What Do Titre Tests Measure?

[sandgrubber]

It is the only proof the dog has memory cells.....It doesnt matter remotely what the levels are, purely that the dog registered a response, which is proof the dog has immunity.....

As far as kennels go though they want to see Canine Cough proof & you wont get that from titer.

Wrong . . . quoting from the article cited in my last post . . .

'A "titer" is a measurement of how much antibody to a certain virus (or other antigen) is circulating in the blood at that moment. Titers are usually expressed in a ratio, which is how many times they could dilute the blood until they couldn't find antibodies anymore. So let's say they could dilute it two times only and then they didn't find anymore, that would be a titer of 1:2. If they could dilute it a thousand times before they couldn't find any antibody, then that would be a titer of 1:1000.

A titer test does not and cannot measure immunity, because immunity to specific viruses is reliant not on antibodies, but on memory cells, which we have no way to measure. Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Memory cells don't need "reminders" in the form of re-vaccination to keep producing antibodies. (Science, 1999; "Immune system's memory does not need reminders.") If the animal recently encountered the virus, their level of antibody might be quite high, but that doesn't mean they are more immune than an animal with a lower titer. '

My vet says that KC (or BB, as the vets call it) vaccination doesn't work for very long, and that if people really want their dogs to be protected, they should take them in for a KC vaccination about two weeks before taking them to kennels. He says the annual KC is nonsense. Not all kennels require KC vaccination . . .

I'm not sure but I think maybe you didn't get what Cavandra was saying and I don't think what she said was wrong at all.

What you quoted says this "Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Which is basically the same thing - it sounded like she was saying that the presence of antibodies is reasonable proof that the dog has memory cells that ARE and WILL prompt the immune system to fight the virus. It's the only way we have of testing that the dog responds approopriately to the threat of that virus.

Vaccination proves nothing, you could be revaccinating a non responder for years...

The level of antibodies IMO, are mostly irrelevant.....a TT just proves as much as we can, that the dog mounts a proper response to the threat of the disease.

Let's say a pup is vaccinated with the baby series of jabs, and a follow-up at one year, ending up with well primed memory cells. It is then not vaccinated for many years. If I understand the material I quoted correctly, one would expect TT to show a good response (many dilutions required) at one year. But at five years, the antibodies would probably be way down and TT would show poor immune response. The dog's memory cells, however, would be able to identify the virus and set off production of antibodies, thus conferring full immunity if the dog were exposed to the disease.

[Ptolomy]

Let's say a pup is vaccinated with the baby series of jabs, and a follow-up at one year, ending up with well primed memory cells. It is then not vaccinated for many years. If I understand the material I quoted correctly, one would expect TT to show a good response (many dilutions required) at one year. But at five years, the antibodies would probably be way down and TT would show poor immune response. The dog's memory cells, however, would be able to identify the virus and set off production of antibodies, thus conferring full immunity if the dog were exposed to the disease.

I can provide some real data here:

My bitch was last vaccinated at 12 months of age - she will be 9 in November and parvo and distemper titres are still both >80.

Edited September 5, 2009 by Ptolomy

[Guest Tess32]

It is the only proof the dog has memory cells.....It doesnt matter remotely what the levels are, purely that the dog registered a response, which is proof the dog has immunity.....

As far as kennels go though they want to see Canine Cough proof & you wont get that from titer.

Wrong . . . quoting from the article cited in my last post . . .

'A "titer" is a measurement of how much antibody to a certain virus (or other antigen) is circulating in the blood at that moment. Titers are usually expressed in a ratio, which is how many times they could dilute the blood until they couldn't find antibodies anymore. So let's say they could dilute it two times only and then they didn't find anymore, that would be a titer of 1:2. If they could dilute it a thousand times before they couldn't find any antibody, then that would be a titer of 1:1000.

A titer test does not and cannot measure immunity, because immunity to specific viruses is reliant not on antibodies, but on memory cells, which we have no way to measure. Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Memory cells don't need "reminders" in the form of re-vaccination to keep producing antibodies. (Science, 1999; "Immune system's memory does not need reminders.") If the animal recently encountered the virus, their level of antibody might be quite high, but that doesn't mean they are more immune than an animal with a lower titer. '

My vet says that KC (or BB, as the vets call it) vaccination doesn't work for very long, and that if people really want their dogs to be protected, they should take them in for a KC vaccination about two weeks before taking them to kennels. He says the annual KC is nonsense. Not all kennels require KC vaccination . . .

I'm not sure but I think maybe you didn't get what Cavandra was saying and I don't think what she said was wrong at all.

What you quoted says this "Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Which is basically the same thing - it sounded like she was saying that the presence of antibodies is reasonable proof that the dog has memory cells that ARE and WILL prompt the immune system to fight the virus. It's the only way we have of testing that the dog responds approopriately to the threat of that virus.

Vaccination proves nothing, you could be revaccinating a non responder for years...

The level of antibodies IMO, are mostly irrelevant.....a TT just proves as much as we can, that the dog mounts a proper response to the threat of the disease.

Let's say a pup is vaccinated with the baby series of jabs, and a follow-up at one year, ending up with well primed memory cells. It is then not vaccinated for many years. If I understand the material I quoted correctly, one would expect TT to show a good response (many dilutions required) at one year. But at five years, the antibodies would probably be way down and TT would show poor immune response. The dog's memory cells, however, would be able to identify the virus and set off production of antibodies, thus conferring full immunity if the dog were exposed to the disease.

Yes that's right.....I don't quite get the point of your post though?

[sandgrubber]

Sandgrubber:

Let's say a pup is vaccinated with the baby series of jabs, and a follow-up at one year, ending up with well primed memory cells. It is then not vaccinated for many years. If I understand the material I quoted correctly, one would expect TT to show a good response (many dilutions required) at one year. But at five years, the antibodies would probably be way down and TT would show poor immune response. The dog's memory cells, however, would be able to identify the virus and set off production of antibodies, thus conferring full immunity if the dog were exposed to the disease.

Tess32:

Yes that's right.....I don't quite get the point of your post though? :p

The change in AVA presents canine service providers with complex decisions. If the AVA recommends annual vaccinations, our backsides are exposed if we accept another vaccination regime. Now that the AVA has backed off, we have to re-examine our policies. Pro-titre testing people have been loud on this forum. In broad terms, my posts aim for a balanced perspective on titre testing . . . informed by scientific understanding, legal understanding, and understanding of what clients know and want.