Dear J Paul and Flowers, I read all your comments and I agree that the best solution is to educate. Anybody that teach flow cytometry knows how important is to educate and teach the students, fellows and even the PIs how to avoid mistakes. May be it requires a little more effort from our side and to be more proactive in this area. I believe that by destroying somebody furniture, we do not make our furniture looks better. Then, we should improve the training in flow Cytometry instead of playing some kind of "super flow-guru" and concentrating the knowledge in a few lucky guys. The education approach will be slow but at the end it will yield a very professional field and may be, it will put Cytometry at the same level as Molecular Biology or Immunology (?). May be, we are seeing right now the growing pains of the cytometry. If the post-publication-peer-review (PPPR) of a paper will be a need for improving and whipped out the "bad flow data", I suggest to the folks to have a look in Pediatrics (http://www.pediatrics.org/). Pediatrics has developed a PPPR site where you can comment about a paper or suggest new controls or changes in the paper. Your comments will be posted and the authors will have the opportunity to reply and post any answer that they have. May be Cytometry and the Editor will take this suggestion (Hi Jan, it is only more work for the web guys). Regards Rafael -- Rafael Nunez M.D. Associate Laboratory Member-Immunology Program Manager Flow Cytometry Core Facility Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Box 98, 1275 York Avenue New York, NY 10021 Telephone (212) 639-6392 Fax (917) 432-2333 E-mail: nunezr@mskcc.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 19:01:35 EST