Can anybody tell me the name of the labor that does colour testing in the UK . I think it is in Scotland. I know that Vetgen does in the USA but they can`t be the only on.
Waiting hopefully
Killian

I think you will find that VetGen are probably the only ones that actually carry out the test although other people act as agents for them and send the kits out to them to be tested.

Christine

Contact the AHT they are doing DNA testing for a range of things and I am fairly sure I saw colour was one item listed.

sorry to have to ask but what exactley is dna testing for but it,s new to me so i may as well ask and appear thick or go through life not knowing

Trouble is, as I said in another thread, whole sections of decoded DNA have been patented by various labs and the only way other firms can test is to pay a licence fee to the Lab concerned. All in all it's killing DNA testing.

John

Yes John, I`ve been aware of this for a while now, but what I don`t understand is why no one is kicking up a fuss about it! And why are only a few people aware of the consequences of this situation? Don`t people care?
Christine, Spain.

Hi Carol, DNA testing can be used for a number of things in animals, much the same as it`s used in human testing. In various breeds for colour testing of genes to predict what colour coats dogs will have or to see if they are carrying the gene for certain eye conditions/health conditions. Also to see if the progeny from a dam & sire actually came from said dam & sire. Some of the tests need saliva swabs & some need blood tests. Different DNA tests are available for different things in various breeds of dogs.
Christine, Spain.

I knew nothing about it until I came across it in connection with a Golden Retriever which had been DNA tested for PRA and failed. It was tested in the time honoured way and the eyes were "Text Book Perfect". This was when I found about the patenting of sequences. Since then there has been quite a bit on the news about the human DNA and the same thing is happening there. I'm afraid I know longer see a future for it because the price is likely to be prohibitive.

John

John you know the story of my dog & thats how I found out about it. But I do feel people should be aware of these things as they are important to our dogs, but I think its a case of till it happens to you....... And yes the price is exhorbitant.
Christine, Spain.

Hi John, do these patents have a time limit on them, as for drugs and the like? From what I remember about 'intellectual property' if a patent is awarded then it has a limit, after this time it expires and all the other companies can get in on the act. If I remember correctly, the patent cannot be reissued for any specific thing. If this is the case then it would just be a matter of waiting - unfortunately I think it is something like 19 years, but at least after that time there would be a more open 'market'.

In terms of the human genome, I think it was this very reason that a group of private and public bodies tried to team up to decipher it, but obviously you then got the problem of the private American company and it turned into a race. As the American guy eventually collaborated with the others I don't know what the exact agreement was, but I think it was along the lines of certain sequences would be patented by them (sorry I forget the name of the company) in exchange for others which they sequenced being made public property.

I think what it comes down to is the perceived importance of different species' DNA sequences. Human DNA was deemed important enough to make most of it public property, but even then the most lucrative parts were patented; I guess Dog's wasn't considered in the same way. ;)

I really don't know the answer to that arwenwulf.

Changing the subject slightly, I said earlier about the Golden tested for PRA. The problem there was that although the dog failed the DNA test but passed on the standard KC/BVA/ISDS test, was the DNA correct in its findings? Just maybe although the dog had perfect eyes it was a carrier for PRA! And if this is the case, will people stop using dogs with perfect eyes on the off chance that it might throw affected puppies? I would like to think they would. But the question then is, as everyone knows who studies pedigrees, almost all if not all dogs in a breed are interrelated so will there be ANY clear dogs? At what point do we, (can we) use dogs which have failed a DNA test? Without trying to open a can of worms we all know that Collies with CEA are bred from. (In fact it is almost impossible no to now!) The Golden people are still breeding from dogs which have failed for MRD and a lot of people I know of in Flatcoats are using dogs which are low number failures for Glaucoma. Whilst I'm not saying that some of these dogs should not be used, if we cant stay away from these dogs what chances is there of staying away from dogs with perfect eye sight?

