[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 14/07/96 22:46:01, Jon Rodgers writes:
>
> >If the answer is zero, then I would agree!
>
> The answer is not zero, we have had a true positive in the last five years.
> Having said that there are some false positives that require investigation.
> We would be better off chasing the HepB positives rather than the WR's.
>
> Trefor Roscoe
>
> [log in to unmask]
Or better still HIV's.
We aren't required to do them here for antenatal screens, what about the
UK??
Jon W
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|