[Histonet] honey as a formalin substitute

[Rittman, Barry R]

Rene
I was in process of also commenting on this paper to the Journal but perhaps here is as important.

Rene - I agree with all the points that you have written.
To me the images of their formalin fixed tissue do not represent any acceptable level of fixation anywhere I have worked. 
The major problem that I have is that this journal is peer reviewed is it not? My question then is who reviewed this? Based on the article I personally would not have accepted this in its current form for publication - based on the images alone, let alone the other points. 
I am not familiar with the work of the authors but even if they are new to the field I believe that when any papers are submitted for publication they should receive a critical review. This is in everyone's interest. It encourages authors to look very critically at their submitted work and lets them know how their peers will look at the articles.
People should be given every encouragement to submit papers but should also be prepared for a very critical review. We all have tunnel vision when we write papers and benefit from others reviewing these.
Just my opinion also.
Barry

-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Rene J Buesa
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 11:30 AM
To: Olszewski, Dawn; histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] honey as a formalin substitute

Dawn:
  The article was published in the Journal of Histotechnology, September 2006 issue (vol.29, No.3, pages 173-9).
   
  I read the article and was not really impressed by it because:
  1-the honey used came from a source that would not be readily available to everybody, which means that tests with other types/sources of honey will be necessary;
  2-there are no comparative methods, no statistical analysis of the results or documented comparisons with standard procedures, and
  3- if to substantiate the results we have to judge by the photomicrographs, they are of a very poor quality and what reflect is poor processing. That poor processing could be due to the processing protocol itself or to the fixation the authors claim to have perfomed with honey.
  If that is the case, the procedure does not seem to be very promising. I would have require the authors to rewrite some aspects of the paper before publication.
  Just my opinion based in what I read.
  René J.

"Olszewski, Dawn" <Dawn.Olszewski <@t> SGMC.ORG> wrote:
  Help!!!
We have a student in our lab who has been asked to write a summary of the article "The effectiveness of honey as a substitute for formalin in the histological fixation of tissue". Has anyone read this article ( or know where this article can be found) or know anything about this subject matter? If so, any and all info would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. 

Dawn Olszewski
SGMC 
Valdosta, Ga
dawn.olszewski <@t> sgmc.org

_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet




 		
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet