RE: [Histonet] SMAD4

2012-04-25 Thread Hoekert, W.E.J.
Which stainer are you using? Because some clones will not work on a Venatana 
stainer.
 
Willem



Van: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu namens Chakib Boussahmain
Verzonden: ma 23-4-2012 4:20
Aan: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Onderwerp: [Histonet] SMAD4



Hello histonet,
Does anyone uses SMAD4 antibody? If so, can you tell where can I find a good 
one? Can you also share the staining protocol? dilution? epitope retrieval?
Your help will be appreciated so much.
Thank you.
Chakib Boussahmain
Histotech
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet



Disclaimer:

Dit e-mail bericht is uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde(n). 
Verstrekking aan en gebruik door anderen dan geadresseerden is niet toegestaan. 
Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent, wordt u verzocht de verzender hiervan op 
de hoogte te stellen en het bericht te verwijderen.
In verband met electronische verzending kunnen aan dit e-mail bericht geen 
rechten worden ontleend.


___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


[Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Joanne Clark

David, after reading your post I was not at all surprised to see that you are a 
PA.  I am assuming that explains your vitriol towards techs that gross.  Yes, 
CLIA does provide the educational requirements for high complexity testing, but 
what on earth makes you think that a tech with the proper CLIA qualifications 
can gross without proper training by a pathologist?  CAP requires that as well 
as extensive documentation of training AND a list of the specimens approved by 
the Lab Director that a 'non-pathologist' is allowed to gross.  I'm sure you 
can tell that I am a Histotech with an Associates Degree and I do the grossing 
in my lab.  I can assure you that I do a good job and if there is EVER any 
question regarding how to gross in a specimen I will get a pathologist.  To 
make it clear, just because we tech's that gross do not have a masters as a 
pathologist assistant, we care just as much about the patients we serve as a PA 
does.  Another point I would like to make is that very often we gross not by 
choice but because it is what our pathologists demand of us and they wouldn't 
put us there if we couldn't do the job. Believe me, when I say that I do want 
to get my masters as a PA, but I haven't been able to find a program that 
accommodates someone who is working full time and can not afford to quit to go 
back to school.  I am currently finishing up my Bachelors, because I still want 
to pursue it.

Joanne Clark, HT
Histology Supervisor
Pathology Consultants of New Mexico

--

Message: 8
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:32:34 -0700
From: Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Qualifications for grossing
To: Glen Dawson ihcman2...@hotmail.com
Cc: histonet histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
ca+f+rhoy4dypx0mpoq65rrrvldxobv_0acspzbgqrpv8ygv...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Glen,

Below are the requirements for high complexity testing, as outline by CLIA.
You can reference the CLIA '88 ruling, specifically look at Subpart M, Section 
493.1489

The requirements are weak, to say the least. I am not alone in the opinion that 
just because CLIA allows it, it is not necessarily appropriate for the minimum 
qualified person to be grossing certain specimens. Having someone other than an 
M.D., or ASCP certified PA do anything larger than a skin shave is not good 
medicine. But, in answer to your question - yes, the government allows 
inadequately trained personnel to perform high complexity testing.


Sec. 493.1489  Standard; Testing personnel qualifications.



Each individual performing high complexity testing must--

(a) Possess a current license issued by the State in which the

  laboratory is located, if such licensing is required; and

(b) Meet one of the following requirements:

(1) Be a doctor of medicine, doctor of osteopathy, or doctor of

  podiatric medicine licensed to practice medicine, osteopathy, or

  podiatry in the State in which the laboratory is located or have earned

  a doctoral, master's or bachelor's degree in a chemical, physical,

  biological or clinical laboratory science, or medical technology from an

  accredited institution;

(2)(i) Have earned an associate degree in a laboratory science, or

  medical laboratory technology from an accredited institution or--

(ii) Have education and training equivalent to that specified in

  paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section that includes--

(A) At least 60 semester hours, or equivalent, from an accredited

  institution that, at a minimum, include either--

(1) 24 semester hours of medical laboratory technology courses; or

(2) 24 semester hours of science courses that include--

(i) Six semester hours of chemistry;

(ii) Six semester hours of biology; and

(iii) Twelve semester hours of chemistry, biology, or medical

  laboratory technology in any combination; and

(B) Have laboratory training that includes either of the following:

(1) Completion of a clinical laboratory training program approved or

  accredited by the ABHES, the CAHEA, or other organization approved by

  HHS. (This training may be included in the 60 semester hours listed in

  paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(A) of this section.)

(2) At least 3 months documented laboratory training in each

  specialty in which the individual performs high complexity testing.

(3) Have previously qualified or could have qualified as a
  technologist under Sec. 493.1491 on or before February 28, 1992

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Glen Dawson ihcman2...@hotmail.com wrote:


 All,

 Can a histotech perform GROSSING if he/she has an associate's degree 
 in Histotechnology from an accredited institution (Argosy in MN)?

 Any help would be appreciated.

 Thank-you,

 Glen Dawson BS, HT(ASCP)  QIHC
 Histology Technical Specialist
 Mercy Health System
 Janesville, WI
  

Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Davide Costanzo
Joanna,

I wanted to take an opportunity to explain my, and most of my colleagues,
feelings about CLIA '88 with respect to grossing standards. But I want to
start by stating that this goes both ways, I also do not feel it is
appropriate for an ASCP certified PA to be performing Immunohistochemistry,
or other stains in the lab. Both histotechnicians (ologists) and PA's have
a very clear role in the pathology laboratory. Both have very different
training programs. Both HT's and PA's should be protected by law, and
rules/regulations for each should be clear. One is not better than the
other, and I certainly hope you do not think I have an opinion different
from that. Both are highly qualified individuals in their area of
expertise.

