testing for PSSM 2

[I'm Dun]

Wrong but in your case totally blind and unwilling to think outside the box.

Thinking outside the box was how I found out mine had type 1, so that's not the case. I have previously recommended the type 2 test to people, but I stopped doing so when it became obvious that there was no link between the genes and symptoms. And that's where almost all of us are.

 

[Winger23man]

Thinking outside the box was how I found out mine had type 1, so that's not the case. I have previously recommended the type 2 test to people, but I stopped doing so when it became obvious that there was no link between the genes and symptoms. And that's where almost all of us are.

Thinking outside the box was how I found out mine had type 1, so that's not the case. I have previously recommended the type 2 test to people, but I stopped doing so when it became obvious that there was no link between the genes and symptoms. And that's where almost all of us are.

Pssm1 is not related to mim pssm2 as was

I will repeat the research by equisec shows the link however Valberg could not find the link. Why because they never worked together on the same section of horses. You have a vet examining healthy not symptomatic horses who’s muscles showed no issues which they wouldnt

The dna test shows the faulty gene from birth to death it never changes. When and if the horse becomes symptomatic is very much unknown. This is where the two sides work together

Muscle biopsies have shown the horse is unaffected yet the horse by dna has the disease and symptomatic. Why is this because the muscle is not yet affected by the diease

People are using the dna as their vet after extensive expensive tests draws a blank and tell you your horse is healthy

Eg horse presents with lameness behind tripping in front and lethargic. Lengthy expensive tests undertaken by vet draws a blank. This is a vet open to the dna mim pssm2. The muscle biopsies shows a negative result. DNA shows possitive. Physio always comments on how tight the horse is behind and stiff laboured gait. Horse left as field ornament regular physio for two years. At 8 the horse has a further biopsie which shows it has a muscle myopathy. Explain that one then

 

[nutjob]

I will repeat the research by equisec shows the link

Is this published research? There are a lot of us on this forum who are interested in the topic, including some people who work in the field whom you have been rude and dismissive towards. Many people have been waiting optimistically hoping that the equisec test would be validatable but instead of any real data we have someone who denigrates everyone elses published work and insists that the equisec way is the only way. You are certainly doing a good job of destroying the credibility of this company with your approach.

 

[FieldOrnaments]

What do we want? Peer review!!

When do we want it?

Yesterday would be smashing but y'know anytime really

 

[shortstuff99]

Pssm1 is not related to mim pssm2 as was

I will repeat the research by equisec shows the link however Valberg could not find the link. Why because they never worked together on the same section of horses. You have a vet examining healthy not symptomatic horses who’s muscles showed no issues which they wouldnt

The dna test shows the faulty gene from birth to death it never changes. When and if the horse becomes symptomatic is very much unknown. This is where the two sides work together

Muscle biopsies have shown the horse is unaffected yet the horse by dna has the disease and symptomatic. Why is this because the muscle is not yet affected by the diease

People are using the dna as their vet after extensive expensive tests draws a blank and tell you your horse is healthy

Eg horse presents with lameness behind tripping in front and lethargic. Lengthy expensive tests undertaken by vet draws a blank. This is a vet open to the dna mim pssm2. The muscle biopsies shows a negative result. DNA shows possitive. Physio always comments on how tight the horse is behind and stiff laboured gait. Horse left as field ornament regular physio for two years. At 8 the horse has a further biopsie which shows it has a muscle myopathy. Explain that one then

No they didn't, they found a similar gene region in humans that caused muscle disease and extrapolated that it was the same for horses.

I would also hope that the DNA didn't change throughout the horse's life otherwise .

I'm guessing you're meaning expression, so do you have the transcriptomic data then?

 

[I'm Dun]

Given how many horses have the genes and are not symptomatic, or other things are found, I'm sorry I don't believe you. If its true I would be delighted and very keen to read the peer reviewed research. But there is none. Anyone can claim anything but it doesn't mean its true I'm afraid.

 

[Winger23man]

On

Is this published research? There are a lot of us on this forum who are interested in the topic, including some people who work in the field whom you have been rude and dismissive towards. Many people have been waiting optimistically hoping that the equisec test would be validatable but instead of any real data we have someone who denigrates everyone elses published work and insists that the equisec way is the only way. You are certainly doing a good job of destroying the credibility of this company with your approach.

