Vega test method
The Vega test method is an alternative diagnostic technique that measures the body's electrical resistance at acupuncture points. It is promoted by some alternative medicine practitioners as a way to diagnose illnesses and identify appropriate treatments, and is also known as electrodermal testing (EDT) or electroacupuncture according to Voll (EAV). The method typically involves a device that tests the effects of potential allergens, toxins, or treatments placed within a specialized honeycomb setup. In more modern applications, computers simulate the presence of substances for testing.
Despite its adoption by certain practitioners, the Vega test lacks a scientifically accepted basis and has not demonstrated validity in diagnostic capabilities. Studies involving experienced Vega-test practitioners found that they were unable to distinguish between allergic and non-allergic individuals effectively. Although there was a smaller study that suggested some potential utility in identifying allergens, criticisms regarding its methodology emerged, calling into question its reliability. Overall, the Vega test is viewed skeptically in the mainstream medical community, and while some alternative practitioners continue to use it, it is often regarded as an unreliable method for allergy diagnosis.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Vega test method
DEFINITION: A technique that measures the body’s electrical resistance at acupuncture points.
Overview
Some alternative medicine practitioners promote an unconventional device called the Vega Test machine for diagnosing illnesses and determining appropriate treatments. Other names for this approach include electrodermal testing (EDT) and electroacupuncture according to Voll (EAV). The method, which has many variations, generally involves measuring the body’s electrical resistance at acupuncture points. Possible allergens or toxins, or prospective treatments, are placed within a device called a honeycomb that is said to test the effects of that substance on the body. In the twenty-first century, devices use a computer that reportedly simulates the presence of test substances.
There is no commonly accepted scientific basis for this method's use. To the limited extent that it has been tested, it has not proven a valid diagnostic technique.
Scientific Evidence
Four Vega-test practitioners, each with a minimum of ten years of experience, agreed to participate in a study conducted by a proponent of EDT testing. Thirty people volunteered to participate as subjects in the study. One-half of the volunteers had known allergies to house dust mites or cat dander (as determined by skin testing), while the others were not allergic to these allergens. Each participant was tested with six items in three separate sessions by each of three different operators of the Vega machine, resulting in more than fifteen hundred separate allergy tests throughout the study. The results showed that the Vega-test practitioners could not distinguish between allergic and nonallergic participants. In addition, no individual operator of the machine was more accurate than any other.
In another study, the Vega test failed to distinguish between people with respiratory allergies to a defined set of substances and those without them. One smaller double-blind study did find the Vega test capable of distinguishing between allergens and nonallergens. However, one of the authors of this study felt that it suffered from significant flaws, and he went on to conduct the foregoing first trial.
Based on this information, the only fair assessment is that the Vega test is not a meaningful method of identifying dust mites or cat dander allergies. Proponents of the Vega device and other EDT techniques object that the device’s primary use is not to identify respiratory allergens. However, there is no reliable evidence that the method is valid for any use. While naturopaths remain convinced that Vega testing combines ancient medicine techniques with modern technology to provide a comprehensive healthcare experience, most medical professionals remain unconvinced of its effectiveness and legitimacy. In the mid-2020s, some alternative medical practitioners still offered the Vega test method, but it was well-known as an unreliable diagnostic tool in the mainstream medical community. As conventional allergy testing methods have advanced considerably, the Vega test method continued to lack scientific evidence and practical use.
Bibliography
González-Correa, C. A. "Toward a Binary Interpretation of Acupuncture Theory: Principles and Practical Consequences." Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, vol. 10, 2004, pp. 573-579.
Katelaris, C. H., et al. "Vega Testing in the Diagnosis of Allergic Conditions. The Australian College of Allergy." The Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 155, no. 2, 1991, pp. 113-4, doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1991.tb142141.
Krop, J., et al. "A Double Blind, Randomized, Controlled Investigation of Electrodermal Testing in the Diagnosis of Allergies." Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, vol. 3, 1997, pp. 241-248, doi: 10.1089/acm.1997.3.241.
Lewith, G. T. "Can We Evaluate Electrodermal Testing?" Complementary Therapies in Medicine, vol. 11, 2003, pp. 115-117.
Lewith, G. T., et al. "Is Electrodermal Testing as Effective as Skin Prick Tests for Diagnosing Allergies?" British Medical Journal, vol. 322, 2001, pp. 131-134.
Semizzi, M., et al. "A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study on the Diagnostic Accuracy of an Electrodermal Test in Allergic Subjects." Clinical and Experimental Allergy, vol. 32, 2002, pp. 928-932, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2222.2002.01398.x.
Vagg, Michael. "PathoLOLgical Testing. Actually It's Not so Funny." The Conversation, 28 Oct. 2013, theconversation.com/pathololgical-testing-actually-its-not-so-funny-19592. Accessed 9 Sept. 2024.
"Vega Testing is a Powerful and Insightful Aid for the Trained and Qualified Naturopaths at Applied Healing." Applied Healing, www.appliedhealing.com.au/vega-testing. Accessed 9 Sept. 2024.