One of the snarkiest comments I've ever seen here at YT was made in this thread - it was deleted, as were the comments that "thummed up" the snarky comment. It was totally disrespectful and disdainful and downright rude. There is just no valid reason to stoop to that level in the midst of this conversation...it's uncalled for.

There is no prob at all with questioning this test to the end of the world - we are all free to do that. :)

I totally agree w/ you in terms of how much I cannot stand it when others say "that is crap food" or whatnot - it makes me just crazy when that happens.

I have not been disdainful or snarky towards anyone who has used Dr. Dodds Nutriscan test. Maybe the test does work at some level. Who knows? If Bella had food allergies and I had tried everything else that had been scientifically proven, maybe even I would try the Nutriscan test in a last ditch act of desperation in seeking relief for Bella. Scammers prey on such desperation. My point has been that she is marketing an expensive test that has not been scientifically proven, and all of the bells and whistles are going off in my head that there is at least some level of scamming going on. The test has been around for how long? Five years or more? Why, in that time, has Dr. Dodds, or ANY veterinarian scientist for that matter, not published studies that prove that it works? Why, in all of the pages on her commercial website, does Dr. Dodds not cite any research that at least supports the concept of the Nutriscan test? Why does she recommend that it be performed yearly, at great cost, with no evidence backing up that recommendation? Why is she charging $20 or more for a mass market book on "Canine Nutrigenomics" that is filled with pseudoscience and is basically a several hundred page advertisement for the Nutriscan test?

It must have been the "broken clock" comment, since I went back through the thread trying to figure this one out and that one is missing. Let me rephrase, then. Even scientifically invalid tests can, by random chance, give results that are accurate. It can even happen often. That does not prove that the test is valid. That is why testimonials are not acceptable proof that a test works. More power to the people who DO get relief for their dog's allergies, however it comes about.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with anyone who is concerned about the test...I have *no problem* with those questioning it and exploring it. Have at it! I hope it leads to something positive, like Dodds responding to it somehow.

But as far as the snarkiness - it was absolutely there, but is now deleted. It may not have been meant as mean as it came off but believe me, it came off extremely mean and disrespectful...almost as if someone were being called stupid or something.

The re-phrasing comes off much better than the original :) :thumbup:.

Thanks! It wasn't my intention to insult the person I was responding to--it was directed towards the Nutriscan test. Hopefully Dr. Dodds will start responding to questions that people have about her test. If a good research paper comes out, even better.

Not everyone read it as disdainful or insulting to Jenny. I read it as again pointing out that if the test worked, it was random not because it could have a replicable scientific result. When one person keeps promoting a test here that's invalid, I feel like we have to warn others that it's bogus.

I don't think I've ever seen you be insulting, so I really don't think you meant it in the way it actually came off to others...it was one of those unintentional results that really wasn't meant in bad faith.

I too think it would be just awesome if Dodds would actually respond to the questions that are out there. If she doesn't ever respond, that alone will also speak volumes!

OH I must have missed that. Or maybe I did it and don't remember? I hope not.

Well given this has been a subject of much discussion
 

I thought it would be advisable to ask Dr Dodds herself about Nutriscan and the lack of testing.


Here is the email I sent today:


Good Day Dr Dodds;


There has been some discussion about the above test and concerns expressed with-in a forum I am a member of. I will link below the thread for your perusal.


Essentially the concern is that at this point in time there are no published peer reviewed studies that validate this test.


I was hoping that you could give me an expected publish date for the research that underpins the accuracy and reliablility of this test.

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yorkie-health-diet/282550-dogs-food-intolerance.html

Oh, I now see what it was. No, I also did not find it disrespectful in any way. Just an anology that made sense to me. Honestly, I found some humor it in...and not in a snarky way at all. It honestly was a fact...and certainly I am sure Phil meant no disrespect to anyone. He is looking at all of this as a scientist. I totally appreciate his input on a lot of topics here.

At this point in time we don't know that it is invalid - we do know at least I think we know that it is *unproven*. So we don't know if it was sheer random luck - that Jenny's dog got well and we certainly don't know if it could or could not have a replicable scientific result.

Yes, the jury is out on this one. Time will tell. All I can say is that anyone who knows me, knows I spare nothing to care for my pups. My veterinary bills are astronomical in that I seem to be a magnet for yorkies with medical issues. I guess the universe has decided I don't need money. lol

Would I pay for this test? Never! I like my money a bit more than that. I was recently speaking with my vet about one of my pups who is having some medical issues.....the specialist had advised a few things. He has lymphangectasia (proven by endoscopy) and an enlarged liver and gall bladder. So, I was advised to come back for another ultrasound in four weeks to make sure the antibiotics rx'd to him are helping him. That is logical to me. They also suggested that I rule out cushings. Ok...he is not symptomatic at all. I weighed this and have decided not to do that at this time. The vet I was speaking with agreed and said to me that they can test and test and almost make a pup have cushings! I am sure others would disagree but it made sense to me. Even if he tested positive, it would be a stretch for me to start him on meds at this time. Why am I mentioning this? I am just saying that I give a lot of thought to tests and meds that are suggested for my pups...and withhold nothing for cost alone. I look at the entire picture. Just not going to spend my money on questionable things.

Wow fast response from Dr Dodds
 

[QUOTE=gemy;4551759]I thought it would be advisable to ask Dr Dodds herself about Nutriscan and the lack of testing.


Here is the email I sent today:


Good Day Dr Dodds;


There has been some discussion about the above test and concerns expressed with-in a forum I am a member of. I will link below the thread for your perusal.


Essentially the concern is that at this point in time there are no published peer reviewed studies that validate this test.




And here in is her response! Wow that was fast - I guess she might remember me.

I was hoping that you could give me an expected publish date for the research that underpins the accuracy and reliablility of this test.

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yorkie-health-diet/282550-dogs-food-intolerance.html[/QUOTE]




Dear Gail: Hello ! Not so – see attached peer-reviewed paper. FYI – our Nutriscan test is also patented in USA, Canada , Europe and the Orient for dogs, cats and horses. Best wishes, Jean


AHVMA Journal Volumne 36 Summer 2014


I will send this onto Phil as I have no idea how to link a pdf file here.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: That's a polite, respectful letter asking for information.