From:
Roger Vaughn
Date: 2002-05-19 14:52:00 UTC
Subject: Re: Re: ADV test kit
> It seems that there is a lot of disagreement on the best thing to
> do but general agreement that the tests are not too reliable. I
> would love input before ordering more test kits.
Personally, I believe the POCT kits are great for screening, just as
you are doing. If you have a ferret who is high-risk for ADV, perhaps
coming from a known-infected household, then you definitely want to go
the blood test route. But for the majority of cases, the error rate of
the POCT should be acceptable.
I agree with you - I would think any positive on any test requires
greater care, and a wider variety of tests. Simply retesting with the
POCT is not good procedure. The ADV virus apparently has the ability
to "hide" and reappear later, so repeated retests may not give you good
results. Periodic testing over the course of the year is better.
I believe people as a whole tend to overreact. Even if we are seeing a
1% error rate with the POCT (I don't have any real statistics), I
believe that the popular forums tend to inflate the numbers and make
the problem seem much more severe than it actually is.
There are two real problems with the POCT. First, it requires some
care to administer, and laypeople aren't trained in careful test
administration. Specific times for each phase of the test are given,
and the warning is given that any food - even Ferretone - given within
one hour of the test can invalidate it. This has to be taken
seriously. I'm convinced that the majority of failures are due to
improper administration.
This could be mitigated by changing what I consider to be the second
big problem with the POCT. The control line on the slide picks up
pigment and shows red if there is an adequate amount of fluid. Even
the raw test fluid will give you a positive control. (I sacrificed a
kit to confirm this.) This would be far improved if the control
indicated an adequate amount of *saliva*, rather than simple fluid.
This would confirm whether or not you performed the saliva gathering
step - arguably the most important and most error-prone step - properly.
It would be best to hear directly from Dr. Stephon, but it is possible
that he (she? I forget - no offense intended) is plain fed up with
people. Particularly in electronic media, we (humans, not FHL) tend to
bash rather than question openly. Avecon has stated over and over that
the POCT is highly reliable, but as you pointed out, many of the forums
say it is anything but. What would you do if your reliability and
skill in your chosen profession - even your honesty - were continually
called into question? Most of the people using these tests have no
testing background, and in many cases, no medical background. Who are
we to question a professional testing organization? If it can be
scientifically proven that the test is flawed, that's one thing. But
this idle conjecture gets us nowhere.
Then again, Dr. Stephon may just be on vacation.
So, as for me, I will keep using the POCT as long as it is offered.
It's very convenient and inexpensive for testing my little bunch at
home. I can accept a small error rate. If I handled a large
throughput of ferrets, I might insist on the highest reliability
possible, but I don't, so the POCT is fine with me. It's far better
than not testing at all.
Roger, Digger, Bear, Fox and Sniffles
Tampa, FL