[Microbiology] Re: Want to join this milis

N10 via microbio%40net.bio.net (by limbic_lesion from hotmail.com)
Tue May 19 18:34:05 EST 2009


"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 :)




















More information about the Microbio mailing list