[Histonet] Histonet] Re: Embedding process etc.

Amos Brooks amosbrooks <@t> gmail.com
Fri Aug 26 22:05:15 CDT 2011

     That was a good article. I really do hope I am not the only one that
was just mortified at the high numbers of bad sections being produced. Once
in a while on a bit of difficult tissue is one thing, but consistent poor
quality is inexcusable. Come to think of it that was actually a rather
depressing article.


On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:00 PM,
<histonet-request <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>wrote:

> Message: 13
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:36:15 -0400
> From: Bob Richmond <rsrichmond <@t> gmail.com>
> Subject: [Histonet] Re: Embedding process etc.
> To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> Message-ID:
>        <CAOKsRH6BBMkqLZEVCY=E4BkSWXz6AcRSy3oTRX+F1ob-TKt4Cw <@t> mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Bill O'Donnell observes:
> >>I once worked for a very demanding pathologist and because of his
> expectations, the whole crew put out near perfection. Pathologists that are
> "OK" with what they get, so long as they can make a diagnosis, are a huge
> part of that problem.<<
> I very much agree, though I've often been guilty as charged. Edwards
> Deming - whom of course American MBA's learn to ridicule - was very
> much concerned with constant feedback, and constant attention to
> fixing little problems before they turn into big problems.
> The histotechnologist who never looks at a slide and the pathologist
> who is afraid to complain about unsatisfactory work are two sides of
> the same problem.
> This month's Journal of Histotechnology has an article about quality
> assurance of GI biopsies that everyone concerned with this issue
> should read. I'll try to get review of it onto Histonet.
> Bob Richmond
> Samurai Pathologist
> Knoxville TN

More information about the Histonet mailing list