# Wee foal test lied



## appymini (Mar 10, 2008)

I test 3 mares last month.2 of them did not really look in foal.The wee foal test daid they where and I did the string test on them all And it also said in foal. Now the other day one mare came in heat




So now I fear if the other 2 will come in heat also OH! .I just can`t afford the 120.00 to test them again. Has anyone else had this happen?


----------



## Doobie (Mar 10, 2008)

I feel for you Appymini ...

I not only hurts the pocket but the heart when this happens.

This year I went with only the string test and it showed strong for one mare,

who if she is not preggers I will be putting on a very strict diet! and the other

was a weak positive. So I have my fingers crossed ....

for me and you!

Doobie


----------



## Bonny (Mar 10, 2008)

They claim no false positives. I had my pregnant mare come into heat .

The only other reason would be if she lost the foal. I would trust the test. I am betting she is still pregnant.

Bonny even let the stallion breed so, dont give up! Keep the stallion away from her. How far along should she be?


----------



## Carolyn R (Mar 10, 2008)

Prego mares with raging hormones can act like they are in heat, and on occasion may even reciprocate a stallions advances. If a mare is prego, well, that just opens a whole new can of worms when it comes to infections. A $120 for tests is expensive, but a mare in foal with all the potential risks to go along with it, not to mention all the things can go wrong once a foal is on the ground can be alot more costly.

These are the odds we all take when we choose to breed our animals, sometimes it really hurts the pocket.


----------



## ClickMini (Mar 10, 2008)

My vet told me that she prefers to do a blood test on minis to determine pregnancy. The test itself costs $68 or something, she said it is pretty accurate. They are testing for progesterone.


----------



## wpsellwood (Mar 10, 2008)

Well my mare showed heat too, and the gal I got her from said that her mother would show heat when in foal. Well I wanted to breed this mare, so I ended up taking her in and ultra sounded her and she ended up open. So bred her this weekend. She wasnt due until the end of April and I didnt want to wait that long to breed her if she wasnt in foal. Soooo I guess my point is if you dont want to spend the extra money wait til her due date, if you dont want to wait check her again. My best advice.


----------



## appymini (Mar 11, 2008)

Well ,that gives me promise still.


----------



## joylee123 (Mar 15, 2008)

[SIZE=12pt]Just curious,[/SIZE]

I had a mare test positive back in the beginging of December. I figured she was in foal. I have sat on a chair two different times for about an hour each time and felt absolutly NO movement. I went ahead and tested her again this past Thursday and she came back positive again, she would be at approx 8 months pregnant at this time



I sat on a chair again for about an hour after she tested positive again and Still felt NO movement. I have bred horses for 17 years, so I know what I'm feeling for and I have never not felt movement in a 8month old pregnancy. She is a maiden mare, rather fat and about 32 inches. The stallion is tiny(26.5") Is It possible because the stallion is so small and the mare larger and overweight that it may not be big enough to feel yet



I am grasping at straws as I just don't think that's possible OH! but I'd like to hear what others have to say





Thanks,

Joy


----------



## Charlotte (Mar 15, 2008)

Joy, I have had several mares over the years that I NEVER felt any movement till I had a wet foal flopping on the ground! So that can happen, but I wouldn't think real often.

And appymini, I've had several mares...one especially....that showed strong heat and teased the stallions ALL the time she was preg! Just as regular as clock work....she 'came in heat' about every 20 days! EVERY year! That doesn't answer your question, but it is possible. Enough to drive you nuts!





Charlotte


----------



## dmm (Mar 15, 2008)

What is "the string test" for pregnancy in horses? I never heard of it before. Thanks.


----------



## Magic (Mar 15, 2008)

Charlotte said:


> Joy, I have had several mares over the years that I NEVER felt any movement till I had a wet foal flopping on the ground! So that can happen, but I wouldn't think real often.
> 
> Charlotte





Same here! One mare in particular, she's had two foals and both times I was unable to feel ANY movement while she was pregnant.


