Saturday, January 14, 2012

Stress Test?

Is this really a valid test, and an indicator of "stress" in a working/traveling situation?


klsdad said...

I don't know.. but.. let's find out..

You're next..........!! (smile)


Wade G. Burck said...

That's the point..... Is it a valid test to indicate stress in traveling felines. Was it done to "the T" with no subjection, or is it more kool-aid without 100% scientific certainty?


Jim A. said...

I'd like to believe traveling circus lions are doing just fine and aren't stressed. We saw how they collected saliva from captive animals. How did they collect it in the wild, after they were drugged or killed? Couldn't that contaminate the sample? Maybe one of those Tarzan, friend of the lions guys could walk up to a wild pride and rub their gums.

Another question: How big is the sample size, how many cats? Is it statisically significant?

Wade G. Burck said...

It stated the cotton was "saturated" with saliva, saturated defined as "holding as much water or moisture as can be absorbed; thoroughly soaked." None of the cotton looked saturated to me, in fact occasionally Martin had to really scrutinize one to see if it had anything. They showed a graph from 4 animals out of 13 or 14. Did they show animals that had been in traveling for over a dozen years, or new animals that had only traveled a short time? A lot of supposition all through the clip. Were they uncomfortable with the vet being there upon arrival in Munich? Possibly, or were they uncomfortable due to the trip? That is also a possibility that was not mentioned. Why was it important to have a vet on hand for the conclusion, but not at the start of the test? The cortisone levels of the only 4 animals mentioned rose but were below stress levels which was stated "as the point" but no thought given as to why they rose, or why "some" rose was in fact, 3 out of 4 tested. It seems like one of those test's where you were going to know the outcome before it was tested. Ar groups do similar test's with the opposite result.
The point is, if someone is "hoping" for a certain result, should they be doing the test? Most glaring to me, what animals were tested, old or new and why 4 subjects out of 14 were tested to arrive at a favorable conclusion?