Whom do most of you all use for EIC testing ? One you trust more than another ? Tia.

They dont post to the OFA web site but its so easy just handing out a copy. DDC is great to work with

I used DDC and they seemed to be good and also fast.

A bunch of us having lunch yesterday and trying to decide. Know some of my friends have used DDC and happy with it. I don't care if its on OFA or not. I want it for me. And like someone said just hand out the copy. Thanks.

Mailed the DDC envelope on a Monday, got an email with results on Friday, hard copy in mail by following Monday. Did this 3 seperate times, same results.

Who/What is DDC?? Website? TIA!

http://vetdnacenter.com/

We used DDC and the results came back SO quickly! Very happy with them!

U of MN. They did the research in collaboration w/ the Canadians, etc, and they deserve all of our business!!! They also are quite fast. What difference does speed of turn around really make anyhow-- many of you have waited what, a year or more to even consider testing for it?

I am really not being "smart" (let alone nasty) here, esp because I know you! :) I just think we owe it to the folks that spent the $$$ to do the research, write it up, spend their time on chat boards "consulting" etc. Why NOT support them unless they don't offer a specific process (eg, on frozen semen, U of MN does seem to want alot of "matl" -- 1/2 straw-- that many won't part with) for what you want? They are the only ones that OFA will accept too, so I'd think for stud owners esp, that would be a deciding factor. Just sayin... ;)

Anne

I've used DDC and been very happy both with the price and the turn around time. In regards to OFA not recognizing it and that being a factor in my own stud dogs... well, it isn't, as I can scan a copy of the document provided by DDC and give out to anyone requesting.

My problem with U of Minn's test is that on the form they ask if your dog has had episodes, bloodlines, etc. I'm guessing that in most research circles, this would be known as biasing the results... remember, we're paying them to tell us, so sure, we put down that our dog has had symptoms and that doesn't in any way reflect the results of the test? I know it's DNA based, but the DDC test doesn't ask for anything... they just do the test. I'm sure U of MInn is "gathering data" but I find this somewhat problematic to ask for background on the dog... perhaps it would be better to do that on dogs that come back carriers & affecteds after the fact instead of before.... just a thought. Optigen certainly doesn't ask if your dog is blind when you submit those samples.......

I've used the U-MN in the past but am planning to try Animal Genetics for a cpl of the gang soon, has anyone had experience with them?

Who cares who's profiting... isn't the test about our dogs, their health and the accuracy of the test?

No - the TEST is about determining if a dog is EIC clear, carrier or affected... that's it. The money part of it is a personal decision on whom to use- nothing more, nothing less. If some sense of moral obligation commends you to use U of Minn then so be it.

Patents expire and free trade exists.... I think most of us prefer generic when filling scrips as opposed to saying, No, I'd rather pay more for the name brand. Is this really much different? It's personal choice and the financial ability of those involved. Both drugs, just like both of these tests, will get you to the same place.

Research done by Universities is generally funded by grants. Some are from public funds (taxes, etc.) and some private. Any "profit" to be made through use of the research is generally collected by the University, as the work done by professors while on staff is the property of their employer.

For those who feel they should support the Universities where the work was done, that is an admirable sentiment. Public education can use all the money it gets Other than paying for the regular teaching salaries of the researchers, most universities do not make any financial contribution toward research. In fact, the tenure of the researchers is often tied to their ability to attract grants and benefactors for the school. This is neither good or bad - it just is the way of funding higher education and research.

The way in which many researchers eventually get some financial return for their years of work is through patents. Many public or state supported universities do not apply for patents. Most private institutions or research institutes (funded by private money) will apply. Optigen holds a patent for the prcd-PRA test and several others. the University of Minnesota has not applied for a patent for the EIC test. The research was funded by grants and public money and is (at least for now) public domain.

