gamma-interferon by PBMCs.

These tests are much more adequate for routine use.

Further tests to evaluate the immune response

1.  At present time, the evaluation of the humoral immune response
is based on titre of anti-Leishmania antibodies and proteinogramme.
It has been well demonstrated that the titre of antibodies (mostly IgG2)
is well correlated with the severity of the clinical signs.

Remember that the titres, after therapy, decrease very slowly in
many dogs and that in some dogs remain positive years after
clinical cure (confirming that animals although clinically healthy
remain infected). However, in the evaluation of the response to
therapy the normalisation of the proteinogramme and the decrease
of the titres are indicators of good response and favourable prognosis.

The ratio between IgG1 and IgG2, which was suggested by some
authors as a prognostic indicator, in our hands is not correlated
with clinical evolution or with the severity of the clinical signs.

2.  Remains to be investigated if the identification of the allele of
the NRAMP1 gene (Slc11a1) has value in clinical practice, especially
to predict the response to treatment. Apparently, the identification of
the allele susceptible in the microsatellite of the gene should be easy
using the published PCR technique (Altet et al, 2002).

References

1.  Altet, L., Francino,O., Solano-Gallego, L., Renier, C., Sánchez,
A. 2002. Mapping and sequencing of the canine NRAMP1 Gene
and identification of mutations in leishmaniasis-susceptible dogs.
Infect. Immun. 70: 2763-2771

2.  Berrahal, F., Mary, C., Roze, M., Berenger, A., Escoffier, K.,
Lamoroux, D., Dunan, S. 1996. Canine leishmaniasis: identification
of asymptomatic carriers by polymerase chain reaction and immuno-
blotting. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 55:273-277.

3.  Bourdoiseau G, Bonnefont C, Magnol JP, Saint-André I,
Chabanne L.1997. Lymphocyte subset abnormalities in canine
leishmaniasis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 56: 345-351

4.  Byrne K, Kim HW, Chew BP, Reinhardt GA, Hayek MG. 2000
A standardized gating technique for the generation of flow cytometry
data for normal canine and normal feline blood lymphocytes. Vet
Immunol Immunopathol 73: 167-182

5.  Cabral, M., O'Grady, J.E., Gomes, S., Sousa, J.C., Thompson,
H., Alexander, J. 1998. The immunology of canine leishmaniosis:
strong evidence for a developing disease spectrum from asymptomatic
dogs. Vet. Parasitol.76:173-180.

6.  Fisa, R., Gállego, M., Castillejo, S., Aisa, M.J., Serra, T., Riera, C.,
Carrió, J., Gállego, J., Portús, M. 1999. Epidemiology of canine
leishmaniosis in Catalonia (Spain). The example of the Priorat focus.
Vet. Parasitol. 83:87-97.

7.  Guarga JL, Moreno J, Lucientes J, Gracia MJ, Peribáñez MA,
Alvar P, Castillo JA. 2000. Canine leishmaniasis transmission:
higher infectivity amongst naturally infected dogs to sand flies is
associated with lower proportions of T helper cells. Res Vet Sci 69:
249-253

8.  Moreno J, Nieto , Chamizo C, González F, Blanco F, Barker DC,
Alvar J. 1999. The immune response and PBMC subsets in canine
visceral leishmaniasis before, and after, chemotherapy. Vet Immunol
Immunopathol 71: 181-195

9.  Pinelli, E., Killick-Kendrick, R., Wagenaar, J., Bernardina, W.,
del Real, G., Ruitenberg, J. 1994. Cellular and humoral immune
response in dogs experimentally and naturally infected with Leishmania
infantum. Infect. Immun. 62:229-235.

10. Pinelli, E., Gonzalo, R.M., Boog, C.J., Rutten, V.P., Gebhard, D., del
Real, G., Ruitenberg, E.J. 1995. Leishmania infantum-specific T cell lines
derived from asymptomatic dogs that lyse infected macrophages in a major
histocompatibility complex-restricted manner. Eur. J. Immunol. 25:1594-1600.

11. Riera, C., Valladares, J.E., Gallego, M., Aisa, M.J., Castillejo, S.,
Fisa, R., Ribas, N., Carrio, J., Alberola, J., Arboix, M. 1999. Serological
and parasitological follow-up in dogs experimentally infected with
Leishmania infantum and treated with meglumine antimoniate. Vet. Parasitol.
84:3-47.

12. Solano-Gallego, L., Llull, J., Ramos, G., Riera, C., Arboix, M.,
Alberola, J., Ferrer, L. 2000. The ibizian hound presents a predominantly
cellular immune response against natural Leishmania infection. Vet.
Parasitol. 90: 37-45.

13. Solano-Gallego, L., Llull, Arboix, M., L.Ferrer, Alberola. 2001.
Evaluation of the efficacy of two leishmanins in asymptomatic dogs. Vet.
Parasitol. 102: 163-166.

14. Solano-Gallego L., Riera C., Roura X., Iniesta L., Gallego M.,
Valladares J.E., Fisa R., Castillejo S., Alberola J., Ferrer L., Arboix M.,
Portús M. 2001. Leishmania infantum-specific IgG, IgG1 and IgG2 antibody
responses in healthy and ill dogs from endemic areas. Evolution
in the course of infection and after treatment. Veterinary Parasitology 96,
265-276

15. Solano-Gallego L., Morell P., Arboix M., Alberola J., Ferrer L. 2001.
Prevalence of Leishmania infantum infection in dogs living in an area of
canine leishmaniosis endemicity using PCR on several tissues and serology.
2001. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 39, 560-563

Speaker Information
(click the speaker's name to view other papers and abstracts submitted by
this speaker)
Lluís Ferrer, Dip ECVD
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Barcelona, Spain

Lluís Ferrer obtained a DVM degree in 1981 at the University of Zaragoza
(Spain) and a Ph.D. at the Veterinary School of Hannover (Germany) in 1984.

He is Diplomate of the European College of Veterinary Dermatology
and full member of the European Society of Veterinary Dermatology
and of the American Academy of Veterinary Dermatology.

He is currently professor of Dermatology of the Veterinary School of the
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain). He has published over 80 papers
in referred journals and given numerous lectures in several countries. His
major areas of interest are canine leishmaniosis, dermatopathology,
skin neoplasia and biology of mast cells.