Post by Mitchell on Apr 22, 2017 2:39:32 GMT
I agree with you where it comes to lab procedures.
Any of N said,
From the accuracy of the testing, to the qualifications of those performing the tests( as it pertains to education, a certificate program, or a guy off the street who could pass a job skills assessment), test collection and handling throughout, whether there was any redundancy in place, lab sterilization standards, etc...
There is much variation in the process. Probably too much for something this important. Most of this variation can be attributed to the human factor. I am full of questions, of course, and someone here may be able to answer.
1.)Would there be a scenario wherein a sample was tested and a borderline result was obtained? A result that couldn't definitively be classified as, for example, a '1' or '0' on a binary scale but instead yielded a result of '0.5' that looked like a vin diagram? Could two different individuals look at the same result and interpret in different ways?
2.)If a test failed to produce a satisfactory result, would enough testable material remain from the collected sample in order to perform an additional test?
3.)Is their any data present about potentiality of a false positive or false positive rates?
4.)If a search warrant was required to obtain a biological sample, or even in the case of a voluntary sample, how much of that information would be shared with LE? Would the same laws protecting privacy applied to medical records apply to these tests? The question concerns whether or not LE could potentially have in their possession any records regarding the tests performed or the results of them.
One thing that is worrisome is that anyone who has worked in production can tell you(and this echoes the sentiment expressed by Any of N) is that as volume goes up, standards invariably go down. We can only hope that there were enough trained and competent people around to competently perform these tests.
Any of N said,
Maybe there really is no such condition of being both a secretor and a non-secretor. And if there is, maybe it's so extremely rare that it's not really a legit worry. Who knows. But I also wonder about the accuracy of the testing. If you ask an over-burdened forensics lab to run 500+ samples through in production line fashion, maybe you introduce a lot of room for error. We can see from the paper that there was much skill and subtlety involved. It's probably one thing to run a sample here and there, and quite another to ram a bunch through with a team of antsy investigators on your back.
From the accuracy of the testing, to the qualifications of those performing the tests( as it pertains to education, a certificate program, or a guy off the street who could pass a job skills assessment), test collection and handling throughout, whether there was any redundancy in place, lab sterilization standards, etc...
There is much variation in the process. Probably too much for something this important. Most of this variation can be attributed to the human factor. I am full of questions, of course, and someone here may be able to answer.
1.)Would there be a scenario wherein a sample was tested and a borderline result was obtained? A result that couldn't definitively be classified as, for example, a '1' or '0' on a binary scale but instead yielded a result of '0.5' that looked like a vin diagram? Could two different individuals look at the same result and interpret in different ways?
2.)If a test failed to produce a satisfactory result, would enough testable material remain from the collected sample in order to perform an additional test?
3.)Is their any data present about potentiality of a false positive or false positive rates?
4.)If a search warrant was required to obtain a biological sample, or even in the case of a voluntary sample, how much of that information would be shared with LE? Would the same laws protecting privacy applied to medical records apply to these tests? The question concerns whether or not LE could potentially have in their possession any records regarding the tests performed or the results of them.
One thing that is worrisome is that anyone who has worked in production can tell you(and this echoes the sentiment expressed by Any of N) is that as volume goes up, standards invariably go down. We can only hope that there were enough trained and competent people around to competently perform these tests.