On the contrary you are dismissive of another view point and have stated openly that you will not accept the commercial companies results without peer review

I’ve explained how complicated muscle disease is in horses. Yes it’s published but not peer reviewed. If in research we waited for peer review the world would stop. The Covid vaccine was never peer reviewed before it was used yet thousands of people have been vaccinated

I can give numerous examples of where the muscle biopsies have given a negative result when the horse has been symptomatic. I’m purely pointing out that because BEVA and others have not found what the DNA companies have it doesn’t mean it should be dismissed, neither should be be dismissed because it isn’t peer reviewed

An open mind is required. How BEVA can dismiss a possibility without working or examining a theory with the persons who discovered MiM is beyond anyone’s comprehension

It is well known MiM can be found in foals but when and if the disease manifests itself is unknown. What start cutting chunks out of young unaffected horses is beyond me as the dna has found unless a young horse has multiple variants it will not show mim in its muscles until it gets older. Why this may or may not happen is unknown to the dna people or vets

I offered both my symptomatic and positive horses to muscle biopsy by BEVA and got the door shut in my face. You would think they would gladly accept them but no

A biopsy was examined by two different vets one declared free from muscle disease the other declared MFM

A breeder took his 6 year old symptomatic horse for a biopsy and it was negative. Valberg told him to keep breeding and come back in a few years for another biopsy he found out about the dna test and found it had mum. A few years later he returned to Valberg for a biopsy it was positive. Valvergs explanation was that biopsies can often provide negative results and that retest is recommended if the horse continues to show symptoms

 

[Winger23man]

On

On the contrary you are dismissive of another view point and have stated openly that you will not accept the commercial companies results without peer review

I’ve explained how complicated muscle disease is in horses. Yes it’s published but not peer reviewed. If in research we waited for peer review the world would stop. The Covid vaccine was never peer reviewed before it was used yet thousands of people have been vaccinated

I can give numerous examples of where the muscle biopsies have given a negative result when the horse has been symptomatic. I’m purely pointing out that because BEVA and others have not found what the DNA companies have it doesn’t mean it should be dismissed, neither should be be dismissed because it isn’t peer reviewed

An open mind is required. How BEVA can dismiss a possibility without working or examining a theory with the persons who discovered MiM is beyond anyone’s comprehension

It is well known MiM can be found in foals but when and if the disease manifests itself is unknown. What start cutting chunks out of young unaffected horses is beyond me as the dna has found unless a young horse has multiple variants it will not show mim in its muscles until it gets older. Why this may or may not happen is unknown to the dna people or vets

I offered both my symptomatic and positive horses to muscle biopsy by BEVA and got the door shut in my face. You would think they would gladly accept them but no

A biopsy was examined by two different vets one declared free from muscle disease the other declared MFM

A breeder took his 6 year old symptomatic horse for a biopsy and it was negative. Valberg told him to keep breeding and come back in a few years for another biopsy he found out about the dna test and found it had mum. A few years later he returned to Valberg for a biopsy it was positive. Valvergs explanation was that biopsies can often provide negative results and that retest is recommended if the horse continues to show symptoms

I will leave it there as we will never agree. You are obviously working to BEVA rules and regulations and that has to be accepted. Even my VET practice thinks there is mileage in the dna test results but have to work within BEVA rules. They are at least open minded

Yes there are lots of unknown muscle diseases that have not been discovered this is in human and animals

 

[I'm Dun]

Sorry but stuff is peer reviewed every single day. Given the huge interest in this, I think it would be quicker than most as lots of parties would like to review it. Without peer review its meaningless.

 

[Winger23man]

I totally disagree if that was the case the covid vaccine would have had to be before it was used and it wasn’t You can peer review a complex process just like that. Anyway we are talking to brick walls. Watch this space

 

[shortstuff99]

Sorry but stuff is peer reviewed every single day. Given the huge interest in this, I think it would be quicker than most as lots of parties would like to review it. Without peer review its meaningless.

Also the base behind the covid vaccine (mRNA vaccines) is peer reviewed, all they changed was the target antigen.

 

[shortstuff99]

And from reading the replies I can guess who Wingerman is.

 

[paddy555]

And from reading the replies I can guess who Wingerman is.

come on, do tell,don't leave us in suspense. does he (she) have an interest in equisec? otherwise not sure why they are ramming it down our throats.

