[ Home | Contents | Search Q&A | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Robert Swotinsky, MD
Password: orange
Date: 24 Aug 2009
Time: 18:38:50 -0700
Remote Name: 98.229.131.90
The laboratory could have treated this as a fatal flaw, but instead proceeded with enough of the analysis to identify the presence of oxidizing adulterants. It sounds like the lab has not identified the presence of any specific oxidizing adulterant. If the lab HAD identified a specific adulterant it would have reported that finding, e.g., glutaraldeyde detected, pyridine chlorochromate detected. Instead, the result of this test is invalid. (This contrasts to the subject line of this thread, which incorrectly refers to the result as "positive" for oxidizing adulterants.") Review the invalid finding and notify the employer that the test is cancelled and whether the donor should be immediately retested under direct observation. If direct observation, don't forget it's the new "strip search" direct observation procedure.