Not at all - why would I when I have 4 carriers 2 of which are by the same dog.
However your comment raises a whole new can of worms which I would hope, in the interests of any testing, wasn't necessary.
Just interested to know how it was done as the pups are still quite young and really to highlight to people new to testing how to do it - because instructions for buccal swabs appear to be in the sealed pack that doesn't usually get opened till you are at the vets.
The third pup - well let's have the whole story or we have more speculation.
AMS in cockers.
Re: AMS in cockers.
Rereading your post Plainsman I clearly don't have the suspicious mind that you have. It never crossed mine that the result was anything but honest.
Re: AMS in cockers.
From posts earlier on this thread I understand the Vet has to take the samples now and check the microchip at the same time? If that is the case all we have to worry about is whether or not the pedigree is correct for that particular pup.
In life, it is important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.
Re: AMS in cockers.
Jeffiner,
It just seemed odd that your comment was not about the result but about the possibility of cross contamination.
Judy, once the sample is completed some vets, like mine, just give the package to the client to post. I have been in dogs way too long not to realise there are opportunities for some people to abuse the system.
It just seemed odd that your comment was not about the result but about the possibility of cross contamination.
Judy, once the sample is completed some vets, like mine, just give the package to the client to post. I have been in dogs way too long not to realise there are opportunities for some people to abuse the system.
Re: AMS in cockers.
Yes it was about the result. What is the status of the third pup? If you know 2 results you (or whoever posted them) must know the third and given all the discussion earlier on percentages etc the answer could be helpful - though I doubt given all the arguments that it would actually prove anything to most of you.
As far as cross contamination - it is in the instructions but could be a close thing if you don't know about the 1 hour comment. I wasn't casting aspersions but trying to highlight the possible problems of testing young pups to those who have yet to test anything for any condition.
As far as cross contamination - it is in the instructions but could be a close thing if you don't know about the 1 hour comment. I wasn't casting aspersions but trying to highlight the possible problems of testing young pups to those who have yet to test anything for any condition.
Re: AMS in cockers.
I have no idea if the "third pup" has been tested or not. It was not me who posted about these results initially.jeffiner wrote:Yes it was about the result. What is the status of the third pup? If you know 2 results you (or whoever posted them) must know the third and given all the discussion earlier on percentages etc the answer could be helpful - though I doubt given all the arguments that it would actually prove anything to most of you.
As far as cross contamination - it is in the instructions but could be a close thing if you don't know about the 1 hour comment. I wasn't casting aspersions but trying to highlight the possible problems of testing young pups to those who have yet to test anything for any condition.
So you urge people to test then question them when they test young pups? No wonder people are sceptical.....
Re: AMS in cockers.
Jeffiner, why question this particular result? Why query cross contamination / 1 hour limit on this particular result?jeffiner wrote:Yes it was about the result. What is the status of the third pup? If you know 2 results you (or whoever posted them) must know the third and given all the discussion earlier on percentages etc the answer could be helpful - though I doubt given all the arguments that it would actually prove anything to most of you.
As far as cross contamination - it is in the instructions but could be a close thing if you don't know about the 1 hour comment. I wasn't casting aspersions but trying to highlight the possible problems of testing young pups to those who have yet to test anything for any condition.
Should we be concerned about other peoples results? Maybe their clear results are not reliable as there is a chance that there was cross contamination or that a full hour had not passed since food when the swab was taken? Or are you raising doubts on the reliability of results for these particular dogs?
These pups were tested clear. This result is just as reliable (or unreliable) as any other AMS tests by the lab.
Blowing my candle out will not make yours burn any brighter
Re: AMS in cockers.
It seems reasonable to question results which don't seem to follow the expected pattern and yet unreasonable to question the results and ask what the results were for the third pup in this litter?
In life, it is important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.
Re: AMS in cockers.
Now that really is clutching at straws, we've been talking about human error upstream - human error at owner level is brought up and suddenly it's a reason for scepticism?Plainsman wrote:
So you urge people to test then question them when they test young pups? No wonder people are sceptical.....
Re: AMS in cockers.
So a guy who has been through a world full of shit for the last few months does the right thing, tests two pups and finally gets a break and they come back as clear. The next thing the validity of the test is questioned due to cross contamination and I am clutching at straws!!!!Miesque wrote:Now that really is clutching at straws, we've been talking about human error upstream - human error at owner level is brought up and suddenly it's a reason for scepticism?Plainsman wrote:
So you urge people to test then question them when they test young pups? No wonder people are sceptical.....