LOL. You ladies are cracking me up. This thread has been really interesting to me as it is about a topic I knew nothing about and I am all about furthering my knowledge about everything that affects our precious furbabies. I am especially impressed with all of you who have done such diligent research. I have to admit all that science hurts my head so I greatly appreciate those who do that kind of work and can break it down for me in easy to understand terms. So for those of you who have kept the focus on the topic instead of personal attacks on each other, Thank you.

Don't forget about Phil......;)

Thank you for posting. It's always nice to hear that other members are paying attention to the information that we are sharing. :)

Sounds very much like the vet the Golden Retrievers owners use (I posted about on page 3, I think).... at this point, the dog is 10 and they know he is not going to be around much longer so the most important thing is keeping him comfortable and as healthy as he can be. They're not trying to 'cure' anything but basically just let him live out his final weeks. But when they give him his Chinese medicine (I'll find out exactly what it is tomorrow), it's really like a miracle drug, he begins to act like a different dog, for the better. And the fact that he's even still alive is crazy, he was supposed to be gone by January.... the only 'regular' meds he's getting are pain meds basically, the rest is a lot of the herbs and Chinese meds that they have.

I have no idea about this product so I'm only jumping in to say that science terminology is different to lay persons terminology and we are not all scientists and we are not all lay persons so we must adapt our communication and expectations re: this accordingly.


Coming across as factual (and sometimes offensive due to a propensity to appear to disregard public opinion) is a professional hazard with researchers because they have to be so very critical of their work as well as others. This professional skill does not always translate well into every day conversations.


My take on this as a researcher is simple, one scientists assertion, even if it is based on original empirical evidence, is not enough evidence to support or reject the conclusion of the research. Therefore, at best, all one can conclude is that their findings are worthy of further investigation by them or others.


I would say that if a product or an endorsement of a product is as a result of one research project, I would be very cautious about how I viewed the claims of that product and keep an open mind re: any future adaptations to the product or product advice.


Hope that helps

At the risk of being hit in the head by flying objects :D, I finally had a chance to go over the paper that Dr. Dodds sent to Gemy with a fine tooth comb.

As a review article, it is rather frustrating, because most of the references she cites to prove a point have little to do with the point that she is making. There are a few exceptions, and I was able to find this gem amongst the gravel:

The canine model of dietary hypersensitivity, by Michael J. Day. 2005. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 64:458-464.

This article describes the concept of food insensitivity and intolerance in terms that align very well with the way Dr. Dodds describes it. It's behind a paywall (of course), but you should be able to read the abstract here: Cambridge Journals Online - Proceedings of the Nutrition Society - Abstract - The canine model of dietary hypersensitivity

Well, that's the good news. The bad news is that Dr. Dodds' references to salivary testing for food sensitivity and intolerance point mainly to her unpublished data presented at AHVMA conferences, or to her Canine Nutrigenomics book. She does provide references to salivary antibodies in humans, but those are mostly related to responses to bacterial antigens. There has been very little published on salivary antibodies as related to food insensitivity. Serum (from blood) antibodies yes, but saliva no.

Dr. Dodds provides photos of two food intolerant dogs before and after removing the offending food from their diet, presumably diagnosed using Nutriscan, but that's only two data points. She doesn't give any numbers or percentages on how many dogs improved after their diets were changed based on the test.

Dr. Dodds also provides two tables of data, but they only indicate the numbers of dogs that showed various food insensitivities according to the Nutriscan test. It doesn't say how many improved after their diet was changed.

Overall, I am left better informed about the concept of food intolerance and the leaky gut syndrome, which I believe to be real, but there is no proof that the Nutriscan test works, or that it measures anything that is biologically meaningful in food intolerant dogs. Dr. Dodds still needs to publish peer-reviewed data on the number and percentage of dogs that improved once their diets were changed in accordance with the results of Nutriscan testing.

And this is likely the same conclusions reached by veterinary dermatologists and others who do not use the test like veterinary nutritionists who work in large clinical settings like vet schools and teaching vet hospitals. Those people already know a lot about food intolerances and leaky gut syndrome so if the test was worth using, they would.

[quote=gemy;4551769]Can you please pm me the info. . If not I will pm my email to you so you can send it to me please

Thank you for your diligent efforts in researching this and other papers and references. I agree, a fully completed study reported in an approved journal would be ideal. However, for example, I have IBS which I have not been able to get cured yet and if I were the one who was cured by a partially completed research and unpublished study I would be over the moon. Many of the treatments that have helped me a little have been from the non traditional medicine sources!! As for the cost, I would pay what it cost if the treatment worked for me. What we pay for treatment and meds is up to us and we have to make our own judgement as to what it is worth to us.
I think it important to note that research into physical/scientific subjects (my interest and experience) is so much easier to quantify, control and prove than those in medical animal subjects that have many and sometimes uncontrolled variables. Thank you again for all your literature review efforts, I know that is very time consuming!!

