D
dbrower
Guest
MagillaGorilla wrote:
> > Well, no. Your "~.005%" is off. A lot. In a study by the National Academy of
> > Sciences, they found that just contamination of the glassware used in the tests
> > causes a false positive rate of 3-5%. Furthermore, those tests will show positives
> > for illegal drugs if the testee has used any number of over the counter medications
> > or such things as anti-depressants, heart, ulcer or diabetes medication.
>
> Not true. Ask Catlin aty UCLA and he'll tell you why this doesn't
> apply to his lab.
Excellent, let's play "Appeal-to-Authority!"
When it's clear that Catlin's lab would have declared Landis' IRMS/CIR
results negative, what will you say?
-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.
> > Well, no. Your "~.005%" is off. A lot. In a study by the National Academy of
> > Sciences, they found that just contamination of the glassware used in the tests
> > causes a false positive rate of 3-5%. Furthermore, those tests will show positives
> > for illegal drugs if the testee has used any number of over the counter medications
> > or such things as anti-depressants, heart, ulcer or diabetes medication.
>
> Not true. Ask Catlin aty UCLA and he'll tell you why this doesn't
> apply to his lab.
Excellent, let's play "Appeal-to-Authority!"
When it's clear that Catlin's lab would have declared Landis' IRMS/CIR
results negative, what will you say?
-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.