In many states, and I will use Florida as an example because that is what I
am familiar with, there are clear definitions in the law as to whom can
perform what tasks. In the State of Florida, a PA (regardless of training
level) is not to perform frozen sections. That State only allows
Pathologists and HT's to cut a frozen. This is the result of much effort
put in to changing those rules by the HT's in Florida. Clearly they saw
PA's as a threat to their job, and took action. Not a problem, I am happy
to let them do the frozen sections.

What was it about cutting a frozen section that the HT's thought a PA could
not handle? I do not know, but nonetheless they reacted. Certainly PA's are
heavily trained in how to cut a frozen section, and it is generally
considered our responsibility in most places in the US that I have seen,
and I have seen many. Rarely, outside the State of Florida, do I see PA's
that do not cut frozens.

Now, on to the issue of grossing techs. There are myriad reasons why I, and
most of my peers, think it is not appropriate to utilize grossing techs.
For starters, and to be clear, the use of such techs serves one principal
purpose to the pathologist's and institutions that employ them - to save
money and increase their profits. They are not employed because they
represent the clear choice for the utmost in patient care, and to suggest
that is not just misleading, but completely false.

Grossing small specimens is never just about transferring tissue from a
container to a block. Many tend to try and downplay the importance of that
task, and overlook things that could be problematic without certain
training/skills. And, there are many grossing techs that do larger cases,
from gallbladders all the way up to mastectomies and beyond - all with no
didactic education, no proficiency testing and no rotations through various
types of insitutions.

I have never seen a study, but perhaps someone on here has, that points out
the sharp increase in error rates found when a tech is used to gross,
versus a trained pathologists' assistant. There is a drastic difference. It
is distinct, and a study is really not needed to see that difference. Now,
to be clear again, that is not to say that every tech that grosses does a
bad job. No vitriol here. It is just a fact, and a troubling one at that.

Imagine the difference in quality you would see if you had me doing all
your stains! I am not trained as an HT. You could argue that I could be
trained, but do you really want to open that can of worms? Do you want
medicine to allow for that, and risk the HT profession? Probably not, and
we do not either.  Do you think I would be as good as you are, given all
the real education you received when getting your HT training? I don't
think I would be as good as you are at doing your job.

As an example to illustrate, anyone that grosses should know how to answer
these very basic questions. These might help shed some light on the issue:

   1. What is the most common neoplasm of the gallbladder, what does it
   look like, and where is it found? Would you know it if you saw it? Is it
   benign, or malignant?
   2. What is the reason that all appendices should have the margin
   submitted in the initial submission?
   3. Would you know the difference between an esophageal bx and a bx from
   any other part of the GI tract simply by gross appearance? What would you
   do if you had 2 specimens, one esophagus and one duodenal and they were
   reversed in the specimen containers by the biopsy tech? Would you be able
   to pick up on that mistake?
   4. How should you handle a skin punch for alopecia?
   5. If sent a skin for frozen, and it was a pilomatrixoma, would you know
   it, and would you still freeze it, or ask the pathologist first to avoid
   doing an unnecessary frozen?
   6. When are tangential margins more appropriate than perpendicular, and
   vice versa?

You can ask me the same types of questions as they pertain to histology,
and there is no chance I can answer them as correctly, and with as much
clarity as a well trained HT.

The bottom line is patient care and quality. I cannot provide the level of
quality in histology as you can, and a grossing tech cannot provide that
quality at 

Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Rene J Buesa
For what little it may mean, I wholeheartly agree with Davice Costanzo e-mail. 
I completely agree with him.
In the same way the economic situation we are now was caused by greed, that is 
the motor guiding those who, to just save money, let a histotech (ologist) to 
do grossing.
Grossing,, especially large complex specimens, is the fundamental initial task 
in any complex diagnosis. The PA is the one who SELECTS what is going to be 
processed and used for diagnosis.
IF some part of the specimen is not submitted as the result of ignorance caused 
by poor training, the worst thing could happen, namely, a FALSE NEGATIVE

--- On Wed, 4/25/12, Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com wrote:


From: Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing
To: Joanne Clark jcl...@pcnm.com
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Date: Wednesday, April 25, 2012, 12:34 PM


Joanna,

I wanted to take an opportunity to explain my, and most of my colleagues,
feelings about CLIA '88 with respect to grossing standards. But I want to
start by stating that this goes both ways, I also do not feel it is
appropriate for an ASCP certified PA to be performing Immunohistochemistry,
or other stains in the lab. Both histotechnicians (ologists) and PA's have
a very clear role in the pathology laboratory. Both have very different
training programs. Both HT's and PA's should be protected by law, and
rules/regulations for each should be clear. One is not better than the
other, and I certainly hope you do not think I have an opinion different
from that. Both are highly qualified individuals in their area of
expertise.

In many states, and I will use Florida as an example because that is what I
am familiar with, there are clear definitions in the law as to whom can
perform what tasks. In the State of Florida, a PA (regardless of training
level) is not to perform frozen sections. That State only allows
Pathologists and HT's to cut a frozen. This is the result of much effort
put in to changing those rules by the HT's in Florida. Clearly they saw
PA's as a threat to their job, and took action. Not a problem, I am happy
to let them do the frozen sections.

What was it about cutting a frozen section that the HT's thought a PA could
not handle? I do not know, but nonetheless they reacted. Certainly PA's are
heavily trained in how to cut a frozen section, and it is generally
considered our responsibility in most places in the US that I have seen,
and I have seen many. Rarely, outside the State of Florida, do I see PA's
that do not cut frozens.

