Re: Van Impe situation, by Magilla

On Mar 25, 11:18 pm, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <PoSdnSX22sU9iXTanZ2dnUVZ_jKdn...@xxxxxxx>,





 MagillaGorilla <magi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Howard Kveck wrote:

In article <hKadnVrMmLaE4XXanZ2dnUVZ_vOln...@xxxxxxx>,
 MagillaGorilla <magi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
   The first test (at LNDD) was a positive. The second test was at Ghent -
   that was
inconclusive. They retested that sample at LNDD and got another positive.

I don't consider that "different results."  If you get an inconclusive
test, you should just run it again.  They did that and got a positive.

   Well, the fact that they get different results (and I know that
"positive", "inconclusive" and "negative" are different results) at different
labs indicates that there are problems with a) lab personnel, b) lab equipment,
c) the tests themselves. Those factors are are a start of a list of possible
problems. I imagine that others with more experience in a lab can fire off some
more. Anyway, a test should be repeatable with the same results in any lab.
That's one of the core principles of the scientific method.

No, an inconclusive result is not considered a result.  It should never
have been divulged by the lab and simply re-run by them until they got a
definitive result.

   Perhaps the Ghent lab got the best result the sample would allow and the LNDD
results are the ones that are inaccurate. the point that I'm making and you're
ignoring is that the labs *should* be able to repeat the tests and get the same
result - that is a core part of the process, I think. But they can't, as evidenced by
this example.

I hate to tell you, by the labs that run your medical tests do the same
thing all the time.  Nobody said lab work was perfect.  Somehow, you
think that if lab work isn't perfect it can't be used.  Not true.

   One of my friends runs a lab at a cancer research center in Seattle - she'd
disagree with you on that point, Magilla.

--
                              tanx,
                               Howard

                        Whatever happened to
                        Leon Trotsky?
                        He got an icepick
                        That made his ears burn.

                     remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Labs never make mistakes either, or repeated mistakes. Always believe
them.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/03/20/5058736-cp.html

Eastern Health chairwoman apologizes for botched breast cancer tests

By THE CANADIAN PRESS

Bill C
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: legalitty of making listed chemicals to be used in legal
    ... corporate research lab. ... And there's a quote from Kerry Mullis' (Chem Nobel Prize ... its future scientists. ... non corrisponde ad un utente   |message is not related to a real ...
    (sci.chem)
  • Re: OT: Aussie soldier MIA Afghanistan for 14months, found!!!
    ... she has been found safe!! ... Australia       ... Typical of a Lab - they always need a purpose. ...
    (rec.food.cooking)
  • Re: Are there forces in relativity?
    ... SR does not have to apply ONLY in absolutely gravitation-free ... that got Einstein going toward general relativity and what is ... This means that a small lab in free fall *in a gravitational ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Trying to decide if this is funny...
    ... was probably a lot funnier if you were actually in the lab at ... closer, wondering what it was, then finally the characters come ... It's been 18 years since I had to spend time in the lab or library, ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: LANCE ARMSTRONG: When Will YOU Admit Cheating?
    ... as to the B samples (and Armstrong can check that if he likes) and ... At another f-bombing lab, for Christ's sake. ... Materials may have been leaked, but the primary claim about ... give a complete bill of good health to the LNDD materials. ...
    (rec.bicycles.racing)
Loading