Sorry if this upsets anyone, John

Hi John & A.wulf, well my dog passed the DNA test & failed (correctly) the standard test, as you know John. You are quite right J there are not so many pedigrees that have all clear dogs in them & even the pedigrees that are relatively clear of affecteds have carriers & as we know, they are the hidden dangers as once you get to second generations out of affecteds you don`t know who the carriers are! In a perfect world carriers wouln`t be bred from but what happens with affecteds? A lot of times they are bred with before the disease comes to light. We all have to live with our own conscience.
As to the length of the copyright aech country has different laws & the patents can be renewed by the owners, but I do think if more money went in to the DNA research it could be the way forward but because of whats been done by the big money firms I doubt any more funds would be forth coming, as these firms see it as just a way of making more money.
Its very difficult to make choices.
Christin, Spain

What you say is very true Christine. My Bethany was 9 years old before she failed with late forming cataracts. Had I been breeding from her I would have finished using her at least 2 years before it came to light. It was only the fact that she went Epileptic at 18 months which saved me! These are the breeders I feel sorry for. They do the very best they can and it still goes sick on them!

Best wishes, John

Hi again,
just wondering, does everyone getting eyes tested use both methods? I wasn't sure if both DNA and standard testing together was recommended, if not I was wondering what the proportion of people using either of the tests on their own was? In a lot of diagnostic procedures different tests are used in conjunction with each other and the final result depends on these. If in this case both tests are used and come up negative for the problem, then confidence in the result is increased. Of course, doesn't help if the condition doesn't become detectable until after breeding age.

:)

I don't think a DNA test would tell you if your dog is blind! what it will do is tell you that the gene is there for the trouble so really if you want to know the present state of your dogs eyes you would need the old test. By the same token, anything like Late Forming Cataracts like my old Bethany had would have shown on the DNA right from a young puppy!

Looked at like that, the DNA is the most important test although for someone working their dog then the old test would tell them the more useful info about how their dogs eyesight is AT THAT MOMENT.

Regards, John

Hi John & A/Wulf, I don`t at the moment have a lot of confidence in th DNA testing. Think I am agreeing with John right now. But I have an awful lot of questions to ask about it but no one seems to be able to answer them with a clear answer. I don`t think the experts know. Life would be a lot easier if things were black & white & but the older I get there are more grey areas & things are not so clear cut.
Christine, Spain.

Hi A/Wulf going to reply direct to you my views. What method of eye testing do you have the most confidence in? DNA or traditional- ie Dr K Barnett or the equivalent? From what I have learned if you go for the traditional you need an experienced opthalmologist to give you a correct diagnosis, opt for the DNA & you still need experienced technicians in the field of DNA for a correct diagnosis that are relying on technical data. Pay your money & take your chances!!!!!
I had my Bonnie diagnosed by Dr Keith Barnett from choice, he gave me a correct diagnosis. I then decided to have her tested by DNA method. My Bonnie & her daughter blood were sent for testing & they came back *Bonnny* certified clear of PRA & hr daughter *possible carrier*. I know for sure & without ANY doubt Bonnie is PRA affected, in other words going blind with PRA & also with secondary cataracts caused by the PRA. & her progeny are a definate carriers.
I don`t think it`s the norm to have both tests done, it`s just I had nothing to lose by proving the DNA testing for PRA wasn`t correct. And for the amount of money they were charging not to mention the damage it was doing to the reputations of good dogs & kennels working so hard for the well being of Labs, I would expect nothing less than 100% correct!! I do believe that my willingness to go public with my Bonnies PRA & her MISDIAGNOSIS from Health Gene was the direct reason for Health Gene to withdraw their DNA test for Labradors with PRA .
from the public domain. I can tell you that I was NOT happy to prove my point because I`m no further on to helping my beloved dogs & believe me a blind labrador is not should happen in the world! You have to read up on everything & make your own mind up.
Christine, Spain.

Hi Christine, thanks for your reply - I can see how frustrating it is for this to happen. It is the same with human medical choices, all people want is enough information to be able to make an informed decision but often that info isn't available, whether the experts themselves don't know or just aren't forthcoming :( .