 

[ycbm]

I’ve explained how complicated muscle disease is in horses. Yes it’s published but not peer reviewed. If in research we waited for peer review the world would stop. The Covid vaccine was never peer reviewed before it was used yet thousands of people have been vaccinated

I totally disagree if that was the case the covid vaccine would have had to be before it was used and it wasn’t .

Only it was.

Peer-reviewed report on Moderna COVID-19 vaccine publishes

Data from Phase 3 clinical trial confirm vaccine is effective.

www.nih.gov

 

[shortstuff99]

come on, do tell,don't leave us in suspense. does he (she) have an interest in equisec? otherwise not sure why they are ramming it down our throats.

Yes indeed they do

 

[paddy555]

Yes indeed they do

in which case is advertising allowed on this forum.. I always understood that it wasn't.

YCBM, nice to see you posting.

 

[I'm Dun]

Also the base behind the covid vaccine (mRNA vaccines) is peer reviewed, all they changed was the target antigen.

and a balanced decision was taken as it was a worldwide emergency where the economy was being destroyed and hundreds of thousands of people were dying. And there was still huge concern about it. How is it comparable to this.

You keep mentioning covid, but its really not relevant.

 

[shortstuff99]

and a balanced decision was taken as it was a worldwide emergency where the economy was being destroyed and hundreds of thousands of people were dying. And there was still huge concern about it. How is it comparable to this.

You keep mentioning covid, but its really not relevant.

Yea I don't think a vaccine to (hopefully) save the world and a maybe dna test for a horse disease are quite the same somehow

 

[Tiddlypom]

PI totally disagree if that was the case the covid vaccine would have had to be before it was used and it wasn’t You can peer review a complex process just like that. Anyway we are talking to brick walls. Watch this space

Just keep digging, Wingerman, you are doing a grand job of trashing EquiSeq’s reputation even more than hitherto.



Unlike FB you can’t just delete replies from posters who actually do know what they’re talking about when they refute your straw arguments.

You’re right out of your depth here, and are sinking deeper with every post you make.

 

[khalswitz]

Also the base behind the covid vaccine (mRNA vaccines) is peer reviewed, all they changed was the target antigen.

Only it was.

Peer-reviewed report on Moderna COVID-19 vaccine publishes

Data from Phase 3 clinical trial confirm vaccine is effective.

www.nih.gov

Yea I don't think a vaccine to (hopefully) save the world and a maybe dna test for a horse disease are quite the same somehow

A very good friend and colleague of mine is an expert in emergent viral diseases and was a WHO expert adviser during the pandemic so I got a pretty reliable perspective on this - they absolutely peer reviewed and went through due process for the Oxford vaccine here in the UK, but a lot of resource was put into speeding up the process.

Instead of running each clinical trial phase separately and collecting all data before submission for review of each phase, data was being added to the packet and reviewed live as it went along. That, alongside previous clinical trials of the mRNA vaccine tech meant they managed to massively speed up review of the vaccine.

Data continued to be gathered afterwards in large scale which adapted recommendations.

This is in no way comparable to unvalidated genetic tests that been offered commercially for >7 years with no presentation of evidence supporting them.

The one ‘publication’ I have seen was a non-peer reviewed ‘report’ - and the phenotyping was so horrendous that the data was meaningless. It would never pass peer review. And it makes me wonder what the rest of the ‘evidence’ is like!

 

[SEL]

I saw this thread had been updated and poured myself a coffee and grabbed a ginger biscuit.

Honestly so much more entertaining than everything else going on in the world right now

**waves at YCBM**

 

[Winger23man]

And from reading the replies I can guess who Wingerman is.

Really who am I then?

 

[shortstuff99]

Really who am I then?

I don't want to go down the road of doxxing anyone, but others can research as they like.

 

[Winger23man]

lol if you think I am who you think I am you are so way off the mark.

 

[paddy555]

lol if you think I am who you think I am you are so way off the mark.

then enlighten us, who are you and what precisely is your interest if not commercial.

you must have got the impression by now people on here are not going to change their minds based on your say so as you don't even appear to have any qualifications,
perhaps you don't know us very well. I'm sure many are doing exactly as SEL suggests.

I saw this thread had been updated and poured myself a coffee and grabbed a ginger biscuit.

