A resource about a contested infection has to be explicit about its own interests. This page states them plainly so you can discount accordingly.
This site is an independent project. It is not affiliated with any clinic, laboratory, manufacturer or veterinary pharmaceutical company, and it carries no advertising for prescription products.
Photographs on the site were supplied with permission, and two carry a named source: Luna from With All My Love Cattery in Texas, and Nudel from Seraphina’s Sanctuary in South Carolina. The rest come from Wikimedia Commons under the licenses listed on the image credits page. Naming a source in a photo credit is attribution for the image, not a claim that the organization reviewed, funded or endorses this resource.
It compiles the published work of the Gookin laboratory at North Carolina State University because that laboratory produced most of what is known about this organism. That is a citation relationship, not an endorsement: Dr. Gookin has not reviewed or approved this site, and the reviewer of record is listed as pending until someone qualified and named actually reviews it. That word will stay on every clinical page until it is true.
This project may in future share practical products used in rescue work, and some of those links may be affiliate links carrying a small commission. The constraints on that are fixed in advance:
Every clinical claim carries one of four badges: Clinical trial, Laboratory only, No published evidence, or Harm reported. Where a guideline and a dataset disagree — and they do, on antibacterial withdrawal before sampling — both are shown with a citation each, rather than the tidier one being chosen.
Anecdote appears on this site, labeled as anecdote. A story is evidence that someone reports an outcome, never that the thing caused it.
This site does not describe a cat as cured. It says a cat has been cleared on retest, and states which test, on which sample, how long after the last dose.
The reason is not pessimism. Eradication has been documented in experimentally infected cats, so calling it impossible would be false. The problem is that "curable" describes a possibility, while "cured" describes a cat — and the second claim requires a properly collected, late enough negative test that most treated cats never actually receive. Infection has been observed to relapse up to 20 weeks after treatment ended, so a four-week negative does not settle anything.
Where a source says "cured," we report what it measured and when. The full reasoning, with citations, is on the treatment page.
Experiences are the largest body of practical knowledge about this infection anywhere, and almost none of it is published. Collecting it fairly has rules:
Every page carries a last-verified date. When something here turns out to be wrong, it is fixed and the fix is recorded in the public corrections log with the date and what changed. The log starts on the day the site goes live: errors are found in drafts — that is what drafts are for — and what a reader is owed is the record of what changed after they could read it.
It is not veterinary advice, and it does not give doses to give your cat. It exists to make the conversation with a veterinarian shorter and better, not to replace it.
