The Ketchum Report

[masterbarber]

Dr. Melba S. Ketchum grew up in Texas City, Texas. She attended Texas A&M University where she received her doctorate in Veterinary Medicine after five years at the university. She had a mixed veterinary practice until she founded DNA Diagnostics. Dr. Ketchum is the president and founder of DNA Diagnostics, Inc. d/b/a Shelterwood Laboratories. Established in 1985, DNA Diagnostics has become a leader in all types of DNA testing including: human and animal forensics, human and animal paternity and parentage testing, disease diagnostics, trait tests, animal and human identity testing, species identification and sex determination. Most common species of animals are tested at DNA Diagnostics.

What is a Doctorate in Veterinary Medicine?

It is a degree of the highest study in Veterninary Medicine. To do a Doctorate, you must first do a Bachelor Degree ie. the first level of degree, then a Masters (second level of degree), then a Doctorate. To complete a Doctorate, you must write a book on your subject matter and have it approved and published. This is the product on what your degree will be graded and awarded. Once you have achieved a Doctorate, you can place the abbreviation of Dr. before your name.

I'd say she qualifies as a Scientist.

[Guest]

Dr. Melba S. Ketchum grew up in Texas City, Texas. She attended Texas A&M University where she received her doctorate in Veterinary Medicine after five years at the university. She had a mixed veterinary practice until she founded DNA Diagnostics. Dr. Ketchum is the president and founder of DNA Diagnostics, Inc. d/b/a Shelterwood Laboratories. Established in 1985, DNA Diagnostics has become a leader in all types of DNA testing including: human and animal forensics, human and animal paternity and parentage testing, disease diagnostics, trait tests, animal and human identity testing, species identification and sex determination. Most common species of animals are tested at DNA Diagnostics.

What is a Doctorate in Veterinary Medicine?

It is a degree of the highest study in Veterninary Medicine. To do a Doctorate, you must first do a Bachelor Degree ie. the first level of degree, then a Masters (second level of degree), then a Doctorate. To complete a Doctorate, you must write a book on your subject matter and have it approved and published. This is the product on what your degree will be graded and awarded. Once you have achieved a Doctorate, you can place the abbreviation of Dr. before your name.

I'd say she qualifies as a Scientist.

Actually, to get a DVM, one usually completes a Bachelors in something like "Animal Science" or "Veterinary Science" and then one must be accepted into and complete veterinary school. As far as I know, a DVM is not the same as an academic doctorate (PH.D). I am unsure if Dr. Ketchum is a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine or if she has some other form of grad or post-grad education. "Linked-in" has her listed as a DVM. If she is a DVM, she is as much of a "scientist" as your local veterinarian. That said, she seems to be qualified to do what she has been doing with the DNA study. Bipedalist is right in saying that a DVM's training is very much like the training received by human doctors.

Edited August 1, 2011 by notgiganto

[Sasfooty]

Not only is she a doctor of veterninary medicine, but she apparently does quite a bit of forensic science work for law enforcement agencies & has written several articles for science journals, (two of which I found in a 30 second Google search).

SHE IS A SCIENTIST, & saying otherwise shows a serious lack of knowledge about the subject!!

[Guest]

That is highly debatable, she said she began receiving samples thought to be sasquatch in the mid nineties.

I agree it is debatable?

Me neither. Who is Alex Hearn?

Mr. hearn is a guy in arizona whom work with Tom b. He is somehow involed with a toe-nail sample from northern arizona and turn it over to Dr. ketchum, and proclaims he in the loop/inside track about all of this.

From the sound of this, I wouldn't look to him for facts then.

I know, however IMO anybody who was and assoicated with Tom B. I be very wary of and if Ketchum is assoicating with Mr. Hearn now I be as I say very wary.

There is a list of labs that are signed up to work cases such as the WTC mass fatality incidents. I didn't see DNA diagnotics on it , but wouldn't rule out the possibility that she could have received overflow work from one of them.

I agree, However I still haven't found any with her associated with them/other labs. I think she was chest pounding to make her seem more qualify than your normal DNA tech.

Ultimately, it won't matter if she could prove that. The documentation may not be for public consumption either, those things are private matters to the victums families. You are working a deadend here.

You might be right, but when folks makes huge claims theirs nothing wrong with checking into it as well questioning it.

I think nothing will come of this DNA, since its been so long, and with so many questions with few answeres, it looks like to me a page out of Tom B. play book on getting attention and run with it to give yourself exposure.

[Guest]

So we can assume that Dr. Ketchum has already been subjected to enough investigation to more than suggest she is "clean"?

Be careful, its never a good idea to assume things, IMO.

[southernyahoo]

You might be right, but when folks makes huge claims theirs nothing wrong with checking into it as well questioning it.

Huge claims? There were dozens of labs working to bring closure to the victums families associated with the WTC attacks. Would it be a huge claim for each of them?

I think nothing will come of this DNA, since its been so long, and with so many questions with few answeres, it looks like to me a page out of Tom B. play book on getting attention and run with it to give yourself exposure.

You're entitled to your opinion, and you can ask questions until you're tired of it, but nobody is obligated to answer them. It would actually be a violation of a professional code of ethics IMO for a Doctor to release private information on a client or patient, and thats exactly what you would be asking for.