----------



## joylee123 (Mar 15, 2008)

[SIZE=12pt]That is SOO weird! I guess you just never know and there's a first time for everything. It just seems so strange to me as I have always felt some movement, whether rolling or slight ticks, when they kick. One of my mares looks as if she has a war going on inside



I've never seen one soo active



you definetly don't have to touch her to see that she's preggers LOL! Thanks for both of your replies



I guess I'll just have to spend a few more hours in "the Chair"



[/SIZE]

Thanks





Joy


----------



## luv2ridesaddleseat (Mar 15, 2008)

Joylee, you might spend the rest of your mares pregnancy in "the chair" and still not see or feel anything. Thats why it's so hard to figure out pregnancy in these mares. I am a total believer in the Weefoal tests! They are awesome! I was leasing to own a leopard appy mare that had previously had 2 foals for the owner. She never showed any heat at all after she was bred. They bred her for a third foal and she came into heat. They didn't bother to breed her again and she was in raging heat all summer. I took her in the fall on a lease to purchase and I found out she was pregnant. (I used the weefoal test) The owners were quite shocked and needless to say took her back. It just goes to show, these mares pregnancys can each be totally different.


----------



## appymini (Mar 21, 2008)

I am sorry I posted this topic.And upset some people. It is not a normal thing I do. There is only one horse vet in this district.And no other (HORSE) vet is allowed here.And I can tell you,It has been this way for dacades. And he is the biggest crook.And has no feelings for animals. Anyway I wanted to know if she was in foal.As I would like to get her teeth done. And do not want to do it if she is.I will be trucking her on a 2 hr drive to go to another vet for her teeth. I have talked to the weefoal distributors. And they have been very nice to work with.And was able to learn a few more things.


----------



## appymini (Mar 21, 2008)

I have to also add. I relized mares can come in heat and still be foal. OH! Wee foal dist. Is sending me a new sample to try.Which is nice of them. I will let you know what the result is.


----------



## Rauchmini's (Mar 21, 2008)

Hi Everyone

I also use WeeFoal,I have had great results from them. I'm a firm believer in the urine tests.

If anyone has any questions I will be happy to answer them. I'm also a distributor but use them on my own horses so I do have a lot of knowledge of them & would not sell them if I didn't believe in the product.

If anyone has any comments or questions send me a email I will be happy to help. Thanks Lynne [email protected]


----------



## Bonny (Mar 21, 2008)

Appy mini,

at first I actually agreed that the tests are always accurate,but I myself have had a false positive. I dont see your response as ugly in anyway. Just as being curious to the status of your mare.

I know my mare didnt abort. I know I preformed the test correctly. I know the urine was not stored and it was diluted properly. I collected the sample with a clean paper cup and a clean paper towel and testes right away, as I wanted to know.

I have been in contact with wee foal and they have been _very pleasant_ to deal with, They have even forwarded my e mail to Dr Henderson in New Zealand.

Basically I was told it was user error on my part. I had even sent pictures along with the e mail of both my neg and false positive tests.

This is the e mail from Dr Henderson.

It is unusual for the WeeFoal test to return a false positive result. There are a few possible causes such as the urine was stored too long before testing (over about 8 hours at room temperature) and this resulted in bacterial growth in the urine which can give a false positive result; the container the urine was collected in was not clean and the contents contaminated the urine (we have had an instance of a user collecting urine in a bucket that had previously held feed and there were still feed remnants in the bucket, and this gave a false positive result). If too much urine is added to the diluent, or the urine is not diluted before adding to the cassette well, this can return a false positive too. We have also had an instance where a mare which had foaled the previous year had not dropped its estrogen concentrations to the typical non-pregnant values, but were still at the low end of the range associated with pregnancy. However, as the first test showed a negative result this situation is unlikley. Also, if the test has not been stored properly, then this can result in a pregnant result, though there would also be a faint 'C' line. If the test itself has not run properly, then the 'T' line might not have shown up, but again this would be accompanied by a faint 'C' line. I wonder if Bonny noticed if the 'C' line was strong or faint in the test that gave a false positive result.


----------



## Mona (Mar 21, 2008)

Bonny said:


> I know I preformed the test correctly. I know the urine was not stored and it was diluted properly. I collected the sample with a clean paper cup and a clean paper towel and testes right away, as I wanted to know.


You may have tested TOO soon. The test must be done with both the test kit AND the urine sample at room temperature, so if you ran the test as soon as you got the sample, that may prove to be a problem also.


----------



## Bonny (Mar 21, 2008)

Actually no I waited until it was room temperature. I meant that I didnt let it set for 8 hours on the counter. As implied in the email.The test was at room temperature also, I had received it that morning. And yes it was in the house also. I read the directions very carefully both times I tested. It was not user error.

I would love to know why I got a false positive.


----------



## Minimor (Mar 21, 2008)

I'm one that won't waste money buying a wee foal test kit, and I sure don't put any stock at all in the string test being accurate. I used to do the string test just for fun, but the last year I tried it, it told me that two mares were open and the other 2 were going to have colts. Fact is, all 4 were in foal, and all 4 were carrying fillies.