I am so glad you found an amazing doctor. Sometimes the alternative therapies are better for the body as a whole. It is nice to see you opened your mind up to something different. Something you were not used to. I am so excited for you !

Repeat

Totally agree! BTW I emailed Skeptvet yesterday and forwarded the PDF to him for his input. He responded and will read over and respond with his opinion on the research that was done for the paper that Dr. Dodd sent to Gemy. I'm very interested in his take and feedback. I'll be sure to update.

That was brilliant! I was thinking about the same thing, but you beat me to it. I did email the Skeptvet and asked him to write a blog reviewing the Nutriscan test and Dr. Dodds' book Canine Nutrigenomics, and he wrote back and said that was on his "to do" list.

I wanted to come back to this as I definitely misunderstood it the first time. I was under the impression that you provided conventional medical care for your animals and that your holistic vet was an adjunct. It is clear from this post that I misunderstood you. So, you have a holistic vet who uses herbs. He is a "minimalist" with vaccines and medicines. In all but one case w/ Kiwi, you used holistic medicine not conventional.

That's fine, that's your choice. Katie is a young dog, and I hope for her sake you are doing core vaccination, heartworm prevention and flea/tick prevention. I hope she has an annual physical exam and routine lab work. It isn't my business how you take care of your dogs, and they obviously have lived very long lives and are most definitely greatly loved and valued by you in the same way I value and love my dogs.

I guess I have some concerns w/ the disappointment you had w/ conventional medicine. Reading your post, you state that one of your dogs had developed kidney problems after being on enalapril for congestive heart failure. I am not a vet, so I cannot speak definitively on this issue, but it is my understanding that Enalapril and other ACE inhibitors are used to delay the onset of CHF. These ACE inhibitors are unlikely to cause kidney damage, in fact, they are widely prescribed by veterinary specialists for dogs w/ certain kidney disease like protein losing nephropathy. My own dog has PLN, and has been on an ACE inhibitor for about 4 years, with normal kidney values.

Unfortunately, congestive heart failure in dogs creates fluid problems which impact the kidney more so than the medications. Nowadays, CHF is treated with newer drugs like Viagra, Pimobenden, and maintaining fluid buildup with lasix. My dog has severe atrial enlargement and is on a tiny dose of an ACE inhibitor. There is no consensus from the ACVIM for my dog's treatment for the stage of heart disease he has, but his cardiologist has chosen to add the ACE inhibitor. This decision was also backed by his internist that is seeing him for collapsing trachea and bronchial compression.

That brings me to your next point about Collapsing Trachea. There is no better anti-inflammatory than corticosteroids. I have concerns about long term use of them, but again, small doses, and newer medications like Temiril-P can really keep symptoms at bay. My dog Barney who I referenced above about heart disease has had a very mild grade CT his whole life. Now that his heart is enlarged, it is causing some pressure on his bronchial stem and the area of narrowing of his trachea seems more pronounced. The trajectory of the disease in a now almost 15 year old dog will not be such that he will every really be a severe case. His heart is likely to do him in before the trachea every does and my worst fear is that the chordea tendonae will bust and he will die on the road to Boston before I can have his vets help him to his final rest.... But, while he is alive, I have had to come away from long held concerns about using steroids and broncho-dialators and cough suppressants. He will need some combo of these for the rest of his life. His potassium may jump from his ACE inhibitor, but if it does, Dr. Remillard who is a vet nutritionist will alter his diet to remove some potassium from his daily intake (he takes in quite a bit from sweet potatoes).

I guess what I am saying in a long winded way here is that medications have their place and the prescribers have decades of experience using these medications in certain dosages to preserve the health of the dog and improve their quality of life. I'm sorry you felt like conventional medicine did not do enough for your dogs. Perhaps you needed a specialist, with more specific training and clinical experience to titrate the drugs properly and in a minimal way where you would have been comfortable. Conventional vets have done plenty for my animals, also living long lives, and I hope even longer. I would never go to a holistic vet as a stand-alone person. I don't believe in their testing methodologies and don't need to listen to soft music piped into the waiting room while sipping an organic tea. My flavor is more like a cup of coffee, wifi, and the smell of broad spectrum microbicide filling the air so I know I'm in a hospital that stands ready and capable to take care of my animals. If they are integrative vets, then at least I know they are delivering some aspect of allopathic medicine and testing.

I hope Katie never gets sick. But if she does, I hope you will never rely fully on untested theories, herbs, and a guy you really like when she may really need the conventional veterinarian on her case.

[quote=Verbena;4552186]You can PM either gemy or me with your email address. The paper is a 2.2 Mb PDF file, so we'd have to email it to you.

Thank you very much. . . I try. . :)