2:00 you could not get the ideal biological samples like what you mentioned blood or urine, even the other tissues were not accessible, therefore hair which was accessible has been done… I accept all that.. Now my questions are this. No 1. The hair sample that was done has come down I think from hand to hand, over a period of several years. Maybe decades. So that itself is a matter of concern. As to how much contamination has not just been added.. but multiplied. Over a period of time. How are you sure that it is really in a flawless state from the time when it was cut, or clipped or whatever it is to the time it was analyzed. To the man of science, as a toxicologist I would say we could not be sure. You can say you are sure but you can’t convince me. Because the problem with metal analysis is … if I could draw a parallel with DNA analysis. Even the slightest doubt,
3:00 that there is contamination will make the whole test invalid. It is like that. DNA analysis as you know is supposed to be one of the best way to find some ID or biological substance or fluid.. But if there is even the slightest doubt raised by somebody that the tissue or the source of the biological sample is in doubt you cannot proceed further it’s as simple as that. So if there is the slightest doubt of the origin of the hair samples or the fact that it could be contaminated, whatever test you do subsequently is under a cloud. And if you look at that as if it is the ultimate that I’ve got, that proves my point… no I don’t agree. I don’t think and average man of science would agree because there are so many uncertain issues here. No 1. Because hair sample itself is not very good for hair analysis. No 2: The kind of method that was selected here, no I don’t agree it was really the best.
Audio: DrPillay_9783 – Length 9.29 – https://youtu.be/M_EzebjCjJs