"JEDilworth" <bactitech from hortonsbay.com> wrote in message
news:-a6dnVf12IOyRWbUnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d from buckeye-express.com...
> Sorry about the duplicate posts. We had to get a new computer and I just
> set up newsgroups with the ISP. I didn't think the messages had gone out
> so I kept trying.
>> I think the days of the "real" microbiologists will be gone in another
> generation. Our laboratory has rapidly, and quite rightly so, embraced new
> molecular technology for a number of tests. We are adding on more and will
> soon be testing for Campylobacter in stools via PCR and not on culture
> plates any more. We had added the new PNA FISH testing to our "rapid"
> testing to determine if septic patients with gram positive cocci in
> clusters in positive blood cultures have Staph. aureus or not within a
> couple of hours after discovering the positive. Differentiating this from
> coagulase negative Staph. (which is most usually a contaminant) can save
> hospitals and patients about three days in the hospital. The list goes on.
>> I learned my reactions on tubed media. Most of our newer techs have seen a
> few tubed reactions, and memorize ImVic's for the registry, but the
> reality is that Vitek2 is doing the bulk of our identifications for gram
> negatives (and other bugs) in a few hours in 64 well cards that are read
> automatically. Microbes are characterized now not by their biochemicals
> but their genetics.
>> Yes, Larry, we are becoming has-beens.
>> N10 - thanks so much for the compliment. They were talking about getting
> rid of Vi and just using Poly+Vi to screen, but I "mentioned" that without
> Vi by itself you wouldn't know if the Poly+Vi agglutination was due to
> Poly or Vi. The Vi is staying.
>> Judy Dilworth, M.T. (ASCP)
> Microbiology
>>> "Larry Farrell" <farrlarr from isu.edu> wrote in message
> news:xitKl.4155$0S.1002 from newsfe22.iad...>>>> Ah, we are all going to Hell in a handbasket!!
>>
Judy :) you are more than welcome to loads of compliments and thanks for
the dialogue on Vi...if I have any more kids Im gonna call one Vi ...that
wont happen because of the vasectomy lol so maybe my next cat will called
Vi :)
Anyway this is an interesting thread to me an as employer of
microbiologists.
I would have to report the IQ of candidate microbiologists seems observably
up over ( as it does for most eductated young people) the last decade but
actual knowledge of microbiology and the ability to think ones way out of a
microbiological waste bag seems down in my estimate ; which seems to agree
with the kit culture model.
Im really fortunate I have three real Microbilogists in my Diagnostic
section ( Food Microbiology). They all have 13 years experience with my
Company and I would have to say that they unequivocabley know their job
100 % inside out. They are so good they leave auditors and me
speechless...Im blessed. These days we simply cannot employ people like
them unless its a blue moon or an eight day week !
Im all for creating jobs in Science for almost anyone but the trend to
"off the shelf" technologies for critical measurments really focuses the
need for good scientists capable of producing robust validations of such
systems prior to adoption. Fortunately in Europe and certainly in the UK
the Food microbiological industry is higly regulated by the requirment for
laboratories to obtain accredition to BS EN 17025. For any methodolgy to be
approved under this regime requires a robust validation and demonstartion
of personnel competance against measurable standards and external audits
of proficiency. Under such rigors useless kits, methods,technologies and
sometimes people tend to disappear. So it seems atleast in some areas of
microbiology there is a compensating mechanism for shallowness.
An area of interest to me is that of Diagnostic confidence in the end
user of diagnistic information. In the medical field ( not mine) I perceive
extreme proficiency and confidence in the result obtained with modern
analytical techniques ( as you report). In my own country, in realtion to
food microbiology, we ineveitabley get into massive debates of whether or
not the correct result has been obtained with a given new technique be it
PCR,Vitek identification or the use of monoclonal Latex agglutination
systems when a event occurs threatening Public health. For some reason (
even none microbiologists ) seem to gravitate towards confirmation of
pathogens, obtained by any route, via pure culture isolation and
conventional or classical microbiological identification technologies. I
would have to admit Im on that boat too.
N10 M.Sc,B.Sc.Mi.biol.Ci.biol...grade III piano :)
