[Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers

[John Steel]

The Dako Eridan was never released, thus is a moot point, and agree that the current open platform Dako offers is very flexible for a variety of uses - with a caveat.  Different instruments require different levels of IHC experience, IHC confort level, and who pre-screens stained slides prior to passing on to the pathologist or PI.  There are many out in histo-land that perform and interpret IHC that are well qualified to do so - and there are others that are not.  There is NO instrument on the market that is capable of screening clinical assays - no vendor is there yet.  Would you want a nonCLIA/CAP approved lab to diagnose your family's specimen?  The certifications are in place for a reason.  Granted, research is different, although would you bet your grant submission or renewal on an untested improvisation???  It is called research for a reason, but I believe consistancy, reproducibility, and reliability is the hallmark of research and IHC.

Best regards,
Jerry




________________________________
From: Larry Woody <slappycraw <@t> yahoo.com>
To: John Steel <steely0511 <@t> yahoo.com>; Amos Brooks <amosbrooks <@t> gmail.com>; sprice2003 <@t> gmail.com; "histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 6:01:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers


Dako doesn't even manufacture an IHC stainer unless you count the Eridan which was a failure. The instrument that they distribute is manufactured by Lab Vision/ now Thermo Shandon and hardly a dinosaur. If a person doesn't know the theory behind doing IHC or can't perform IHC on the bench then they really have no business doing IHC by any machine. I don't care how idiot proof they make an instrument there are still times when you have to improvise especially in the research field which requires a more open type platform. In research we do so many different types antibodies with everything from A-Z when it comes to AR, and methodology that an open platform is essential. The idiot proof machines have a niche but it's not in research.


Larry A. Woody
Seattle, Wa.




________________________________
From: John Steel <steely0511 <@t> yahoo.com>
To: Amos Brooks <amosbrooks <@t> gmail.com>; sprice2003 <@t> gmail.com; "histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 2:43:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers

Perhaps, you need to ask this professional's level of comfort in performing IHC...

Best regards,
Jerry




________________________________
From: Amos Brooks <amosbrooks <@t> gmail.com>
To: sprice2003 <@t> gmail.com; "histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 5:06:54 PM
Subject: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers

No Way!!
  Just because there are new gadgets & gizmos on the newer instruments
doesn't make them better. Versatility = Simplicity! Taking an instrument
that works GREAT off the market just because there are newer ones that are
all limited is dumb. We should follow Darwin and see the natural selection
process through. More complicated systems are often more buggy (... see M$
Vista for example). Bells & Whistles are not selling points. Consistency &
Versatility are.

Gettin off my soapbox...
Amos


Message: 23
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:35:55 -0500
From: "Sally Price" <sprice2003 <@t> gmail.com>
Subject: [Histonet] RE: Dako and Leica immunostainers
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu, JCBRITTON <@t> cheshire-med.com,
      jaustin1967 <@t> gmail.com, godsgalnow <@t> aol.com,
      trathborne <@t> somerset-healthcare.com
Message-ID:
      <ffd26fa80811201535y446dfc74l8f12f0ef092ac810 <@t> mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

All,
After reading this thread I just had offer my comments.  I'm not a big fan
of systems that do the dewax and AR, primarily because it costs way too much
to automate these steps.  I've never used the Bond, but I hear that you've
gotta put some plastic thingy - that probably costs too much - on top of
each slide, you gotta use their detection reagents - which probably
cost more than other companies, they charge you for empty barcoded
reagent containers, all the slides in the same tray have to use the same
detection reagents - which means that the continuous-feed feature has some
serious limits, it can't do double-stains, and they have less than 50
IVD-approved antbodies.  Can someone verify for me if all this issues are
true?  If so, why would someone want one of these stainers?  The Dako
stainer is a dinosaur and with all the newre/better ones available,
they should probably take it off the market.
Cheers,
Sally
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet




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