I also have on mare that I can never feel foal movement on. I have no idea what it is about her, but she certainly proves that no foal movement doesn't = an open mare!


----------



## Bonny (Mar 21, 2008)

Honestly unless I find out a good reason why I got a false positive, I doubt I will use it again either. I will stick with the blood test.

It is a great idea and I loved the ease of it. But how can I trust the result now?


----------



## Dona (Mar 21, 2008)

ClickMini said:


> My vet told me that she prefers to do a blood test on minis to determine pregnancy. The test itself costs $68 or something, she said it is pretty accurate. They are testing for progesterone.


Of course a vet is going to tell you that....as it's more business for them. And I can vouch that blood tests are not very reliable either. I've had several blood test done by my vets come up wrong. I've had 100% accuracy with the Pregnamare tests however. Just this year I tried the Wee Foal tests....anxious to see how accurate they are.


----------



## Mona (Mar 21, 2008)

I hardly think you can compare an actual scientific test to a string test!! Lets compare apples to apples here.





I also wanted to add, I am surprised to hear about all the things that they say CAN cause a false positive, since they have said right in the directions that there are NO false positives.



THAT was a little disappointing to hear!

I have used these tests on several mares, and so far, it has been 100% accurate.


----------



## appymini (Mar 21, 2008)

Mona said:


> I hardly think you can compare an actual scientific test to a string test!! Lets compare apples to apples here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*I only brought the string test up. As she was in heat and the string was still moving. I have always relized it is just a game.And you can`t go by it. She might just be a mare that keeps you guessing *


----------



## ClickMini (Mar 21, 2008)

Dona, when I got this info from my vet, we were discussing ultrasounds actually. She said she preferred doing a blood test to doing the ultrasound. The blood test is actually less expensive than doing the ultrasound.

We are so lucky here that we have great access to some very good vet hospitals. While I am sure they are not averse to picking up a few extra bucks here or there, I have found more often than not that they do that through increased costs for specific procedures, etc., rather than performing extra "stuff." The one I use is pretty darned conservative. I have a great relationship with the vets from that clinic, they are very honest with me I feel.

Amy



Dona said:


> ClickMini said:
> 
> 
> > My vet told me that she prefers to do a blood test on minis to determine pregnancy. The test itself costs $68 or something, she said it is pretty accurate. They are testing for progesterone.
> ...


----------



## Bonny (Mar 21, 2008)

Honestly,I am glad to hear that there are things that can alter the test results. Because I know I am capable of performing the test accurately.

But I wonder why the dont explain this on the web site. It says debris wont effect the test results.

I am glad so many have had good results. I just wonder if there was an off batch or something. The only thing I did different was to worm Bonny the day before I tested. I cant imagine that would alter the test though...

The funny thing is Now after hearing the blood test could be wrong....I am again wondering.

But Bonny did let the stallion breed in February, so who knows, maybe she is pregnant from that.


----------



## appymini (Apr 1, 2008)

WeeFoal was nice to send me another try.So I did her today.And I got one line. So I guess she must be foal.


----------



## Fantasia (Apr 1, 2008)

Well, I was one of the trial users for wee foal test and only ever had two problems:

One, an inconclusive test which we believe was a test fault - replacement test sent and correct result ensued.

Two: My old mare gave a false positive on very thick urine, sent urine sample off to Keith and he tested and found her at low end of pregnancy. We re-tested a month later to find not in foal. Suspect she lost foal and hadn't adjusted down to non-preg hormone levels.

I actually used the Wee Foal checker to test a maiden mare this year who went WAY over - we tested her at 345 days and got a positive result. Internal exam confirmed. And, yes, she'd had NO foal movement!!!!

All my urine is collected in clean containers





I have had a number of false results from blood tests also. Mainly in mares in the 45-90 day bracket.

SOOOOOO. I guess the moral of the story is ya never really know until the lil tykes hit the ground


----------



## Boinky (Apr 2, 2008)

Boy that's funny that they would send you an e-mail stating all the things that could cause false, and things they have seen cause false possitivies, when they CLAIM RIGHT ON THEIR info that there are NO false possitives. doesn't sound that way to me! I think it even says on their web page in the case studies there were no false possitives yet we are hearing there were? they really need to reword their web page to something like "very few false possitives".

it says right in their info that dirt and debris ect will not alter the readings.....