Honestly so much more entertaining than everything else going on in the world right now

**waves at YCBM**

 

[Winger23man]

then enlighten us, who are you and what precisely is your interest if not commercial.

you must have got the impression by now people on here are not going to change their minds based on your say so as you don't even appear to have any qualifications,
perhaps you don't know us very well. I'm sure many are doing exactly as SEL suggests.

I have no desire to enlighten you but more than qualified and experienced. Not everyone in your closed group agrees with you. However it’s a very free country and fortunately I and others are looking at the welfare of our animals not shutting the book and letting them suffer

I don’t do ginger biscuits but sat with with a chocolate biscuit reading your *FBIC* adios

 

[I'm Dun]

I have no desire to enlighten you but more than qualified and experienced. Not everyone in your closed group agrees with you. However it’s a very free country and fortunately I and others are looking at the welfare of our animals not shutting the book and letting them suffer

I don’t do ginger biscuits but sat with with a chocolate biscuit reading your *FBIC* adios

Its not a closed group. Anyone can read and post, and these threas come up on a google search.

 

[paddy555]

I have no desire to enlighten you but more than qualified and experienced. Not everyone in your closed group agrees with you. However it’s a very free country and fortunately I and others are looking at the welfare of our animals not shutting the book and letting them suffer

I don’t do ginger biscuits but sat with with a chocolate biscuit reading your *FBIC* adios

I'm struggling to see anyone agreeing with you, You dangle "more than qualified and experienced" yet someone proud of their qualifications would give details. You don't have any but I am starting to recognise your style of writing.

we all look to the welfare of our animals but are not going to be ripped off by snake oil salesmen with no qualifications and a lack of a verified product.

perhaps there is one question you can answer though what is FBIC please.

 

[ycbm]

There is research and it’s published what you are referring to is peer reviewed research this will take years as it’s not that straightforward

This isn't true and I will clarify for those who don't know what peer review is. It is NOT a need for somebody else to validate your results, which could indeed take years. It is instead something simple for anyone with the right experience and is done for every article presenting research findings which is accepted for publication by every reputable scientific journal in the world.

You send your intended publication to a reputable journal. That journal then sends it to one or more of your peers with relevant experience. Those peers look at:

- whether the study has been conducted in such a way as to properly test the hypothesis. There is, for example, no point looking for a DNA link between blue eyes and blond hair if your entire sample has blue eyes and blond hair. You have also to prove that the same link is not present in blue eyed black haired people in order to test your hypothesis.

- whether any statistical techniques used in the study are valid and properly used.

- whether the results of the research justify the conclusions which have been drawn from it.

Given that peer review is so widespread, so relatively easy, and is the responsibility of the journal, not the researchers, it's impossible to come to any conclusion about the lack of peer review on the PSSM2 DNA test than that the seller of the test fears that it would damage sales if the research went through the peer review process.
.

 

[Exasperated]

This isn't true and I will clarify for those who don't know what peer review is. It is NOT a need for somebody else to validate your results, which could indeed take years. It is instead something simple for anyone with the right experience and is done for every article presenting research findings which is accepted for publication by every reputable scientific journal in the world.

You send your intended publication to a reputable journal. That journal then sends it to one or more of your peers with relevant experience. Those peers look at:

- whether the study has been conducted in such a way as to properly test the hypothesis. There is, for example, no point looking for a DNA link between blue eyes and blond hair if your entire sample has blue eyes and blond hair. You have also to prove that the same link is not present in blue eyed black haired people in order to test your hypothesis.

- whether any statistical techniques used in the study are valid and properly used.

- whether the results of the research justify the conclusions which have been drawn from it.

Given that peer review is so widespread, so relatively easy, and is the responsibility of the journal, not the researchers, it's impossible to come to any conclusion about the lack of peer review on the PSSM2 DNA test than that the seller of the test fears that it would damage sales if the research went through the peer review process.
.

Ideally, the original researcher should actively have tried to also disprove their own hypothesis (Popper, falsification), the longer one remains unable to conclusively do so, the more likely the theory is to ‘hold water’. Test and keep testing, particularly the anomalies!
Whether Generatio / Equisec etc have rigorously done this is unclear, insufficient published data, but why the veterinary establishment don’t (appear to) falsify the hypothesis also unclear.
Certainly, plenty of UK vets are dissatisfied with existing biopsy tests for PSSM 2, so other tests for possible links surely worthy of rigorous investigation?
Meanwhile, owners are in despair.