Now, on to the issue of grossing techs. There are myriad reasons why I, and
most of my peers, think it is not appropriate to utilize grossing techs.
For starters, and to be clear, the use of such techs serves one principal
purpose to the pathologist's and institutions that employ them - to save
money and increase their profits. They are not employed because they
represent the clear choice for the utmost in patient care, and to suggest
that is not just misleading, but completely false.

Grossing small specimens is never just about transferring tissue from a
container to a block. Many tend to try and downplay the importance of that
task, and overlook things that could be problematic without certain
training/skills. And, there are many grossing techs that do larger cases,
from gallbladders all the way up to mastectomies and beyond - all with no
didactic education, no proficiency testing and no rotations through various
types of insitutions.

I have never seen a study, but perhaps someone on here has, that points out
the sharp increase in error rates found when a tech is used to gross,
versus a trained pathologists' assistant. There is a drastic difference. It
is distinct, and a study is really not needed to see that difference. Now,
to be clear again, that is not to say that every tech that grosses does a
bad job. No vitriol here. It is just a fact, and a troubling one at that.

Imagine the difference in quality you would see if you had me doing all
your stains! I am not trained as an HT. You could argue that I could be
trained, but do you really want to open that can of worms? Do you want
medicine to allow for that, and risk the HT profession? Probably not, and
we do not either.  Do you think I would be as good as you are, given all
the real education you received when getting your HT training? I don't
think I would be as good as you are at doing your job.

As an example to illustrate, anyone that grosses should know how to answer
these very basic questions. These might help shed some light on the issue:

   1. What is the most common neoplasm of the gallbladder, what does it
   look like, and where is it found? Would you know it if you saw it? Is it
   benign, or malignant?
   2. What is the reason that all appendices should have the margin
   submitted in the initial submission?
   3. Would you know the difference between an esophageal bx 

[Histonet] cloud based LIS

2012-04-25 Thread Kelly Boyd
 Is there anyone out there in Histoland who is using a cloud based LIS??


Kelly 
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


[Histonet] Problems with pAKT.

2012-04-25 Thread Courtney Pierce
Has anyone had cross reacting problems with pAKT. I have used both Cell 
Signaling #3787 and #4606. Can anyone help me with this.

Thanks
Courtney


Courtney Pierce
IHC Specialist
Quintiles
Translational RD - Oncology
Innovation
Navigating the new health

610 Oakmont Lane
Westmont, IL 60559

Office: + 630-203-6234
courtney.pie...@quintiles.com

clinical | commercial | consulting | capital


**  IMPORTANT--PLEASE READ  
This electronic message, including its attachments, is COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
and may contain PROPRIETARY or LEGALLY PRIVILEGED information.  If you are 
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this message or any of the information included
in it is unauthorized and strictly prohibited.  If you have received this
message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
permanently delete this message and its attachments, along with any copies
thereof. Thank you. 


___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Ingles Claire
You can reprocess, recut, and restain, but never re-gross. I for one also 
gross, but only skin. And yes, I DO know how to gross an alopecia specimen.
Claire



From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu on behalf of Rene J Buesa
Sent: Wed 4/25/2012 11:55 AM
To: Joanne Clark; Davide Costanzo
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing



For what little it may mean, I wholeheartly agree with Davice Costanzo e-mail. 
I completely agree with him.
In the same way the economic situation we are now was caused by greed, that is 
the motor guiding those who, to just save money, let a histotech (ologist) to 
do grossing.
Grossing,, especially large complex specimens, is the fundamental initial task 
in any complex diagnosis. The PA is the one who SELECTS what is going to be 
processed and used for diagnosis.
IF some part of the specimen is not submitted as the result of ignorance caused 
by poor training, the worst thing could happen, namely, a FALSE NEGATIVE

--- On Wed, 4/25/12, Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com wrote:



___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Davide Costanzo
Nothing is black and white. Perhaps exceptions are in order where the
tech only does one specimen type. Perhaps. But not where techs do a lot
more. There are gross techs out there doing colons, mastectomies etc.
This is where big trouble brews. This is where people are not
adequately trained, by NAACLS standards. CLIA '88 is the problem, not
the tech. CLIA is over 20 years old, and at that time PA's were fairly
new on the scene and in short supply. That is not the case today. It is
time to raise the bar and improve patient care. There are no valid
excuses. Today, this is no more than financial greed that accounts for
misuse of personnel.

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Ingles Claire
Sent: 4/25/2012 10:43 AM
To: Rene J Buesa; Joanne Clark; Davide Costanzo
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing
You can reprocess, recut, and restain, but never re-gross. I for one
also gross, but only skin. And yes, I DO know how to gross an alopecia
specimen.
Claire



From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu on behalf of Rene J Buesa
Sent: Wed 4/25/2012 11:55 AM
To: Joanne Clark; Davide Costanzo
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing



For what little it may mean, I wholeheartly agree with Davice Costanzo
e-mail. I completely agree with him.
In the same way the economic situation we are now was caused by greed,
that is the motor guiding those who, to just save money, let a
histotech (ologist) to do grossing.
Grossing,, especially large complex specimens, is the fundamental
initial task in any complex diagnosis. The PA is the one who SELECTS
what is going to be processed and used for diagnosis.
IF some part of the specimen is not submitted as the result of
ignorance caused by poor training, the worst thing could happen,
namely, a FALSE NEGATIVE

--- On Wed, 4/25/12, Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com wrote:

___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Nicole Tatum
Yupp he strikes again.


Joanne,

I strongly agree with your perspective. Many Techs do not have formal
expensive educations and have sat on the bench for many years and
eventually became grandfathered in. Those techs are the life blood of
pathology. It has only been in recent years that licensure has become a
larger part of health care requiring personal to obtain certification to
hopefully increase patient care. But, this argument is becoming a thing
of the past, because CLIA, CAP, JOCA have set standards that personal must
meet regardless of the extensive OJT. I am qualified to gross based on
these accrediators standards. It is others opinions that think these
standards are weak. If the argument is greed, than people should
understand that employee payroll is the highest cost within a laboratory
so to help cut cost to our bankrupt health care system, why not pay a
Histologist who is clearly qualified to do a job they have been doing
since the beginning of pathology.