----------



## Bonny (Apr 2, 2008)

Boinky said:


> Boy that's funny that they would send you an e-mail stating all the things that could cause false, and things they have seen cause false possitivies, when they CLAIM RIGHT ON THEIR info that there are NO false possitives. doesn't sound that way to me! I think it even says on their web page in the case studies there were no false possitives yet we are hearing there were? they really need to reword their web page to something like "very few false possitives".
> 
> it says right in their info that dirt and debris ect will not alter the readings.....


Tell me about it. I had my vet look at it and he was surprised.

But the "catch" per say is that its user error. If the test is preformed in exactly the way stated and the test hasnt been compromised by temperature then it should be accurate.But user error can be from the collection through running the test.


----------



## Boinky (Apr 2, 2008)

yes but if it's "user error" they should state that there has been found to be false possitives due to USER ERROR in such and such circumstances. that is a VERY deceptive if not a outright lie that there are no false positives.... in my book anyhow! they also shouldn't say that you can use a dirty sample if that's the case as well. somewhere i read in their info that it didn't have to be a sterile sample ect.


----------



## qtrmoonfarm (Apr 2, 2008)

Just to clarify, the test info on WeeFoal regarding the false positive factors IS in the process of being updated both on their website and in the directions, a complete revamp. We've used them on over 100 mares of ours and clients and gotten 98% accurate results..the ones that weren't were problem mares and a bad batch of test cassettes it turned out. Let me share part of the email I received as to reason WHY their would be false positives:

We are removing the "NO FALSE POSITIVES" from our web design and packaging. Although the statement is true as to the chemistry, there are some external things that can create a false positive:

A) too much urine from the pipette into the diluent bottle,

B) not enough urine in pipette going into the diluent bottle.

C) dirty collection device - not dirt which sits on top of the membrane but bacteria or mold that might go through the membrane pores and block a signal.

Other problems.....

D) mare urine that has not been refrigerated till use or frozen. Hormones start to break down giving weaker signals

E) using warm sample and not room temp can give weaker signal.

F)Freezing temp

G) not refrigerated over time and then used will give a weak signal or inconclusive.

H) Flooding the unit can give very hard to read results. Drop, Drop, Drop....

In our situation altho our repro vet is very very good, US's are VERY expensive here and only 73% accurate on average with a vet that KNOWS what they are doing ( Univ of Va study), Blood testing is just as costly for us, and the wait time for results is agonizingly slow, and too, for us only 75% accurate on the ones we've done..so I'll stick with the urine tests ..and knowing they are working on refining it to an earlier test date and the false positive issues as well.


----------



## Bonny (Apr 2, 2008)

I am glad they are changing the website to include the things that can cause false positive results. As of when I bought my test it was very misleading.


----------



## lil hoofbeats (Apr 2, 2008)

I cannot believe a vet would charge so much for an ultrasound. My vet charged 45.00 for the ultrasound, and that also included the sedation. He is able to check mares as small as 27 inches. The ultrasounds do NOT lie. YOU, with you own eyes can see the fetus with a live heartbeat at 28 days. There is NO mistaking it!

We still thought that 45.00 was a bit high, so we bought our own ultrasound machine, and are doing them ourselves. The early pregnancies are the easiest to see, you can see them at 21 days gestation very easy, and some people can see them as early as 19 days(i can not though). The machine was only about 2000.00 and carried a 1 year guarentee. we have used it for 2 years now, and it has payed for itself by 3 fold. Im very happy with it. I never really trusted the blood/urine test, they were too inaccurate, too many variables, and i like to place my money on the "sure"thing.


----------



## luv2ridesaddleseat (Apr 2, 2008)

I am in the process of becomming a distributor for the Weefoal tests as I feel so highly of them. The people that got what you are calling a "false positive", are you positive that your mares were at least 120 days in foal when you perfomed the test? Before that, the test doesn't count. I am looking to learn all I can here to answer any questions any of my customers may have in the future.


----------



## Bonny (Apr 2, 2008)

Joyce, I didnt know how far along my mare was. I tested in January and the test was negative, which the test says you can get a false negative before 120 days not a false positive before 120 days.

The second test done in Feb was the false positive. After 3 weeks I did the US it showed no foal so did blood work, not pregnant.

After the results I have had and the explanation from the maker, I personally would have a hard time believing the results. I love the ease of the test. But If I got a test and it read positive, I wouldnt trust the results. But thats because I had a false positive, and I still dont know why. I guess If I knew why I got the false positive I would feel differently. If it was a false negative I could understand better, as it would seem that is more common than a fasle positive.


