Having ready Mr Mosley’s book, I have been considering microbime testing via stool samples. However, I have noted (via the Internet) some cases where stool samples (as nearly the same as possible) have been sent to two organisations (eg British Gut and uBiome) and had gicven two very different and contradictory results. Can I therefore be sure of a trustworthy result?
-
-
Depends how different and how contradictory the results really are. You would need to compare and contrast the methodology each service use, how each interprets those results, and what specific population(s) they compare the results to.
AFAIK the Gut Projects don’t do that much interpretation or links to health conditions. The field is still young, there is much research yet to be done. The Gut Projects are all about contributing your data, becoming a part of current and future studies.
-
[post removed]
-
Thank you, Firefox 7275 and Graham for your replies.
The results referred to were significantly contradictory, not just a natural variation. As regards the projects being all about contributing data – that’s fine & I am happy to do that but not if I have to pay for (solely) contributing to research. -
Were both samples sent on the same time on the same day? It would be interesting to know some more details around the differences? Which labs did you use? Did you ask each of them to justify their results?
-
Hello Graham. My original entry details labs used & note not by me so can’t ask the labs anything. Samples sent from same bowel evacuation.
Radically different results will not help someone like me who is trying to asceratin what his/her guts is lacking or has too much of…. -
Totally understand.. I ‘d go back to the provider(s) and demand answers! I assume you paid a significant sum? If you want to email me your results (both sets) I’m happy to express a view…
-
Graham, It wasn’t me – I didn’t pay- please see my original entry……
-
Gussmithy, I had considered doing a test with two companies for this very reason, if they are giving completely different results from the same sample it does seem to bring into question how on earth that would be possible – either their analytical methods are so utterly different, or they are lax in mixing up or contaminating samples of testing equipment.