The pathologists’ assistant profession began in 1969 with a pilot training
program at the Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC) in Durham,
North Carolina.

In 1856 William Perkin discovered the dye mauve that was used in the early
1860s by F W B Benke of Marlbery. Joseph Janavier Woodward, a surgeon in
the US Army, used fuchsine and aniline blue to stain human intestines.
Paul Ehrlich realized that the chemical dyes obtained from coal tar did
not simply color cells but combined with the chemical elements within them
to form new substances. The Swiss chemist Friedrich Miescher, in 1869 used
aniline dyes to examine the cell nucleus. In 1875 Carl Weigart, Ehrlich's
cousin, demonstrated the fuchsine derivative methyl violet stained
bacteria as opposed to tissue.

The first histologist, Marcello Malpighi (1628-1694), an Italian
anatomist, is in fact considered the true “Father of Histology”.

1819, A. Mayer created the term Histology. In the sequence of the previous
word tissue, made use of two classical Greek root words (histos = tissue
and logos = study

So, my point is I do believe Histo's have been involved since the very
beginning. We as a profession have a combined experience well beyond that
of any formal education.

Last thought, and I quote, I know I would make mistakes, and mistakes may
be considered part of the learning process, but do we really want to
accept that in  health care? Mistakes should happen in school, not with a
real, live patients tissue.

This statement clearly conflicts with all aspect of becoming a medical
professional. Our state/government funded hospitals employ thousands of
residents each year who treat thousands of indigent and paying patients.
This is their school. Histologist do interships within hospitals to get
training. This is their school to. Nurses, MLT's, MA's, everyone in health
care learns the actual (beyond books)trade from watching and working with
skilled persons who have many years of experience. They would not place a
student with a person who has a degree but no experience. My education
qualifies me to be trained by anyone in my field of pathology, and I
should be used where my skills will best serve my department and increase
patient care. Each one of us serves a purpose and is valuable, no matter
what job we perform with what amount of education. The law is weeding out
those who are no longer qualified to work in out field, they set the
standard. Let's let them make the decisions on who is qualified to do what
and stick together to ensure its fair to each one of us.

Can't we all just get along...hehehehehe

Nicole Tatum HT, ASCP







___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


[Histonet] size of cut/transfer method affect staining?

2012-04-25 Thread Smith, Matthew A.
Hi,

  I am attempting to do dual staining with 2 antibodies.  One works fine but I 
am having trouble getting consistent staining with the second.  I recently 
noticed previous user was requesting 3uM microtomy sections on tape, then going 
TPC, xylenes/etoh, AR,etc.  I have been using 4um floated sections and can just 
not see the same staining using same everything else.  Does anyone have 
thoughts about this?  I was thinking perhaps the TPC/tape leaves the cells more 
permeable or affects AR efficiency.  I am currently going to test 
side-by-side...just trying to get a general opinion on the matter as 
immunohistochemistry is not my area of proficiency.



Matthew A. Smith, PhD MSPH
Postdoctoral Fellow, Clinical Investigations
Laboratory of Eric Haura, MD
tel:  813-745-6193 | email:  
matthew.sm...@moffitt.orgmailto:matthew.sm...@moffitt.org


P Please consider the environment before printing this email.


This transmission may be confidential or protected from disclosure and is only 
for review and use by the intended recipient. Access by anyone else is 
unauthorized. Any unauthorized reader is hereby notified that any review, use, 
dissemination, disclosure or copying of this information, or any act or 
omission taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you 
received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately. 
Thank you.___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Horn, Hazel V
Well said.

Hazel Horn
Supervisor of Histology/Autopsy/Transcription
Anatomic Pathology
Arkansas Children's Hospital
1 Children's Way | Slot 820| Little Rock, AR 72202
501.364.4240 direct | 501.364.1302 office | 501.364.1241 fax
hor...@archildrens.org
archildrens.org




100 YEARS YOUNG!
JOIN THE PARTY AT
ach100.org


-Original Message-
From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu 
[mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Davide Costanzo
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:34 AM
To: Joanne Clark
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

Joanna,

I wanted to take an opportunity to explain my, and most of my colleagues, 
feelings about CLIA '88 with respect to grossing standards. But I want to start 
by stating that this goes both ways, I also do not feel it is appropriate for 
an ASCP certified PA to be performing Immunohistochemistry, or other stains in 
the lab. Both histotechnicians (ologists) and PA's have a very clear role in 
the pathology laboratory. Both have very different training programs. Both HT's 
and PA's should be protected by law, and rules/regulations for each should be 
clear. One is not better than the other, and I certainly hope you do not think 
I have an opinion different from that. Both are highly qualified individuals in 
their area of expertise.

In many states, and I will use Florida as an example because that is what I am 
familiar with, there are clear definitions in the law as to whom can perform 
what tasks. In the State of Florida, a PA (regardless of training
level) is not to perform frozen sections. That State only allows Pathologists 
and HT's to cut a frozen. This is the result of much effort put in to changing 
those rules by the HT's in Florida. Clearly they saw PA's as a threat to their 
job, and took action. Not a problem, I am happy to let them do the frozen 
sections.

