Comments on: Chemistry is not above the law

By: convert

convert — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 02:24:03 +0000

This is truly scary. If people get convicted based on a TLC trace, there is no hope…

By: aldehyde

aldehyde — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:13:14 +0000

All the drug/forensics labs I go to stay on top of tuning and their MS stay in pretty good shape. The other labs I go to? Not so much.

By: psi*psi

psi*psi — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 05:30:12 +0000

yes! this was my experience too.

By: Chemjobber

Chemjobber — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:12:46 +0000

Fair enough — I didn’t know that.

By: scrooge mcduck

scrooge mcduck — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:11:47 +0000

Having worked in an australian gov analytical institution I must say that (at least over here) it’s just not true that analytical labs use old, unvalidated and uncalibrated instrumentation and end up with dodgy results. Analytical labs are certified by some national accreditation authority and get subjected to various audits to make sure those results aren’t just random MS noise. And these guys take this stuff very seriously! Validations are done (over here…) internally (and thoroughly and regularly), so results are supposed to be traceable to NIST or BIPM standards.
Maybe you haven’t worked much with analytical chemists and don’t fully realise the heights of pedantic detail these guys are capable of and actually WILLING to go to. If analytical labs were staffed by organic chemists your ideas would be quite right though!

\am not analytical chemist…think they are a bit nuts.

By: Uncle Al

Uncle Al — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:42:43 +0000

Uncle Al was polite in deference to the Blog holder. Manners matter. The original reference is Occidental Research Corporation and “send in the lab nigger”, that having been Uncle Al.

One of Oxy’s many triumphs was starting with ~500 lbs of coal and through oxidation to benzene polycarboxylic acids, decarboxylation and isomerization (specifically without Uncle Al’s catalyst)to terephthalate, purification, polymerization, extrusion and weaving… presenting Armand Hammer with a small polyester handkerchief – from coal! Off the books, a 25 pound tub of Amoco terephthalic acid disappeared into the brew-ha-ha (seed crystals?).

If you are making terephthalic acid from coal (you poor bastard lab nigger), screw Henckel catalysis with cadmium salts,

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja01579a043

Copper (I), specifically CuCN, is simply amazing as a starting point. Before Uncle Al, catalyst assay was 5/week in an autoclave bunker. After Uncle Al, catalyst assay was 12/day in a fume hood, same reaction conditions (know thy Swagelok catalog and keep it wholly). Analytical screamed. Pookie pookie.

By: RB Woodweird

RB Woodweird — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:33:02 +0000

“chigger”?

I never thought the Internet PC Cadre would get to Uncle Al.

A moment of silence, please, everyone.

By: psi*psi

psi*psi — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:54:18 +0000

While this isn’t so much the case in academic labs (it pained me to watch what some students put the shared-use GCMS at my last school through), IME analytical labs tend to baby the instruments they use, even the old ones–they’re calibrated frequently and well maintained. The MS methods used by the environmental lab I worked at involved a lot of standards, and the fragment ions/GC peaks/retention times for these were carefully monitored–if things didn’t look right, the column had to be cut or replaced. As far as external validation, we used external standards–of known value with each run, and of UNknown value (unless you were the QC officer) quarterly as a proficiency test for the analyst. Of course, we weren’t a forensic lab–and a lot of their methods (like the microscopy a friend of mine was doing) don’t seem to lend themselves to quantification easily. A lot of state forensic labs are probably in decent shape because what they do gets lumped in with law enforcement, and therefore they get money–it being political suicide to not include throwing money at the cops in the budget and all.

By: NMR Slave

NMR Slave — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:02:52 +0000

It sounds more like they are finally moving beyond the CSI crazy.

If the person collecting evidence can be examined, why not the person who does the tests?

By: Uncle Al

Uncle Al — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:17:34 +0000

Look up the hourly rate for court-admitted expert witnesses. You could pull five figures/year for polishing your suit pants in witness stands while learnedly, sonorously eructating freshman analytical lab.

No more classes,
No more books,
No more HR dirty looks.

There are remarkable benefits (e.g., multitudinous tax-exempt reimbursements) to being your own corporation. Just one thing… The legal profession refers to expert witnesses as “whores.” It’s better than being a lab chigger! A whore keeps its dignity, at least comparatively.

Google
“expert witness” whore 9440 hits