Ivy League TH Status

[HCCHSS]

What would be wrong with having two samples pulled on each ai sire and donor?

Well the same mistake, however unlikely, could be made again, the lady could type in the wrong info...a second time! The idea could be a step in the right direction as long as the two samples are sent at different times.

 

[aj]

Maybe we should throw the lady in jail. Since the world owes venture capitalist's a living wouldn't it be the right thing to do. If someone spends thousands of dollars on a bull and thousands of dollars promoting a bull with advertising and the deal goes bad. Why is it up to the little guy to make it right? Why should we have to pick up the tab with 100$ tests in the future? Why wouldn't someone who has thousands dollars worth of investment send in a extra sample, line breed the bull, to check for defects? Its poor management. Holy mole y why is it always someone elses fault. Is it a new generation thing?

 

[rtmcc]

If you are really going to promote and sell semen on a bull and you suspect he may be a carrier, it may be a good idea to send a sample to two completely different testing labs and compare the results.

J3, I commend you on your upfront manner in which you have have handled this.

Ron

 

[Show Heifer]

First off, I believe all AI/Donors should be tested by two different labs. Human error does happen, its just a fact of live, so deal with it.

But, before we throw that single person under the bus, think about all the times blood is drawn for DNA test and THE SAME NEEDLE AND SYRINGE IS USED TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME.
It might be rinsed, but that is not good enough when deal with DNA. It wasn't the problem this time apparently, but, I have seen it done many times when cross contamination would be ineveitable from the stand point of how things are handled on the farm.

This very reason is why I like to retest everything I purchase. If she was worth the $5000 grand I paid, then she should be worth the $50 to test her again on my behalf. (yep, just call me paranoid)

From what I understand, the lab in question is not the only lab that has had problems. This was a filing error, and another lab (From what I heard) had cross contamination problems.
Pick your poison I guess.

 

[CAB]

AJ, excuse me, but your comments about this mistake are over the line. Joshua and his family are considered friends by me and many others on this board. Your accusing accusations are uncalled for and show a great lack of any compassion for the owner's of Ivy League and the PPL that took a chance using a promising new SH sire. Did you stop to put yourself in their shoes for one second or could you just not wait that long to jump on them and start pointing your finger @ everyone? Talk about a new generation!! I can't figure some PPL's motives.

 To Joshua & family & all involved, I'm sorry that you have to deal with this situation, but know that you will. It'll all work out in the end somehow and I know you will do what you can to make things right as best as you can.

P.S., I'm still excited to see my Ivy League calf. I am glad that the cow is clean. LOL. Your Friend, Brent.

 

[R1Livestock]

Holy mole y why is it always someone elses fault. Is it a new generation thing?

Maybe because it was someone else's fault?

 

[aj]

I realize that this is a "mutual admiration society" board but if you think this is confusing. Wait till the limi and gelbvieh and Red Angus cattle start showing up th positive. We may have to ban testing.

 

[OH Breeder]

First off, I believe all AI/Donors should be tested by two different labs. Human error does happen, its just a fact of live, so deal with it.

But, before we throw that single person under the bus, think about all the times blood is drawn for DNA test and THE SAME NEEDLE AND SYRINGE IS USED TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME.
It might be rinsed, but that is not good enough when deal with DNA. It wasn't the problem this time apparently, but, I have seen it done many times when cross contamination would be inevitable from the stand point of how things are handled on the farm.

This very reason is why I like to retest everything I purchase. If she was worth the $5000 grand I paid, then she should be worth the $50 to test her again on my behalf. (yep, just call me paranoid)

From what I understand, the lab in question is not the only lab that has had problems. This was a filing error, and another lab (From what I heard) had cross contamination problems.
Pick your poison I guess.

Josh- So sorry this happened. I hope tihs all works out for you and your family.

Show Heifer
I work in the diagnostic industry. The only thing I am trying to understand is what is the Quality Control for this test? Who manages the QC for the results? We have to file a statement with the FDA when there is an error with even a potential negative outcome. We have to issue a letter to customers if a lot of test is even suspect and its recalled immediately. I don't understand how recording the wrong info is acceptable. We have a system of checks and balances in place so this doesn't happen. This is not the first case in what seems like a short period of time. I had results sent to me from testing facility said I had a clean heifer. When I received my letter from Shorthorn Association it said she was a carrier. I called the Shorthorn Association and they said OOH that was our mistake. But now I am beginning to wonder. I don't' use carrier's on my Shorthorns.