What was it about cutting a frozen section that the HT's thought a PA could not 
handle? I do not know, but nonetheless they reacted. Certainly PA's are heavily 
trained in how to cut a frozen section, and it is generally considered our 
responsibility in most places in the US that I have seen, and I have seen many. 
Rarely, outside the State of Florida, do I see PA's that do not cut frozens.

Now, on to the issue of grossing techs. There are myriad reasons why I, and 
most of my peers, think it is not appropriate to utilize grossing techs.
For starters, and to be clear, the use of such techs serves one principal 
purpose to the pathologist's and institutions that employ them - to save money 
and increase their profits. They are not employed because they represent the 
clear choice for the utmost in patient care, and to suggest that is not just 
misleading, but completely false.

Grossing small specimens is never just about transferring tissue from a 
container to a block. Many tend to try and downplay the importance of that 
task, and overlook things that could be problematic without certain 
training/skills. And, there are many grossing techs that do larger cases, from 
gallbladders all the way up to mastectomies and beyond - all with no didactic 
education, no proficiency testing and no rotations through various types of 
insitutions.

I have never seen a study, but perhaps someone on here has, that points out the 
sharp increase in error rates found when a tech is used to gross, versus a 
trained pathologists' assistant. There is a drastic difference. It is distinct, 
and a study is really not needed to see that difference. Now, to be clear 
again, that is not to say that every tech that grosses does a bad job. No 
vitriol here. It is just a fact, and a troubling one at that.

Imagine the difference in quality you would see if you had me doing all your 
stains! I am not trained as an HT. You could argue that I could be trained, but 
do you really want to open that can of worms? Do you want medicine to allow for 
that, and risk the HT profession? Probably not, and we do not either.  Do you 
think I would be as good as you are, given all the real education you received 
when getting your HT training? I don't think I would be as good as you are at 
doing your job.

As an example to illustrate, anyone that grosses should know how to answer 
these very basic questions. These might help shed some light on the issue:

   1. What is the most common neoplasm of the gallbladder, what does it
   look like, and where is it found? Would you know it if you saw it? Is it
   benign, or malignant?
   2. What is the reason that all appendices should have the margin
   submitted in the initial submission?
   3. Would you know the difference between an esophageal bx and a bx from
   any other part of the GI tract simply by gross appearance? What would you
   do if you had 2 specimens, one esophagus and one duodenal and they were
   reversed in the specimen containers by the biopsy tech? Would you be able
   to pick up on that 

RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Davide Costanzo
Thank you Hazel.

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Horn, Hazel V
Sent: 4/25/2012 12:18 PM
To: Davide Costanzo; Joanne Clark
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing
Well said.

Hazel Horn
Supervisor of Histology/Autopsy/Transcription
Anatomic Pathology
Arkansas Children's Hospital
1 Children's Way | Slot 820| Little Rock, AR 72202
501.364.4240 direct | 501.364.1302 office | 501.364.1241 fax
hor...@archildrens.org
archildrens.org




100 YEARS YOUNG!
JOIN THE PARTY AT
ach100.org


-Original Message-
From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Davide
Costanzo
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:34 AM
To: Joanne Clark
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

Joanna,

I wanted to take an opportunity to explain my, and most of my
colleagues, feelings about CLIA '88 with respect to grossing
standards. But I want to start by stating that this goes both ways, I
also do not feel it is appropriate for an ASCP certified PA to be
performing Immunohistochemistry, or other stains in the lab. Both
histotechnicians (ologists) and PA's have a very clear role in the
pathology laboratory. Both have very different training programs. Both
HT's and PA's should be protected by law, and rules/regulations for
each should be clear. One is not better than the other, and I
certainly hope you do not think I have an opinion different from that.
Both are highly qualified individuals in their area of expertise.

In many states, and I will use Florida as an example because that is
what I am familiar with, there are clear definitions in the law as to
whom can perform what tasks. In the State of Florida, a PA (regardless
of training
level) is not to perform frozen sections. That State only allows
Pathologists and HT's to cut a frozen. This is the result of much
effort put in to changing those rules by the HT's in Florida. Clearly
they saw PA's as a threat to their job, and took action. Not a
problem, I am happy to let them do the frozen sections.

What was it about cutting a frozen section that the HT's thought a PA
could not handle? I do not know, but nonetheless they reacted.
Certainly PA's are heavily trained in how to cut a frozen section, and
it is generally considered our responsibility in most places in the US
that I have seen, and I have seen many. Rarely, outside the State of
Florida, do I see PA's that do not cut frozens.

Now, on to the issue of grossing techs. There are myriad reasons why
I, and most of my peers, think it is not appropriate to utilize
grossing techs.
For starters, and to be clear, the use of such techs serves one
principal purpose to the pathologist's and institutions that employ
them - to save money and increase their profits. They are not employed
because they represent the clear choice for the utmost in patient
care, and to suggest that is not just misleading, but completely
false.

Grossing small specimens is never just about transferring tissue from
a container to a block. Many tend to try and downplay the importance
of that task, and overlook things that could be problematic without
certain training/skills. And, there are many grossing techs that do
larger cases, from gallbladders all the way up to mastectomies and
beyond - all with no didactic education, no proficiency testing and no
rotations through various types of insitutions.

I have never seen a study, but perhaps someone on here has, that
points out the sharp increase in error rates found when a tech is used
to gross, versus a trained pathologists' assistant. There is a drastic
difference. It is distinct, and a study is really not needed to see
that difference. Now, to be clear again, that is not to say that every
tech that grosses does a bad job. No vitriol here. It is just a
fact, and a troubling one at that.