With regards to the DNA testing, I really don't know any of the specifics for this condition, I am thinking more in general terms and just thinking aloud really. If I was having to decide whether to trust a DNA test then I would like to know a few things first. Most importantly I think, is exactly what are they detecting with their test? If they are detecting a fragment of DNA, in what percentage of PRA cases does this fragment occur? Disease conditions are often the result of of a combination of genetic 'events' and the fragment they are testing for may be the best option they have, ie. present in the highest number of cases, but it may be possible to PRA to occur without. On the other hand, if it is a case of one specific gene being responsible, if the dog has the gene then it will get PRA, then detecting the presence of the gene should be much more clear cut. Even so, if it is a single gene, the test is unlikely to be for the whole gene, they are much more likely to test for a specific part. Now, what would happen if the gene for PRA underwent a mutation? In this case it might lose the fragment they are testing for, but still retain enough detail to code for PRA. This might be rare, but they would need to work out the probability of it happening to work out the statistical certainty of the test result being accurate.
Another consideration is the type of test they use to detect the DNA - each test has its own certainty levels, I don't think there are any that are 100% accurate. There will be cases of false positives/negatives, and in order to decide how accurate the test is we would need to know what these statistics are.

Sorry this is long winded, as I say I was thinking aloud ;) . I doubt that this sort of information will ever be freely available to members of the public but that just makes it more frustrating :(

Hi A/wulf, here is the link for the Optigen site, this firm has patented the test & I think is the only one doing the test for Labradors PRA. I have been told that the test is a *marker test* & this is what seems to be the problem when dertermining how accurate this test is. I have also heard of people saying their dogs have been misdiagnosed by this method but no one will go public with it so don`t know how true this is & the company claiming false positives/negatives, like you say.
"whether the experts themselves don't know or just aren't forthcoming", I personally think they know more than they are telling us! Either way it doesn`t help us & I don`t understand why they are like this. Have a read at what they say cos they explain it better than I can writing it down, & see what you think.
http://www.optigen.com/
Christine, Spain.

Thanks Christine, that did answer a few things. Unfortunately it doesn't really explain what happened in your own experience. They say they do test for a marker, and not the gene itself, but this is common practice in DNA analysis. If your dog's test came back clear and yet she did in fact suffer from PRA then either the marker wasn't there and the gene was (and the company are being VERY misleading in their info :rolleyes: If a mutation had occurred in your own dog's line this would explain it, but the company should have some disclaimer to say this is a possibility) or a mistake was made when the test was taken, possible human error which resulted in a false negative. The strange thing about this test is the illustration they give of the gel. Normally in DNA analysis, you test for presence or absence of the marker you are looking for, which would be shown on the gel as a band and you can work out the size of the DNA fragment if it matches the size you were looking for. However, they have shown a band on the gel from dogs clear of the condition, it is a smaller fragment. If it is a result of the same test, then part of the 'normal' DNA is amplified adjacent to the marker - if the marker is present and the dog carries the condition then the DNA fragment that is amplified is larger. I wonder if this could explain why some dogs are given the all clear when they do in fact have the gene. An error could have occurred during amlification which either truncated the reaction and made it stop too soon, before it had finished the whole segment, or it could have been degraded afterwards before the gel was run.

While these are possibilities, I do not know the liklihood of the final piece of DNA being exactly the same length as it would be for 'normal' cases.

Hi A/wulf, no I never got an explanation from but I do know that K Barnetts dignosis is correct & she does have PRA no doubt about it.When I wrote to them, after they sent me the clear cert. for her, they emailed back saying they stood by their diagnosis & questioned KB`s diagnosis & that they had even run the test again & it still claimed she was clear of PRA. I forwarded their reply to KB & he got in touch with them & I have copied his reply below for you to read. We never heard from them again & the next thing we know the test was withdrawn for Labs. That says everything doesn`t it & they never carried a disclaimer at the time & no I never got my money back either!! The test was, unfortunatly wrong.
Christine, Spain.