If missed your heart attack I will bet you would be very unhappy camper and lots folks would sue immediately. We are not talking about human welfare but the welfare of alot of cows with financial implications  at stake. Would you leave a hospital and go to another one if you didn't believe the results of a test? I don't think people inherently want to disbelieve the testing facility ; just as you wouldn't leave that hospital and go across town or down the street for the same test just at another hopsital.

Sounds like we need to come up with a better system at the testing site to insure this doesn't occur. The consumer shouldn't have to incur expenses because the testing facility made the mistake. They could split samples if there was enough sample and run them twice. That being the key - enough sample. Did Toyota tell the consumer they needed to go to Honda for a while till they had their problem figured out. No. They took responsibility and fixed the problem.

:-\  JMO

 

[knabe]

I realize that this is a "mutual admiration society" board.

so was the constitution.

 

[aj]

I thought the constitution was a document.

 

[OH Breeder]

Maybe we should throw the lady in jail. Since the world owes venture capitalist's a living wouldn't it be the right thing to do. If someone spends thousands of dollars on a bull and thousands of dollars promoting a bull with advertising and the deal goes bad. Why is it up to the little guy to make it right? Why should we have to pick up the tab with 100$ tests in the future? Why wouldn't someone who has thousands dollars worth of investment send in a extra sample, line breed the bull, to check for defects? Its poor management. Holy mole y why is it always someone elses fault. Is it a new generation thing?

I really liked the comment about......................... Do you use  a step stool to feed your high horse. This might be appropriate time for that statement.

 

[justintime]

I agree with OH Breeder. We, as breeders should NOT have to double test. We have been told that this test has 100 % accuracy so why should it be our responsibility to double test and put twice as much money into the pockets of the lab that is doing the tests. The problem obviously is with the lab... NOT the breeders who send the samples in. I also agree that it is their responsibility to provide the quality controls to insure their testing and results. We have no control over this, so why would we feel any better with two sets of results rather than one set. Personally, I have double tested on a few animals, and I just sent a couple samples in yesterday for the second time. I don't feel that I should have to do this, but after having a test result reversed a couple years ago, I do not want to take a chance.

I have no idea what will come out of this Ivy League situation, but in the case of my bull, he had only serviced 13 females when the TH defective calf arrived. These breeders were suggesting that this had cost them $30,000 in lost sales etc etc, and I was concerned who they were going to ask for it. I certainly did not think that I had done anything wrong, as I had tested the bull and only sold him when he tested TH free. In the latest case, I can see several hundred thousands of $$ in the mix if there happens to be several TH calves born. I doubt if any cattle producer winning a bunch of money here, but I can certainly see a bunch of lawyers sucking a bunch of money out of this misfortunate event.

 

[onthegofarmer]

I am sorry I opened this can of worms.  I do not know Josh but I think he is a Up Standing business Man by his post.  I like Ivy League and will use him again.

 

[jason]

It is an unfortunate circumstance.  However, if you are placing the blame on Josh, you are barking up the wrong.  He did his dull diligence and had the bull tested.  Do you double test everything that you do?  He has stepped up to the plate.


If anyone is badmouthing Josh about Ivy League, consider this your warning.

 

[OH Breeder]

One foot note. I am by no means trying to cruicify the testing site. If you have OUTGROWN your resources you need to commercialize the assay and allow someone else to handle it that can keep proper QC. I know there is maybe one other site that does testing??

 

[nkotb]

If you think it's bad getting a false positive TH test, try getting a false positive AIDS test.  Happened to a friend of mine when he tried to donate blood to the Red Cross.  Also according to the Red Cross I have Hep. B, which I don't, and my mom has some strange disease that you can only get from sleeping in a mud hut in Africa.  Unrelated to the TH discussion, however, I am just saying that mistakes happen a lot while doing diagnostic test.

 

[Show Heifer]

One foot note. I am by no means trying to cruicify the testing site. If you have OUTGROWN your resources you need to commercialize the assay and allow someone else to handle it that can keep proper QC. I know there is maybe one other site that does testing??

From what I understand there are two maybe three labs testing for TH?  Isn't this an issue that was brought up by DL on the other thread of it being the OUTCAST mutation, and not the standard TH that he tested positive for?  His pedigree shows nothing of the outcast pedigree, but it is my understanding that it is the outcast mutation, of which he was not orginally tested for???

