We at Glacier Peak Holistics have a foundational tenet to improve the lives of animals through our herbal remedies and services. Core to this tenet is to have transparency with our customers, and a principle of providing the best in natural remedies that we can to both pet owners and animal healthcare practitioners. In response to recent publications ("Study finds pet 'stress scan' gives unreliable results," Jan. 31, 2019) that publicize a poorly architected study by Dr. Joseph Bernstein regarding our Pet Wellness Life Stress Scan, we’d like to share, once again, what it is our scan provides, and hope to provide clarity to the nature of this service.
Our Pet Wellness Life Stress Scan, and its previous iterations, are a biofeedback test conducted with a machine. The machine that we use is an FDA licensed medical device called the SCIO. SCIO, manufactured by Quantum World Vision, is an automatic, computer-operated non-invasive active therapeutic device that combines bioresonance and biofeedback fields for body analysis and energy balancing. It is a stress management system that measures electrophysiological reactions and patterns. There are numerous clinical trials conducted to establish the efficacy of SCIO both as a therapeutic and a diagnostic tool.
In the study entitled "TVEP Reactivity Scores to Allersode Compounds Measured," written by Prof Desire Dubounet of IMUNE, the study tested human patients with known allergies using the Transcutaneous Voltammetric Evoked Potential (TVEP) electrical reactivity in the SCIO. The reactivity scores of the known allergies were significantly higher than the non-allergic items. The study demonstrated the TVEP reactivity reaction of the SCIO.
In a similar study, the TVEP reactivity scores were used for isode compounds, specifically insecticides. The study, conducted on humans, utilized diluted orange juice as a placebo, and a safe, weak dilution of a common insecticide. The reactions to the insecticide was significant, while there was no reaction for the placebo.
Similar studies were conducted with nosodes and other compounds as a continuation of testing the efficacy of the TVEP feature of the SCIO.
The machine does not identify the nature of the test subject. It does not tell us if the subject is human, animal, synthetic, etc. We could insert a piece of wood, and the machine would provide biofeedback based on the energetic frequencies of that piece of wood. The programming of the SCIO (which stands for Scientific Consciousness Interface Operations System) is based on the provision of humans or living animals as subjects. Using artificial subjects as a basis for testing the accuracy of the device is not only ludicrous, it fails to test the operational programming or intention of the device. In short, it’s just bad science. The only valid architecture under which to test the validity of the SCIO is to compare the results of known stressors versus known non-stressors with the results of the SCIO testing. As noted, this has been done numerous times in the medical and scientific industry with solid results.
The outcome of the biofeedback scan is a report that identifies "stress" triggers based on the reactions of targeted triggers in relation to the subject being tested. Again, the machine (and the operators) are not programmed, taught, or qualified to identify the validity or nature of the subject being tested. We do not check hair and saliva samples to see if they are from a goat, a horse, a dog, or the kitchen sink. It is truly a test of frequency comparisons … so to try to demonstrate that the system lacks accuracy by submitting false samples, as Dr. Joseph Bernstein has indicated, is invalid.
The improvement, or lack thereof, of animals who use the Pet Wellness Life Stress Scan is very dependent on what life changes are made as a result of the scan report. There would be no improvement or impact if no remedial actions are made.
We make every effort to keep our scan accurate for our clients by providing organic swabs and a clean comb that has not been in contact with other animals, and a submittal form that asks for information about the subject animal being tested. Outside of conducting the test in a sterile laboratory with the animal present, this is the best service offering on the market for this type of scan and at this price point. The scan results are most reliable when accurate information about the test subject is provided. Remember — the scan is conducted by a machine, and the results are based on programming. Trying to defeat the system with erroneous information or false samples is not a relevant measure of the accuracy of the machine.
The Pet Wellness Life Stress Scan is often a last resort for our clients. In many cases, clients have already invested thousands of dollars in testing and symptomatic treatments through their veterinarian. Our customers routinely provide feedback about positive outcomes to changes made as a result of the reports from the scan. If this were not the case, we would not continue to offer the service.
We hope that this provides some clarity to our customers, and that our service will continue to help animals every day. It is unfortunate that Dr. Bernstein’s poorly conducted study has been published in a manner that misleads those who may benefit from the use of our service.
We invite our customers to contact us with questions at any time.
Deborah Gwynn is CEO of Glacier Peak Holistics.
Editor's update: Study author Dr. Mark Rishniw has submitted a response.
VIN News Service commentaries are opinion pieces presenting insights, personal experiences and/or perspectives on topical issues by members of the veterinary community. To submit a commentary for consideration, email firstname.lastname@example.org.