yeah i was thinking the same thing while i was reading this. I also looked up a few more articles and looked at the doctors company web site. It is geared toward trying to attract insurance companies and employers trying to disprove claims more than in people being able to prove them. Call me cynical but if the procedure proves too many cases of harm as a result of exposure to toxins wouldnt that put a crimp in his business with insurance companies? Someone expert in the field would have to look at the parameters that they use to determine that exposure did cause damage, for example are the number of markers that this company determines is necessary to prove damage from exposure excessive? Until a number of companies are doing this again it would cast a shadow of doubt in my mind as too which way this testing is skewed. As far as detecting pain i was wondering two things, well actually three, 1. people have different thresholds of pain 2. you can get used to pain and not respond to as great a degree as you did when you first got the pain. As Wings has shown you can learn to live with it and not let it rule your life. 3. How would long term use of pain killers affect this test.

Until this technology has been around for a while and the 99.9% accuracy verified in the real world I have a wait and see attitude.

That said, when i read it and even now, I and im sure many others who see this will be thinking i want to take that test and stick it to those who put us through so many stalling and delaying and denial tactics.

If it proves accurate it could also make it much easier to obtain the pain relief you need if the test shows you are in pain. That is if the cost comes down over time so it is more affordable.