The collection of additional data by the researchers - like whether a submitted dog has had symptoms - is one benefit of using the originators. While you may feel that is unnecessary probing of your personal information, it is where we get the statistics about what percentage of affected dogs have not had a collapse (yet) an how many unaffected dogs have had collapses. Since those figures are tossed about frequently on this forum, be glad someone is collecting the information

I suspect that Optigen willl soon be offering the EIC test as well. The primary advantage to using DDC, Optigen or any of the others is that multiple tests can be done from the same sample. If you ONLY want to test for EIC and don't think it is likely you will want to test that sample for something else in the future, then supporting the University of Minnesota with your money and additional research information is certainly appreciated. If you also want to check color, CNM or any of the other DNA options available, then one of the multi-service laboratories seems the best fit. It is your money - your choice.

"My problem with U of Minn's test is that on the form they ask if your dog has had episodes, bloodlines, etc. I'm guessing that in most research circles, this would be known as biasing the results... remember, we're paying them to tell us, so sure, we put down that our dog has had symptoms and that doesn't in any way reflect the results of the test? "

I very much doubt that the people who actually run the samples have access to that information. The samples would be run, carrier or affected (or clear) status determined, and only then would the information on symptoms be compared to the result of the test.

I just quoted the frequency of collapsing dogs among carriers vs clears. The medical history that UM requests are essential for the ongoing collection of that data.

U of MN is collecting that data for the most part to further research into these "other" types of collapses. You won't see DDC do this since they aren't doing research... maybe you could consider that extra $8 or so as your donation to research??? If you've ever produced or known a dog that collapsed due to EIC or any other reason, you'd probably have more interest in working w/ U of MN.

As for a patent, the process often takes years. I believe Katie explained on a primarily field forum that they made the choice to release the test commercially prior to the patent process being completed because so many folks NEEDED the test (myself included).

And yes, for the person who asked me if I think Optigen is the only place to test for PRA, my answer is yes, it is for me. I also only use Alfort for CNM, for all the same reasons. Sure, it may be nice to get a 3 for 1 test package, but I support the labs that made the investment, rather than those who steal other peoples' research methods. I know how I felt once years ago when all my research was taken by someone who had left the university and needed a job, and wrote up the research I'd been working on for years as his own-- not so much as an acknowledgment to the "grunt" who spent thousands of hours cranking out the data, analyzing it, etc. It is why I now work for myself and share no procedures with anyone. I wonder how long it'll take for the TVD test now-- we may all get to wait til the patent is in place. Now who is hurt? Anne

Thank you for all the comments. Did not mean to start something back and forth. Just think it might be good to test. Think this heat is bringing out affected dogs that might have gone for years without an episode. We just need to start somewhere and this test is what we have today.

I used all the DNA labs for various different tests over the years and I can tell you that by far the most professional place to deal with is DDC. I have used them for my EIC, CNM, and coat color tests. I trust their results, their pricing is fair, the turnaround is consistently the fastest, and they answer my questions promptly, the service is great. Another vote for DDC! www.vetdnacenter.com

I have to vote for DDC as well. We only have our cell phones (no house phone) and, before our network booster, service was sketchy at best out at our place. So, the first time I called DDC to order a kit, I lost connection with Randy (Smith). However, he made the extra effort to search the web for me and found our website to contact me again- by text, email, and a return call (the next day when I was in town and had better reception). I was very impressed with not only the extra effort he put forth to get us the kit, but also the price (he gave us the discount even though the samples were to be received within the next 2 days to apply) and the turnaround time was the fastest I've ever experienced from a lab (sent out on a Thursday, had email results the next Friday). I will definitely be using DDC again for both EIC & CNM.

also a DDC fan. swabs are a snap to use and i have had results via email within a week of actually mailing the swab kits to them.

Do you know if DDC does CNM testing also? I've been pleased with my DDC experiences for EIC testing also.

Thanks.

I just sent in swabs to test a dog for EIC, CNM, DM and Cystinuria. The last two are not common problems, but have been identified in Labradors. I am planning to freeze semen and figured I would just have the dog tested for everything currently available. It may be important when I use the semen years from now.