The Dako Eridan was never released, thus is a moot point, and agree that the current open platform Dako offers is very flexible for a variety of uses - with a caveat. Different instruments require different levels of IHC experience, IHC confort level, and who pre-screens stained slides prior to passing on to the pathologist or PI. There are many out in histo-land that perform and interpret IHC that are well qualified to do so - and there are others that are not. There is NO instrument on the market that is capable of screening clinical assays - no vendor is there yet. Would you want a nonCLIA/CAP approved lab to diagnose your family's specimen? The certifications are in place for a reason. Granted, research is different, although would you bet your grant submission or renewal on an untested improvisation??? It is called research for a reason, but I believe consistancy, reproducibility, and reliability is the hallmark of research and IHC.
Best regards, Jerry ________________________________ From: Larry Woody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: John Steel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Amos Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 6:01:01 PM Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers Dako doesn't even manufacture an IHC stainer unless you count the Eridan which was a failure. The instrument that they distribute is manufactured by Lab Vision/ now Thermo Shandon and hardly a dinosaur. If a person doesn't know the theory behind doing IHC or can't perform IHC on the bench then they really have no business doing IHC by any machine. I don't care how idiot proof they make an instrument there are still times when you have to improvise especially in the research field which requires a more open type platform. In research we do so many different types antibodies with everything from A-Z when it comes to AR, and methodology that an open platform is essential. The idiot proof machines have a niche but it's not in research. Larry A. Woody Seattle, Wa. ________________________________ From: John Steel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Amos Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 2:43:26 PM Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers Perhaps, you need to ask this professional's level of comfort in performing IHC... Best regards, Jerry ________________________________ From: Amos Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 5:06:54 PM Subject: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers No Way!! Just because there are new gadgets & gizmos on the newer instruments doesn't make them better. Versatility = Simplicity! Taking an instrument that works GREAT off the market just because there are newer ones that are all limited is dumb. We should follow Darwin and see the natural selection process through. More complicated systems are often more buggy (... see M$ Vista for example). Bells & Whistles are not selling points. Consistency & Versatility are. Gettin off my soapbox... Amos Message: 23 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:35:55 -0500 From: "Sally Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 All, After reading this thread I just had offer my comments. I'm not a big fan of systems that do the dewax and AR, primarily because it costs way too much to automate these steps. I've never used the Bond, but I hear that you've gotta put some plastic thingy - that probably costs too much - on top of each slide, you gotta use their detection reagents - which probably cost more than other companies, they charge you for empty barcoded reagent containers, all the slides in the same tray have to use the same detection reagents - which means that the continuous-feed feature has some serious limits, it can't do double-stains, and they have less than 50 IVD-approved antbodies. Can someone verify for me if all this issues are true? If so, why would someone want one of these stainers? The Dako stainer is a dinosaur and with all the newre/better ones available, they should probably take it off the market. Cheers, Sally _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
