Thank you, mprice, for your intelligent assessment of yet another
secret commercial product. Having signed the Geneva Convention (20th
Century hippocratic oath that doesn't exclude surgeons but is 
still pro-life) I assert that there is no place for secrecy in any
procedure that might result in more efficient diagnosis.

A commercial product is ethically OK if the claim is, "Here is our
kit for XXXXXX. It contains pre-weighed ingredients and instructions 
for the method of X%X%XX and we have tested it. If you buy it you will
probably save yourself a lot of troublesome work and testing. Here
is an exact description of the kit, with literature references and
notes on our company's minor improvements."

Who could defend using a kit or trade-name that is any less explicit?

 John A. Kiernan MB, ChB, PhD, DSc, MRCS, LRCP,
 Professor,  Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology,
 The University of Western Ontario,
 LONDON,  Canada  N6A 5C1
______________________________________________________________

On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, cmcorp wrote:

> The formula for Declere is proprietary and confidential at this time since
> Declere is patent pending. It appears to be a matter of speculation by Ms.
> Price as to its composition. 
> 
> We at Cell Marque would invite comparison of results using whatever
> formulation one may care to mix. Our own experience suggests that
> concentration of reagents in the retrieval solutions is critical to the
> results obtained. 
> 
> I would suggest that those who are interested, do there own studies
> comparing Declere versus M. Price's formulation. 

__________________________________