Imagine the difference in quality you would see if you had me doing
all your stains! I am not trained as an HT. You could argue that I
could be trained, but do you really want to open that can of worms? Do
you want medicine to allow for that, and risk the HT profession?
Probably not, and we do not either.  Do you think I would be as good
as you are, given all the real education you received when getting
your HT training? I don't think I would be as good as you are at doing
your job.

As an example to illustrate, anyone that grosses should know how to
answer these very basic questions. These might help shed some light on
the issue:

   1. What is the most common neoplasm of the gallbladder, what does it
   look like, and where is it found? Would you know it if you saw it? Is it
   benign, or malignant?
   2. What is the reason that all appendices should have the margin
   submitted in the initial submission?
   3. Would you know the difference between an esophageal bx and a bx from
   any other part of the GI tract simply by gross appearance? What would you
   

[Histonet] ER PR antibodies for rat tissue

2012-04-25 Thread McGinley,John
Hi,

I've been using Dako 1D5 (ER) and Biogenex PR88 (PR) on rat tissue for a number 
of years. I was curious if anyone out there working with rat tissue and has 
found any ER or PR clones that might work better. Has anyone tried rabbit 
monoclonals on rat tissue, e.g. SP1 (ER) or Y85 (PR)?

Thanks,

John

-
John McGinley
Cancer Prevention Laboratory
Colorado State University

___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


RE: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Nicole Tatum
Im sorry you feel that way about me. There is nothing snide here. I
respect your opinion and have no foul words for you. Im happy that you
have earned your education. I currently am in school trying to further
mine, and I belive an education is so important. To a person and a
profession. Have a wonderful day.

Nicole Tatum, HT ASCP





 Try to keep your snide remarks quiet, and respond with some degree of
 respect. We will not always agree, but there is no strike there. You
 dislike me,, that's fine. But keep your personal comments to yourself.
 If you can be that mature.

 Sent from my Windows Phone
 From: Nicole Tatum
 Sent: 4/25/2012 12:09 PM
 To: Joanne Clark; histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
 Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing
 Yupp he strikes again.


 Joanne,

 I strongly agree with your perspective. Many Techs do not have formal
 expensive educations and have sat on the bench for many years and
 eventually became grandfathered in. Those techs are the life blood of
 pathology. It has only been in recent years that licensure has become a
 larger part of health care requiring personal to obtain certification to
 hopefully increase patient care. But, this argument is becoming a thing
 of the past, because CLIA, CAP, JOCA have set standards that personal must
 meet regardless of the extensive OJT. I am qualified to gross based on
 these accrediators standards. It is others opinions that think these
 standards are weak. If the argument is greed, than people should
 understand that employee payroll is the highest cost within a laboratory
 so to help cut cost to our bankrupt health care system, why not pay a
 Histologist who is clearly qualified to do a job they have been doing
 since the beginning of pathology.


 The pathologists’ assistant profession began in 1969 with a pilot training
 program at the Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC) in Durham,
 North Carolina.

 In 1856 William Perkin discovered the dye mauve that was used in the early
 1860s by F W B Benke of Marlbery. Joseph Janavier Woodward, a surgeon in
 the US Army, used fuchsine and aniline blue to stain human intestines.
 Paul Ehrlich realized that the chemical dyes obtained from coal tar did
 not simply color cells but combined with the chemical elements within them
 to form new substances. The Swiss chemist Friedrich Miescher, in 1869 used
 aniline dyes to examine the cell nucleus. In 1875 Carl Weigart, Ehrlich's
 cousin, demonstrated the fuchsine derivative methyl violet stained
 bacteria as opposed to tissue.

 The first histologist, Marcello Malpighi (1628-1694), an Italian
 anatomist, is in fact considered the true “Father of Histology”.

 1819, A. Mayer created the term Histology. In the sequence of the previous
 word tissue, made use of two classical Greek root words (histos = tissue
 and logos = study

 So, my point is I do believe Histo's have been involved since the very
 beginning. We as a profession have a combined experience well beyond that
 of any formal education.

 Last thought, and I quote, I know I would make mistakes, and mistakes may
 be considered part of the learning process, but do we really want to
 accept that in  health care? Mistakes should happen in school, not with a
 real, live patients tissue.

 This statement clearly conflicts with all aspect of becoming a medical
 professional. Our state/government funded hospitals employ thousands of
 residents each year who treat thousands of indigent and paying patients.
 This is their school. Histologist do interships within hospitals to get
 training. This is their school to. Nurses, MLT's, MA's, everyone in health
 care learns the actual (beyond books)trade from watching and working with
 skilled persons who have many years of experience. They would not place a
 student with a person who has a degree but no experience. My education
 qualifies me to be trained by anyone in my field of pathology, and I
 should be used where my skills will best serve my department and increase
 patient care. Each one of us serves a purpose and is valuable, no matter
 what job we perform with what amount of education. The law is weeding out
 those who are no longer qualified to work in out field, they set the
 standard. Let's let them make the decisions on who is qualified to do what
 and stick together to ensure its fair to each one of us.

