Micro Imaging Technology Inc (MMTC)

[Top Penny]

MUST READ DD ARTICLE. PLEASE READ THIS ARTICE IN THE LINK I HAVE POSTED BELOW AS IT WILL ELIMINATE ALL CONCERN TO ANY DOUBTERS. I HAVE POSTED EXCERPTS OF WHAT I FELT WERE KEY POINTS IN THE ARTICLE. PLEASE CLICK LINK ON BOTTOM BELOW EXCERPTS TO READ FULL ARTICLE.

INTERESTING EXCERPTS:

1.Most rapid methods can be done in a few minutes to a few hours, so they are more rapid than traditional methods. But, in food analysis, rapid methods still lack sufficient sensitivity and specificity for direct testing; hence, foods still need to be culture-enriched before analysis.

2.Evaluations of rapid methods show that some perform better in some foods than others. This can be attributed mostly to interference by food components, some of which can be especially troublesome for the technologies used in rapid methods. For example, an ingredient can inhibit DNA hybridization or Taq polymerase, but has no effect on antigen-antibody interactions and the converse situation may also occur (12). Since method efficiencies may be food dependent, it is advisable to perform comparative studies to ensure that a particular assay will be effective in the analysis of that food type

3.The specificity of DNA based assays is dictated by short probes; hence, a positive result, for instance with a probe or primers specific for a toxin gene, only indicates that bacteria with those gene sequences are present and that they have the potential to be toxigenic. But, it does not indicate that the gene is actually expressed and that the toxin is made. Likewise, in clostridial and staphylococcal intoxication, DNA probes and PCR can detect only the presence of cells, but are of limited use in detecting the presence of preformed toxins (12).

4.Currently, there are at least 30 assays each for testing for E. coli O157:H7 and for Salmonella. Such a large number of options can be confusing and overwhelming to the user, but, more importantly, has limited the effective evaluation of these methods. As a result, only few methods have been officially validated for use in food testing (1,11).

5.As a rapid method is used more frequently, its benefits and at the same time, its limitations also become more apparent. This section only briefly described some of the rapid method formats and selected problems encountered when using these assays in food analysis. However, because of the complex designs and formats of these tests, coupled with the difficulties of testing foods, users must exercise caution when selecting rapid methods and to also evaluate these tests thoroughly, as some may be more suitable than others for distinct testing situations or for assaying certain types of food. Lastly, technology continues to advance at a great pace and next generation assays, such as biosensors (18) and DNA chips (32) already are being developed that potentially have the capability for near real-time and on-line monitoring of multiple pathogens in foods.

******LOOK AT THE CHART AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ARTICLE AND NOTE 3M™ Petrifilm™ Plates WONDER MACHINE (NOT!!) IS INCLUDED IN THE CHART******

NOT INCLUDED IN THE CHART IS THE REVOLUTIONARY MIT1000A...WHICH USES CLEAN WATER LIGHT SCATTERING NOTHING LIKE IT CURRENTLY WE ARE ABOUT TO ROCK THE MARKET! HIGHLY ACCURATE! THIS THING IS GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE AND DESTROY ALL OF THESE METHODS. THE ARTICLE BASICIALLY SAYS THAT WHILE ALL OF THESE ARE OK AT BEST IT IS BY NO MEANS A FINAL MEANS OF ASSURING SAFETY IN FOOD. GUESS WHAT WILL BE THE MIT1000A. READ AND ENJOY! I WANT MORE SHARES AFTER READING THIS. WE ARE GOING TO SCREAM IN 2012 PEOPLE! ALL IN MY HUMBLE OPINION....BUT I HAVE A FEELING I AM SO 100% SPOT ON. HERE IS THE FULL ARTICLE POSTED IN THE LINK BELOW. ENJOY EVERYONE!
ALL IN MY HUMBLE OPINION OF COURSE!!!!


http://www.fda.gov/food/scienceresearch/laboratorymethods/bacteriologicalanalyticalmanualbam/ucm109652.htm