It would be like your physician releasing your medical file to the public just to satisfy some forum posters petty curiosity. Ain't happening.

[Guest]

Huge claims? There were dozens of labs working to bring closure to the victums families associated with the WTC attacks. Would it be a huge claim for each of them?

yes and they are mention and recorder as doing so in the new york journals.

You're entitled to your opinion, and you can ask questions until you're tired of it, but nobody is obligated to answer them. It would actually be a violation of a professional code of ethics IMO for a Doctor to release private information on a client or patient, and thats exactly what you would be asking for.

what does this have to do with wtcd?

It would be like your physician releasing your medical file to the public just to satisfy some forum posters petty curiosity. Ain't happening.

Whatever!

[Bill]

"SHE IS A SCIENTIST, & saying otherwise shows a serious lack of knowledge about the subject!!"

Have to disagree. Saying she is not a scientist is a willful attempt at character assassination, a blatant attempt to discredit a person of scientific standing who may offer some evidence that may support the idea BF/sasquatch does exist.

Typical of the "critical thinker" who knows how to be critical, but does not know how to think.

Bill

[Sasfooty]

Have to disagree. Saying she is not a scientist is a willful attempt at character assassination, a blatant attempt to discredit a person of scientific standing who may offer some evidence that may support the idea BF/sasquatch does exist.

Typical of the "critical thinker" who knows how to be critical, but does not know how to think.

Bill

Yeah, THAT, too.

[Drew]

Have to disagree. Saying she is not a scientist is a willful attempt at character assassination, a blatant attempt to discredit a person of scientific standing who may offer some evidence that may support the idea BF/sasquatch does exist.

Couldn't someone say she is not a scientist, if that is their opinion?

Perhaps they have had a bad experience or something.

[Sasfooty]

"Someone" could say the sun rises in the west if that's their opinion, but that doesn't show that they are particularly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[Guest]

I'd have to say that the skeptics are so quick to attack the messenger that they are now starting their attack even before the message is delivered.

If done properly, which is what we all have been told is what is taking so much time, then her findings will hold up to proper methods and can be repeated by others no matter what their credentials say. It won't matter if her business doesn't fare so well with the BBB.

[Guest watcher]

none of this should be viewed as her project

I've got to disagree, You still don't see any other geneticist waving their hands hollering "send the samples to me, I want to do a bigfoot sample study ". Dr. Ketchum did go on a blogtalk show , and let people know she was taking samples, she did head the project.

In many, many scientific endeavors these days, a DNA technician is needed. It NEVER makes the given project become the project of the DNA testing contributor.

It's like saying climbing Mt Everest was the project of the guy who supplied the oxygen for the climbers.

Has Melba pioneered some methodologies in DNA testing? I dunno - she certainly claims to have... but that remains to be seen. Let's say I could agree to that statement. Sure - no problem

Are all the projects of Sasquatch researchers who have contributed DNA to Melba to apply her testing techniques suddenly no longer owned by the Sasquatch researchers? Absolutely not.

She is a hired technician, used for her expertise in ONE area. That area is not integral to Bigfoot research - anymore than forceps, plastic bags, cameras, infrared, night vision, peanut butter and tents are integral to Bigfoot research. Someone who pioneers a new tent tht lets people look through one-way glass, does not become the owner of the project in which a Sasquatch was filmed! They are just contributing one TOOL for the research - no matter how invaluable that tool may be, they are still only a contributor of the tool. They are not the researcher, and they do not become owner of the project or all the work associated with BF research.

Ketchum has contributed, or claims to have contributed a new methodology for testing DNA, that seems to get people the resutls they want. She can own that methodolgoy... patent it, license it, sell it, whatever. She does NOT own the project. She may own any "report" on her DNA methods, but that is it. She will not (or should not) own any Sasquatch report/project/documentary. She has been paid handsomely for her testing, and that is it. She can try to own whatever she feels she owns, in line with that role that she was hired for.

Edited August 1, 2011 by watcher

[Guest parnassus]

So...would an unapologetic interest in Sasquatch affect a scientist's chances of landing a prestigious position?

Not per se. The issue is whether or not a scientist can formulate research questions and devise methods which will answer those questions. Since that has not been possible to date, such a candidate would have to have a convincing track record in a closely related field (including a demonstrated ability to attract grant support, if this is a senior position.

I have previously expressed the opinion that there are opportunities to do such research.

[Guest parnassus]

My original response got ate so reposting:

I don't buy that for a minute. I've seen too many examples of scientists committing fraud to believe that, including:

• the British climatologists that got caught cooking their AGW data last year
  
• the so-called "peppered moth" experiment
  
• various cold fusion claims
  
• the Korean geneticist who claimed to be cloning humans
  

you have your opinion.

I am more aware than you of the occasional bad apple; science however has better methods of preventing, detecting, and correcting problems than do other fields. I think perhaps you do not have a realistic perception of the tiny proportion of problems relative to the immense amount of scientific research. (what British scientist specifically are you referring to?)

Human nature being what it is, no profession is perfect.

Edited August 1, 2011 by parnassus