----------



## luv2ridesaddleseat (Apr 2, 2008)

Hmmm. Bonny, I'm just trying to learn all I can about these tests, so please, I think you know me by now, I'm not trying to be a pain in the butt here. I'm also going through some questions myself with my own mare! To the point where, yesterday, I went to see a mare, bred the same week to the same stallion as my mare that is supposedly bred to and they look the same. I think what I'm wondering is, wasn't Bonny still with the stallion in December? That would make it possible, that she was bred in December and isn't even 120 days in foal yet until this month some time? OR, the positive, possibly like my mare also, may have been a pregnancy, but aborted early enough that we would never have noticed as I got a positive at 104 days. My Vet that did the ultrasound at 134 days, said the baby may have been too small for him to see. I don't think his equipment was all that great anyway. One thing is for sure. I will NEVER do a weefoal before I'm sure the mare is at least 120 days as PER THE DIRECTIONS! That was my biggest mistake! Hopefully, I will get my next test in the next couple of days, and I WILL make sure I follow the directions to the letter, and I will have my true results!

As always, I want to learn all I can with these tests!

Joyce


----------



## Bonny (Apr 2, 2008)

Joyce, I do not think your a pain at all! I would love to know where the mistake happened with the test. Yes it is technically possible that the test was correct and Bonny aborted. Although the Vet didnt think so because it would take time for her levels to come back down in her system and would have been detected in her blood. The estradiol levels that are in the blood start developing on day 36 and can be detected at day 60 and stay high until about day 300, then start to decline. I doubt highly that the wee foal could detect as early as day 60. Especially since they claim that day 120 is recommended for testing. And I got a neg in January, 1 month before I got the positive.

I hope I made sense....


----------



## luv2ridesaddleseat (Apr 2, 2008)

Bonny, what I'm trying to say is, When ever you did any of these tests, are you positive that Bonny was at least 120 days bred? You bought her the beginning of Jan? That means she would have to have gotten pregnant at least by the beginning of September. for you to test her in January. If she hadn't gotten pregnant by then, none of your results mean anything. If she was with a Stallion until the time you got her, it still may be too early to test her.


----------



## Bonny (Apr 2, 2008)

Joyce I brought her home Dec 28th, 07.If it was to early to test her with the wee foal it would have yielded a false negative not a false positive.

Also the blood test was done on my owning her past 75 days.So she would have been well within the blood test range had she bred on Dec 28th before I picked her up. The blood test is valid after 60 days.

Now that is not in the wee foal range at all, but as I said that would have yielded a false negative not a false positive.

The thing is the test claims no false positives because it detects a hormone in the urine. But testing to early wouldnt pick up the hormone. It would be a false negative because it couldnt detect the hormone -yet. Do you see what I mean?

With the test coming out positive it meant it did pick up the hormone. But my point is there wasnt a hormone there in the first place. Or it would have shown in her blood work. So many things can cause a false positive, but not testing to early.

So if she was indeed pregnant and aborted her blood would have shown it.


----------



## luv2ridesaddleseat (Apr 2, 2008)

Ok, I'm sorry, I'll shut up now!! I guess I was thinking even a positive done early wouldn't be conclusive, but I guess there would have to be a reason for it to come up positive. I'm starting to get worried that my mare is just overweight and not pregnant. I am going to go by whatever my next test says. Hopefully I'll have it in a couple of days. Forgive me for being a pain.


----------



## Bonny (Apr 3, 2008)

Oh, your not! It doesnt bother me to explain. I am just as mystified about the whole thing. I wish I knew.....

Dont forget to let me know what your next test says about Cookie! These mares are such as mystery!


----------



## joylee123 (Apr 5, 2008)

[SIZE=12pt]I had written about my mare Breezy testing positive in January. She was supposed to be 6 months along I had sat in a chair several times to feel for fetal movement and several folks told me they had mares they couldn't feel movement on



. Well I tested her again march 13th and it still looked positive to me but I had a gut feeling she is open.I contacted Wee Foal in NZ and one of the scientist wrote me back and sent me two new wee foal tests to try and a vial to send a urine sample back to their lab. Well in the mean time Breezy started to come into heat. Standing heat, I mean hoochy Koochy standing heat






and was in for nine days. I tested her again with the wee foal test when they came in and it showed a very very very faint 2nd line. The gentleman from NZ said her hormones might have been messed up (Can't remember his exact words OH! )[/SIZE]

Here is the positive test taken on 03/13/08 the one taken in january looked the same






Here is the test taken 04/04/08 you can barely see the faint 2nd line.






Even though it isn't always right I still think it is a pretty good, easy and inexpensive way to test



and I'm glad we had the option





[SIZE=12pt]Joy[/SIZE]


----------

