In article <1992Mar24.135429.20934 at doc.ic.ac.uk> ajt at doc.ic.ac.uk (Tony Travis) writes:
---- stuff deleted ----
>>What about bionet.confocal ;-)
>> Tony
>
Actually, it seems to me that something like bionet.microscopy might
be a good idea. I've been thinking about this for a while. There
doesn't seem to be a group on the topic and there really should
be some forum to discuss various problem encountered in microscopic
research and how different folks get around them. It strikes me
that a group just on confocals might be a bit too limited right
now, there just ain't enough of 'em out there, but a group on all
aspects of microscopy from LM to TEM to LSCM might work. Anyway,
I like the idea of mixing things up because after my experiences
with a confocal scope the old boundaries don't seem as fixed as they
use to be. For example, who would of thought that the confocal
microscope would bring back the old clearing techniques and paraffin
histology - *well* - I bet they will (especially for me).
Well, what does everybody else think?
Must run,
Be well -
Michael
________________________________________________________________________
/\/\/\/-
Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
_______________________________________________________________________________
M.W.Folsom/Biology/UNM/Albuqueerque,NM87131/505.277.4228/mwfolsom at unmvm.unm.edu
