Hi,

I failed to see the original communication on this.  Could you(s) give me
the protocol on this?  ]
Thanks,
Trisha
U of WA, Seattle

On -1 xxx -1, BB racing wrote:

> Greg,
>            Nice to hear from you, and that you are still happy with the
>alcohol/xylene processing method.  Also nice to hear that you have been
>able to use one to the xylene substitutes successfully.  I have several
>gallons of various substitutes sitting around my lab, but have never had
>the time to try any of them out, so now I don't need to.  Also nice to
>hear that you have encountered some technologists who are interested in
>trying out the technique.  There are no changes to the basic method, so
>feel free to disseminate the information to anyone who is interested.
>Since I presented this paper at the NSH convention some years ago, I have
>tried to have it published, but it has always been rejected for a whole
>host of reasons, ( "goes against generally accepted histological
>principals," "can't possibly work, water and xylene are not missible," "it
>would be to harsh for small delicate biopsies," "
>fixation/dehydration/clearing is excessive," " would over harden tissues,"
>"sectioning would be impossible," "would destroy tissue antigens," " too
>many non factual statements," "flawed reasoning," " too long" "insufficent
>references," "too informal a writing style,") ect, ect, so the manuscript
>sits in a box in my basement, but one day....
> Kerry Beebe
> Kelowna Gen Hospital
> Kelowna B.C. Canada.
> bbracing@silk.net
>
>
>

Trisha