[Histonet] Histonet Digest, Vol 153, Issue 1

[Steve McClain]

I agree w Dr. Richmond. 
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 17:43:20 -0400
> From: Bob Richmond <rsrichmond at gmail.com>
> To: "Histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
>    <histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Histonet] B-5 Fixative
> Message-ID:
>    <CAOKsRH6g8rOUsicFDp5GKPeAYJeFb+Gyw1iXGxSC14138gs3ZA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> Jillian A. Russell, HT (ASCP)CM, QIHCCM, Supervisor, CDx Histology
> Operations, R&D at Dako in Carpinteria CA asks:
> 
>>> I am wondering how many labs are using B-5 fixatives and how many are
> using B-5 alternatives due to the mercury issue? - For those who have
> switched to an alternative, have you noticed many differences from the
> traditional B-5 fixative?<<
> 
> This is a very controversial topic. B-5 fixative contains a large quantity
> of mercuric chloride, along with formaldehyde, and you really can't use it
> any more. I gave up B-5 and Zenker's fixatives very reluctantly.
> 
> My personal opinion is that B-5 substitutes are no improvement on neutral
> buffered formalin, and may compromise immunostains (which often specify NBF
> fixation).
> 
> Bob Richmond
>