Dear Dr Yuri Melekhovets

>
> I have a copy of your letter dated 28th December 2000 from HealthGene
> Corp. to Christine Vaughan of ElChapparral, Spain regarding gene tests on
> blood samples from her two Labradors...and her daughter
> .... In my opinion your letter is incorrect on a number of counts.
>
> I examined .. in September 1999 and diagnosed an early case
> of generalised PRA by ophthalmoscopy. At that time the dog was exhibiting
> signs of night blindness but day vision was good. Ophthalmoscopically
> both eyes were identical with symmetrical lesions of increased tapetal
> reflectivity and early blood vessel attenuation. Further examination in
> September 2000 proved regular progression, symmetrical in both eyes and
> with clinical evidence of defective vision. Ophthalmoscopic examination
> of the daughter showed no evidence of any ocular abnormality. The breed,
> age and history, together with pedigree perusal, were all typical of
> generalised PRA. I understand that your tests show ... to
> be normal (certificate number 2786-1 with genotype 1,1 and the daughter
> genotype 1,2 (probably a carrier)). My examination showed that... is a case of generalised PRA and will shortly be blind and the
> daughter is therefore a proven carrier.
>
> I was surprised and disappointed that you questioned my diagnosis and
> suggested that it might be the result of a viral infection. I am sure
> that both Gus and Greg would not only agree with my diagnosis but will
> tell you that I have seen very many cases of PRA in very many breeds over
> a number of years and I have a particular interest in the Labrador
> Retriever. I also note from your letter that you claim never to have had
> problems with any of your results - I know that this is also incorrect;
> this in spite of the fact that you re-tested both samples.
>
> I should be interested in any reply you may wish to make and I would like
> to add that your results and your letter have led to considerable
> dissatisfaction and loss of faith in DNA testing which, in my opinion, is
> extremely sad as it promised to be a wonderful opportunity to rid this,
> and other breeds, of important and common hereditary abnormalities.
>

:( That is sooooooooo frustrating - and I am sorry if me going on about has been in any way upsetting. I wish companies would be more upfront about the fact that tests aren't 100% accurate and be a bit more supportive when anomilies crop up.

Thanks for your patience anyway :D

That`s OK A/ wulf :) It`s always upsetting but it`s not going away so I try & be matter of fact about things (don`t always tho). I like to think I`m helping others by putting out the facts of whats happened so others can see both sides of things & the test is not as accurate as they made it out to be. There was some good news when she was examined again in Sept, the secondary cataracts are developing a lot slower than is usual & she still has a little sight although I didn`t need telling :) & she still managed to do retrieving in the pool this last summer! :)
But yes, very frustrating for everyone all round.
Christine, Spain.

VetGen are the US based DNA company but they have offices in Scotland who go by the name of Genetica (UK) Ltd

On their site they don't list as many breeds as their US counterparts, for coat colour testing. I send my Swabs off to the US as the cost works out better for us once you at present it's about £54 per swab but it does take longer to get your results.

I "think" you might find it is now North Western Labs who take the tests for VetGen rather than the other company mentioned. They are not UK offices for VG but agents.

I have recently ran a DNA clinic for vWD in Dobermanns (and also opened it to other breeds for varous conditions but no takers) and had a good uptake as more and more Dobermann breeders and owners are taking note of this condition and breeding responsibly.

Christine

Christine

I couldn't find anything on the net about the new lab so I asked Cheryl at VetGen about them and what services they have to offer us, plus if the Genetica were still working here's her reply

"There is now a lab in England that is selling our tests:

North Western Laboratories Ltd.
addy deleted

Genetica in Scotland is also still doing our tests."

She has given me contact details for the new lab if anyone wants them please email me and I will pass them on. I collected samples for the colour coat testing within Schips which is now up and running for Blacks, Cream/Fawn and Red/Chocolate only Blue to crack.

On the epilepsy front there is little joy as those with affected dogs are willing to provide samples but they need them from 2 litter siblings or half siblings plus parents and most seem to be stopping breeding from the parents if they produce an affected dog, bit of an double edge sword really.

Thank you all for the Information. The reason for asking is that I am buying a Labrador Puppy in England ( I live in Germany) and I would like to test the dog for carring colours.
Thank you all
Killian ( Germany)