ChatterBank0 min ago
pcr
6 Answers
I run a PCR test for an infectious disease. When the negative control is contaminated and reads positive, my boss wants to release results any way instead of invalidating the run. He wants to Repcr teh samples instead of re-extract them.
Any comments any one about this?
Thank you in advance for any imput.
Floppy
Any comments any one about this?
Thank you in advance for any imput.
Floppy
Answers
1 to 6 of 6
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lauraCasenav. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
PCR is a process whereby a small sample is "amplified" so that tests can be run.
Typically used in forensic DNA tests where the samllest samples can be reproduced so that comparisom tests can be run. (It's been contraversial in the past)
A contaminated sample can read positive and it was this that was used to obliterate the DNA evidence in the OJ Simpson trial.
In this instance the suggestion is to use the original sample and re-run the proceudure to amplify them rather than start again from scratch and get new original samples.
Now it's not my area but I'd say it depends on
a) Whether or not you can be sure where the contamination occured.
b) What the consequences of error are - is it "saefty critical" for example
Typically used in forensic DNA tests where the samllest samples can be reproduced so that comparisom tests can be run. (It's been contraversial in the past)
A contaminated sample can read positive and it was this that was used to obliterate the DNA evidence in the OJ Simpson trial.
In this instance the suggestion is to use the original sample and re-run the proceudure to amplify them rather than start again from scratch and get new original samples.
Now it's not my area but I'd say it depends on
a) Whether or not you can be sure where the contamination occured.
b) What the consequences of error are - is it "saefty critical" for example
Thanks for your help, for myriad2112, In my opinion the run with a contaminated control (neg control that shows a positive) should be discarded and all sample should be repeated. I think that they should be repeated using the same original sample and starting with DNA aisolation. But instead only the contaminated control is reamplified and if the new result is NEG then the original run is accepted. Hope this clarify my original question.
Tx
Tx
-- answer removed --
Without knowing the exact nature of the work that you do and the facilities available, I can give you only a general opinion on this one.
Put it like this: if your manager followed the policy he expects of you in my university laboratories, he'd be out of the door before his feet touched the ground. To my mind, he badly needs re-training as he cannot see the implications of what he's doing.
For most purposes, the method you suggest is more reliable.
Put it like this: if your manager followed the policy he expects of you in my university laboratories, he'd be out of the door before his feet touched the ground. To my mind, he badly needs re-training as he cannot see the implications of what he's doing.
For most purposes, the method you suggest is more reliable.
1 to 6 of 6
