RE: [Histonet] RE: QIHC change

From:"Morken, Tim - Labvision"


I'm not discounting the knowledge researchers have. I just don't think the
ASCP certification route  fits research. I pointed out that the ASCP, by
definition,  is intended soley for clinical diagnostic labs. It is not the
ASCP's fault that the research institutions are mis-using the ASCP
certification for their own in-house qualification standards. Certainly  it
would help researchers if there was a more general  certification, but is it
the ASCP's place to do that? I don't know. The ASCP  is an organization of
Clinical Pathology based in human diagnostics. Because of that the HT, HTL
and QIHC are all based on human clinical pathology diagnostic work.  I'm not
sure the ASCP would be interested in setting up a whole new testing
procedure for research. What if a person only does work in ferrets, or fish,
or snakes? Who looks at tests based on that work? There are many
similarities in procedures, and I'm confident a generalized test could be
designed. It simply a question of whether the ASCP is the organization to do
that.  I guess the research techs have to explore this with ASCP. But I don'
think you should blame ASCP for not accomodating research institutions when
that is not what they are concerned with. Remember, there are no regulatory
requirements at all covering the work  of research lab techs but there are
regulations covering who can do certain work in the diagnostic lab.  ASCP,
again by definition,  is only concerned with the diagnostic side. It has
nothing to do with whether one is "better" than another. There is no
"better" in this work, only differences in the work done. I also suggest
that you lobby your institution and show them how the ASCP certification may
not be fully applicable to what you do. 

Tim Morken

-----Original Message-----
From: Pamela Marcum [] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 9:56 AM
To: Morken, Tim - Labvision;
Subject: RE: [Histonet] RE: QIHC change

Hi Tim and Jamie,

I know Jamie and have for many years and you are right anyone would be 
happy to hire him for his experience in clinical or his current research 
position.  However, it is also true that now research positions are often 
asking for at least an HT or even HTL (ASCP) to fill position with 
histology as the main focus.  Yet we are given a set of criteria for tissue 
that often excludes animal research applicants from completing the 
practical easily.  I took my HT many years ago and I was told that even in 
a research position (and I had a BS at the time) it would improve my salary 
and increase me to higher level in the university if I got my HT.  I was 
told not to use animal tissue (1976) as no one reading the exam could 
properly read them.  Now we have veterinary person there and tissue 
requirements can still eliminate some people or make it almost impossible 
to complete the practical with out help in procurement.  Why should that 
happen to some one attempting to improve their position within the 
histology community?

My real problem with what you said about the QIHC is that I would also like 
to take it and can not qualify either.  Yet those of us in research are 
often finding the very antibodies and test methods companies and 
diagnostics later fight to get or learn.  We are exempt in your mind and 
ASCP's even though research is what you depend on often for advances.  I 
have never and will never understand this logic and exempt status for those 
of us  who chose not to be clinical.  We are still often required to have 
or get ASCP status as a way to advance and prove we know our field.  ASCP 
needs to get up to date on the fields it is registering or make new 
categories for those of still contribute to clinical advances every year.

Sorry if sounds like I am picking on you Tim.   I just don't see how we are 
required to be registered on one hand for acceptance (even NSH likes to see 
it) and discounted on the other.

Pam Marcum
UPENN Vet School
New Bolton Center
Kennett Square, PA 19384

At 12:07 PM 11/16/2005, Morken, Tim - Labvision wrote:
>Jamie, It seems from what you say that you are working in a research 
>lab. Is that correct? My understanding about the ASCP certification is 
>that it is aimed at providing a modicum of proof that a person is 
>qualified to work in a medical diagnostic lab. Research labs are not  
>considered diagnostic labs. As you imply, a person in a research lab 
>will often work on only a limited sample set. Therefore, it is 
>meaningless to apply the the ASCP standard to research people.
>  If you are planning to move into the diagnostic field, then I'll bet 
>you could easily find a job in a diagnostic lab, get the experience, 
>and qualify to take the test. It may be that some diagnostic labs have 
>a suggested requirement to be ASCP certified as a QIHC, but the vast 
>majority would be happy to find someone with the experience you 
>outline, even if they had not previously worked in a diagnositc lab.
>Tim Morken
>Lab Vision - Neomarkers
>Free webhosting for US State Histotechnology Societies: 
>-----Original Message-----
>[] On Behalf Of James 
>Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 7:28 AM
>Subject: RE: [Histonet] RE: QIHC change
>This is my point.  With the requirements listed below someone with 25 
>years of experience doing immuno (single, double, triple antibody 
>staining, making own antibodies, and in situ Hybridization: all with 
>and without using kits, all with and without using an automated 
>stainer) is not qualified for this certification if they work in a 
>research facility where immunophenotyping is not done. There is no 
>system of doing it on your own to prove that you have the capability to 
>do immunophenotyping in order to fullfil this requirement. I guess it 
>is time to start harrassing ASCP about the unfairness of this system.
> >From almost always sunny San Diego
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: on behalf of 
>         Sent: Wed 11/16/2005 5:55 AM
>         To:
>         Cc:
>         Subject: [Histonet] RE: QIHC change
>         James, to qualify for the qualification you take the 50 
>question test
>         and submit an employer reference form + of course satisfy one of
>         three routes.  There is no practical to submit anymore.  I 
>think that is
>         what you are asking.  It seems to me that it wouldn't matter about
>         specificity antigens/markers or what diseases or human cells.  
>There is
>         no requirement other than what is requested on the employer 
>         form which you can't see the details until you order and 
>receive your
>         packet. Is it possible for anyone to post a copy of the employer
>         reference form.  From the ASCP website this is what it says "
>         Qualification in Immunohistochemistry
>         Experience requirements
>         Applicants must have experience in the following areas
>             * Immunohistochemical and Immunofluorescence Preparation
>               All of the following should have been performed by the 
>                   o staining technique
>                   o selection of proper control material
>                   o titration of immunologic reagents
>             * Immunophenotyping
>               in at least one of the following applications
>                   o immunodeficiencies
>                   o immunoproliferative disorders (neoplastic and 
>         disorders)
>                   o transplantation biopsies
>                   o other immunophenotyping applications
>                     please specify: ______________________
>             * Quality Assurance
>               The applicant should have participated in Quality Assurance
>         related to all of the following
>                   o specimen fixation, processing, microtomy
>                   o reagent selection, preparation, storage, disposal
>                   o method selection, validation, documentation
>                   o quality control
>                   o safety
>         "  This is the experience which I am assuming is only 
>documented for the
>         ASCP through the employer reference form, hence if you only do 
>A and C
>         and not B you can't qualify unless your employer is dishonest on
>         form. Because even if you crosstrain into what I assume is flow
>         cytometry but don't actually work it day to day as part of 
>your job you
>         do not qualify because you have not had experience doing it for a
>         minimun of 12 months.  As for research, same thing if you do 
>all of it
>         every day then your good to go.  If not it is a grey or is it 
>gray area
>         that I'm looking more information/details on.  In the past you
>         qualified your work with different immuno stains as a practical ,
>         don't remember there being a flow requirement.  Maybe I'm wrong
>         anyone have this info I'm looking for.
>         G Hurlburt HT(ASCP)
>         sunny and warm NC
>         _______________________________________________
>         Histonet mailing list
>Histonet mailing list

Histonet mailing list

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>