Any lab, any test, that is run by a human, has a potential for error. Using the heart attack example made me think: If  I was the suing type of person, I would have sued the 3 doctors who missed my Dad's cancer 2 years prior, 1 year prior and 6 months prior to it actually being diagnosised. In fact, he would probably still be here, if a DOCTOR would have run a second test. But that is neither here nor there.  My point is, it is hard to find something you are not looking for, and if a human is involved, error will happen. 

Josh has done what he could do and I fully commend him for that. You can't undo the past, but you can make it right, and that is what he is doing.

 

[OH Breeder]

If you think it's bad getting a false positive TH test, try getting a false positive AIDS test.  Happened to a friend of mine when he tried to donate blood to the Red Cross.  Also according to the Red Cross I have Hep. B, which I don't, and my mom has some strange disease that you can only get from sleeping in a mud hut in Africa.  Unrelated to the TH discussion, however, I am just saying that mistakes happen a lot while doing diagnostic test.

If that is the case these are sentinal events. The Red Cross would have to notify the vendor and FDA of a false positive on anyone of these test. It is not common occurrance that diagnostic test are false positive. If that was the case, the test that was consistently false would not be in business. I know of one manufacture that had a run of bad lots. They were cited and placed under what is known as consent decree. basically the government comes in with a herd of people and sits in your production facility and checks EVERY test you make. All buyers are notified and those manufactures don't stay in business long. My point, the "new FDA" is not the the FDA was just a mere 5 years ago. They are extremely stringent in guidelines and "false positives". False positives with Humans equates to $$$ lawsuits.

 

[OH Breeder]

One foot note. I am by no means trying to crucify the testing site. If you have OUTGROWN your resources you need to commercialize the assay and allow someone else to handle it that can keep proper QC. I know there is maybe one other site that does testing??

From what I understand there are two maybe three labs testing for TH?  Isn't this an issue that was brought up by DL on the other thread of it being the OUTCAST mutation, and not the standard TH that he tested positive for?  His pedigree shows nothing of the outcast pedigree, but it is my understanding that it is the outcast mutation, of which he was not originally tested for???

Any lab, any test, that is run by a human, has a potential for error. Using the heart attack example made me think: If I was the suing type of person, I would have sued the 3 doctors who missed my Dad's cancer 2 years prior, 1 year prior and 6 months prior to it actually being diagnosed. In fact, he would probably still be here, if a DOCTOR would have run a second test. But that is neither here nor there.  My point is, it is hard to find something you are not looking for, and if a human is involved, error will happen. 

Josh has done what he could do and I fully commend him for that. You can't undo the past, but you can make it right, and that is what he is doing.

I thought from my understanding as of 2008 cattle were being tested for both mutations. There were sires missed and supposed they were testing for both? Maybe that is just now. I may be off.

Sorry for the loss of your father. That is never easy.

Lab test is what were discussing. Lab test for cancer versus  other diagnostic test like CT Scan or other Radiologic procedures are completely different because they rely alot on the physician reading them. Lab test are very objective in the sense of how you interpret the result. Labs are a direct measurement of the patients blood. There is not as much subjectivity to a lab test. It is what it is. Yes you are correct there is room for error, but in the hospital setting the machine is running the test not a human. Most of today's labs are hard wired and humans are not transferring the results manually which would allow for transcription errors etc. Your blood in a tube goes to the machine and to a computer. The errors are mostly human, wrong patient wrong label. There are QC measures in place for human error as well as machine error. The machines notify you of errors. Most humans will too.

I am not familiar with the type of technology involved with TH testing so I can not speak for that. But we do know there was human error in transcription hence a need for more stringent quality control. Patting a guy on the back and saying .....wow sorry about the wrong result. At the moment what is the system of accountability in place for the testing facility being responsible for error?

 

[tama]

Josh thankyou for doing the right thing. There are a lot of people who commend you.Now let me play devils advocate for just a minute.Please take him off the market recall for those that wanted Th free and get control of semen that's out there! If I was a little more aggressive in my response I would say steer him and be done with it! That sounds terribly harsh and may generate comments about management of carrier verses non-carrier etc so I won't say that! But Josh get control of this before these borderline guys try to use him without the testing or conscience needed to not produce more carriers. I know full well the temptation as I am one of those small producers.I test and do not use carrier but you can see by posts just on this topic that it appears not to matter. Either way you have our support.You started this out right that's the main thing.