 Can't we all just get along...hehehehehe

 Nicole Tatum HT, ASCP







 ___
 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] Cytology Standards

2012-04-25 Thread Amy Self
Good Afternoon Histonetters,

I need your help. I have been asked to come up with a list of standards for 
non-gyn cytologies. These standards will be used as a means of evaluating an 
employee for their annual evaluation. The employee will have to meet - exceed - 
or not meet the standard depending on their job performance. These standards 
will help determine their raise percentage.  So here I am writing to see if 
anyone out in histoland has anything that they would be willing to share with 
me.  Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Amy Self
Georgetown Hospital System
843-527-7179
NOTE:
 The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential and 
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by 
replying to this message and deleting it from your computer.
Thank you.
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


[Histonet] barcoding

2012-04-25 Thread mequita praet
Wow, good point, Vinnie!
Thanks for the heads up.
Mequita Praet
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


[Histonet] RE: Histonet Digest, Vol 101, Issue 32

2012-04-25 Thread Joanne Clark
Davide and Rene, you have very valid points and I do not necessarily disagree 
with you.  But the reality is that it is an accepted CAP/CLIA allowed practise 
and will continue.  You both have the right to voice your opinions on the 
issue, but perhaps histonet which is made up mostly of techs, many of whom 
gross (not by choice) is not the best place to do it without causing a lot of 
controversy.  You need to take your concerns where they might make a 
difference, to CAP or CLIA. If you believe in it strongly enough you will try 
and do something about it.  Just know that those of us who do gross, do 
everything within our power to do the job safely for those patients we serve.

Respectfully
Joanne Clark, HT
Histology Supervisor
Pathology Consultants of New Mexico
 --

Message: 14
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:34:29 -0700
From: Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing
To: Joanne Clark jcl...@pcnm.com
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
ca+f+rhqo7guohqtlxta1ffd2yhda0br1hefi3rdh2woji35...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Joanna,

I wanted to take an opportunity to explain my, and most of my colleagues,
feelings about CLIA '88 with respect to grossing standards. But I want to
start by stating that this goes both ways, I also do not feel it is
appropriate for an ASCP certified PA to be performing Immunohistochemistry,
or other stains in the lab. Both histotechnicians (ologists) and PA's have
a very clear role in the pathology laboratory. Both have very different
training programs. Both HT's and PA's should be protected by law, and
rules/regulations for each should be clear. One is not better than the
other, and I certainly hope you do not think I have an opinion different
from that. Both are highly qualified individuals in their area of
expertise.

In many states, and I will use Florida as an example because that is what I
am familiar with, there are clear definitions in the law as to whom can
perform what tasks. In the State of Florida, a PA (regardless of training
level) is not to perform frozen sections. That State only allows
Pathologists and HT's to cut a frozen. This is the result of much effort
put in to changing those rules by the HT's in Florida. Clearly they saw
PA's as a threat to their job, and took action. Not a problem, I am happy
to let them do the frozen sections.

What was it about cutting a frozen section that the HT's thought a PA could
not handle? I do not know, but nonetheless they reacted. Certainly PA's are
heavily trained in how to cut a frozen section, and it is generally
considered our responsibility in most places in the US that I have seen,
and I have seen many. Rarely, outside the State of Florida, do I see PA's
that do not cut frozens.

Now, on to the issue of grossing techs. There are myriad reasons why I, and
most of my peers, think it is not appropriate to utilize grossing techs.
For starters, and to be clear, the use of such techs serves one principal
purpose to the pathologist's and institutions that employ them - to save
money and increase their profits. They are not employed because they
represent the clear choice for the utmost in patient care, and to suggest
that is not just misleading, but completely false.

Grossing small specimens is never just about transferring tissue from a
container to a block. Many tend to try and downplay the importance of that
task, and overlook things that could be problematic without certain
training/skills. And, there are many grossing techs that do larger cases,
from gallbladders all the way up to mastectomies and beyond - all with no
didactic education, no proficiency testing and no rotations through various
types of insitutions.

I have never seen a study, but perhaps someone on here has, that points out
the sharp increase in error rates found when a tech is used to gross,
versus a trained pathologists' assistant. There is a drastic difference. It
is distinct, and a study is really not needed to see that difference. Now,
to be clear again, that is not to say that every tech that grosses does a
bad job. No vitriol here. It is just a fact, and a troubling one at that.

Imagine the difference in quality you would see if you had me doing all
your stains! I am not trained as an HT. You could argue that I could be
trained, but do you really want to open that can of worms? Do you want
medicine to allow for that, and risk the HT profession? Probably not, and
we do not either.  Do you think I would be as good as you are, given all
the real education you received when getting your HT training? I don't
think I would be as good as you are at doing your job.

As an example to illustrate, anyone that grosses should know how to answer
these very basic questions. These might help shed some light on the issue:

   1. What is the most common neoplasm of the gallbladder, what does it
   

Re: [Histonet] RE: Histonet Digest, Vol 101, Issue 32

2012-04-25 Thread Davide Costanzo
Very well spoken. You will note that neither of us raised this subject, but
did respond to a post previously entered. And, as I clarified to another
person here privately, the problem with CLIA does not just mean we are
going after HT's that gross - CLIA allows ANYONE with those very minimal
requirements to gross. Most gross techs are not HT's, most are off the
street people with the bare bones required by law, that are taught on the
job to toss biopsies into cassettes. And, many of these people do much
larger cases as well - all legally under CLIA 88. It's a problem, and it
is not meant to upset anyone on here. Most of those techs, as I stated, are
not HT's and are not on this site anyway. The proper forum of course is to
reach out to government officials and try and get that law changed. Perhaps
we will. A lot of progress has been made in the area over the years, now we
just need to modify the laws to reflect the times within which we live.

