German Shepherd Dog > Degenerative Myelopathy Test - Inaccurate for GSDs? (29 replies)
by Blitzen on 29 June 2012 - 17:17
|Thanks for mentioning that, Abby. I deleted most of a previous post and the notion of providing more DNA being a good thing for research went into the trash. I neglected to include that in my rewrite.|
by CMills on 30 June 2012 - 00:13
|It's even cheaper if you go through Animal Genetics, theirs is only $45, so why NOT test? It can't possibly hurt anything, and may help in the long run. All my dogs are tested, and N/N to boot!|
by Konotashi on 30 June 2012 - 00:22
|CMill, that's great that your dogs all tested normal, but what good does it do if it's inaccurate and testingfor the wrong genes? I do like the idea of having more dogs for the purpose of seeing whether or not it's accurate, and to stack every card in favor of dogs' health, but how many dogs need to privre that it's inaccurate before a serious study is performed on it specifically for GSDs?|
by marjorie on 30 June 2012 - 02:37
|Why not take that $65 and donate it to Dr Clemmons, who researches GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG MYELOPATHY??? You want to know what harm it does to use the OFA test? The harm is that its going to test for a type of DM our breed does not get, thus the clears and carriers who have developed DM. I would much rather see the money go towards researching the type of DM our breed develops. Money going to the OFA test is money taken away from research for OUR BREED and the DM of the GSD :( |
by marjorie on 30 June 2012 - 03:01
|--- > For god sake, in only a few generations of selective breeding the damned gene can be bred out without sacrificing one single dog. |
Thats just not accurate- if it were, the clear GSDS that developed DM and died from it would not have developed it, nor would the carriers have developed it, who arent supposed to get DM, get DM. Its a house of mirrors :( A false sense of security... It cant be bred out with a test that is not testing for the same DM as the DM of the GSD. Its already proven fallible... No, nothing is perfect but with so few necropsies being done, and so many of the few that have been necropsied being positive for DM, how can you believe DM can be bred out using this test in a few generations when not even ONE generatin has been followed through till death, let alone the progeny getting an automaic clear????? I just cannot wrap my mind around this :( I must be really dumb.... I truly do not *get* the logic in this test, at all, when they have admitted its not the same for all breeds, GSDS being the ones who are coming up positive on necropsies for DM!!! What am I missing??????
by Abby Normal on 30 June 2012 - 07:57
Indeed, alternatively people could donate to Dr Clemmons research. But some people have not been able to find an active website for Dr Clemmons recently, and so awareness and confidence in that may be lower. It is a shame, as I think his research is invaluable.
The statistical data needs to be recorded and available and if that is going to be possible via Dr Clemmons as well then fine, two lines of research are better than one IMO but my point is that this data needs to be recorded and collated, the OFA is a very good vehicle for that.
I think in future as this has come more to the fore, more necropsies will be done. I don't believe DM is going to be bred out in a few generations using this test. As I said in my previous post, I think we are just getting started, we are nowhere near a finishing line.
The fact that it has proven fallible is the first step to questioning 'why' and needing more data to validate those results and find the answers. Therefore I stand by what I said, which is the more dogs tested the better.
by marjorie on 30 June 2012 - 15:11
|--- > But some people have not been able to find an active website for Dr Clemmons recently, and so awareness and confidence in that may be lower. It is a shame, as I think his research is invaluable.|
by Abby Normal on 30 June 2012 - 16:58
Thanks for the link, it is one that I have. I did say 'active'. It is very hard to tell whether this site is 'active' by which I mean that it appears to be a static site which is unchanged and not updated. I have referred many people to the site to obtain the protocol.
For example, there is a link which is 'Report on the state of DM in 1998' That's 14 years ago!
I myself have questioned whether Dr Clemmons is actually still researching DM, as there is nothing here to suggest that he is, or isn't. The page seeking donations is undated and could therefore have been (and I suspect was) created in 1998 and could be out of date by now. Do you see what I mean?
As a visitor to the site, it doesn't say to me that it is active, or that research is ongoing, or what changes there may or may not have been in DM in the last 14 years, or that Dr Clemmons is actively pursuing his research.
If donations are going to be made, I think an active site, with updates and news etc is likely to be far more encouraging.
by starrchar on 30 June 2012 - 19:24
|My dog had two DM tests, from two separate labs. I think the first one was the flash test from Dr. Clemmons and I don't know about the second one, but it wasn't through OFA. It was done for the clinical trial she is now in. Both times the results came back affected/at risk. She is now 7 years old and she started showing DM symptoms at 5 1/2 years of age. She has displayed the classic DM symptoms- slow progressive paralysis of her hind end and she is pain free. MY vet specializes in animal rehabilitation and deals with many DM dogs, as well as dogs with many other neurological issues. She says there is no doubt my dog has DM. So, based solely on my own personal experience, the DM tests have been accurate.|
by starrchar on 30 June 2012 - 19:32
|The last update on Dr. Clemmons site was in 2002. I too thought things were at a stand still.|
Regarding necropsies, should it be done by a vet neurologist? It is hard for me to think about having that done to my girl and I really don't want to do it, but for the sake of research it is something I know I should think about.