Quote:
Originally Posted by dottiesyrky  The statistics given in the hospital admissions reference studies give wide ranges, dependent on many factors....ages, hospitals etcetera etc. This is not an exact science and we should not quibble about range subsets as we are not comparing apples with apples. Within a 1-20 % range, an individual subset range could well be 15-20%? Not a valid quibble in my view.
I gather that these numbers are meant to give a broad idea of the extent of the problem and that individual studies could well be different from the mean value.
As a physical scientist, medical science reports seem very inexact to me. With good reason as people are not machines.
We still need to answer the question re the validity of the saliva allergy test and I look forward to knowing the result of the ongoing literature and other research being conducted here. |
I agree. Since there ARE studies that show a higher percentage, I'm not willing to quibble either. I do think that people need to take charge of their own health care and ask more questions about drugs and treatment options, and also keep in mind that no drug is 100% risk free. That goes for dogs as well as humans. Well, humans have to ask their vets on behalf of the dogs
.
And getting back to the Nutriscan saliva food intolerance test, I'll remain vigilant and keep following up on the leads we have so far
.