I did want to point out one thing though - there was a comment about saving
money in healthcare, and that was a valid reason to employ a grossing tech.
Let's be clear on this subject - there is a BOAT LOAD of money in the
technical component of AP services. This is why you see GI docs and
Urologists all over the nation opening their own histo labs. They want to
cash in. The reimbursement for technical charges is public knowledge - look
it up and you will find the Medicare rates for your area very publicly
posted by Medicare. It's not a secret. Take those rates, multiply by 80%
because even Medicare does not really pay what they say and then multiply
it out for your volume. Be sure to include all your 88305's and other
standard charges, and add all the fees for your stains, frozen sections,
decalcifying, etc. When you see just what Medicare pays your site, then
look at your paycheck and ask yourself Is my lab really suffering
financially? Probably not. And that is based upon Medicare rates, the
truth is the lab makes more than that because most insurers pay higher than
Medicare. Where does the money go? I don't think I have to tell you.






On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Joanne Clark jcl...@pcnm.com wrote:

 Davide and Rene, you have very valid points and I do not necessarily
 disagree with you.  But the reality is that it is an accepted CAP/CLIA
 allowed practise and will continue.  You both have the right to voice your
 opinions on the issue, but perhaps histonet which is made up mostly of
 techs, many of whom gross (not by choice) is not the best place to do it
 without causing a lot of controversy.  You need to take your concerns where
 they might make a difference, to CAP or CLIA. If you believe in it strongly
 enough you will try and do something about it.  Just know that those of us
 who do gross, do everything within our power to do the job safely for those
 patients we serve.

 Respectfully
 Joanne Clark, HT
 Histology Supervisor
 Pathology Consultants of New Mexico
 --

 Message: 14
 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:34:29 -0700
 From: Davide Costanzo pathloc...@gmail.com
 Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing
 To: Joanne Clark jcl...@pcnm.com
 Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
 Message-ID:
ca+f+rhqo7guohqtlxta1ffd2yhda0br1hefi3rdh2woji35...@mail.gmail.com
 
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

 Joanna,

 I wanted to take an opportunity to explain my, and most of my colleagues,
 feelings about CLIA '88 with respect to grossing standards. But I want to
 start by stating that this goes both ways, I also do not feel it is
 appropriate for an ASCP certified PA to be performing Immunohistochemistry,
 or other stains in the lab. Both histotechnicians (ologists) and PA's have
 a very clear role in the pathology laboratory. Both have very different
 training programs. Both HT's and PA's should be protected by law, and
 rules/regulations for each should be clear. One is not better than the
 other, and I certainly hope you do not think I have an opinion different
 from that. Both are highly qualified individuals in their area of
 expertise.

 In many states, and I will use Florida as an example because that is what I
 am familiar with, there are clear definitions in the law as to whom can
 perform what tasks. In the State of Florida, a PA (regardless of training
 level) is not to perform frozen sections. That State only allows
 Pathologists and HT's to cut a frozen. This is the result of much effort
 put in to changing those rules by the HT's in Florida. Clearly they saw
 PA's as a threat to their job, and took action. Not a problem, I am happy
 to let them do the frozen sections.

 What was it about cutting a frozen section that the HT's thought a PA could
 not handle? I do not know, but nonetheless they reacted. Certainly PA's are
 heavily trained in how to cut a frozen section, and it is generally
 considered our responsibility in most places in the US 

Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread Jay Lundgren
I agree with Renee's post completely. When the motivation is greed, and not
patient care, we, as laboratory professionals, should be concerned.  I
think we should all realize that the regulations are there to protect ALL
of our livelihoods, HTs, PAs, MDs, HTLs, and everyone who works in the lab.

Patients (insurance companies, the Federal government) would not pay for
testing anymore if the results were invalid.

If I were a Histology Superintendent thinking of having an under trained
laboratory aide do immunohistochemistry, or gross:

 Could you get away with it?:  Sure.  Save $40,000. / year per HTL you
replace, more if PA.

 Would you want that to be your specimen? : No.

 What would one nasty malpractice lawsuit cost your facility?: Potentially
multi-millions of dollars.

Hiring unqualified techs is false economy.  Reimburse your lab aides for
tuition if you want them to do high complexity testing.

Apologies to any lab aides with PhDs, or any 6th grade dropouts with 30
years of X-ray Crystallography and Proteomics bench experience.

   Sincerely,


Jay A.
Lundgren, M.S., HTL (ASCP)
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

2012-04-25 Thread luger...@yahoo.com
Wow .I am appalled with these threads.  There are many of us in our  
field who have grown up in hospital settings learning real time  
Histotechnolgy and not by books.  Sitting bedside with patients speaking  
with their loved ones.  Let's respect this and move on to other topics that  
challenge us present day in our fields...


Regards to ALL of us in our field
Candace

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-Original message-
From: Jay Lundgren jaylundg...@gmail.com
To: Nicole Tatum nic...@dlcjax.com
Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Sent: Thu, Apr 26, 2012 01:43:38 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Qualifications for grossing

I agree with Renee's post completely. When the motivation is greed, and not
patient care, we, as laboratory professionals, should be concerned.  I
think we should all realize that the regulations are there to protect ALL
of our livelihoods, HTs, PAs, MDs, HTLs, and everyone who works in the lab.

Patients (insurance companies, the Federal government) would not pay for
testing anymore if the results were invalid.

If I were a Histology Superintendent thinking of having an under trained
laboratory aide do immunohistochemistry, or gross:

Could you get away with it?:  Sure.  Save $40,000. / year per HTL you
replace, more if PA.

Would you want that to be your specimen? : No.

What would one nasty malpractice lawsuit cost your facility?: Potentially
multi-millions of dollars.

Hiring unqualified techs is false economy.  Reimburse your lab aides for
tuition if you want them to do high complexity testing.

Apologies to any lab aides with PhDs, or any 6th grade dropouts with 30
years of X-ray Crystallography and Proteomics bench experience.

  Sincerely,


   Jay A.
Lundgren, M.S., HTL (ASCP)
___
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