Revision history [back]
I followed the link but there’s nothing on the website which gives this method any more credibility than the numerous presence/absence tests for bacteria which are already available. Even if, as they claim, they are able to isolate faecal contamination by this method, unless something is published which shows how they might quantitatively relate their results to levels faecal contamination (equivalent to E. coli/100 ml). I can’t see this being a very useful addition to the analytical toolkit. We generally don’t go around condemning water supplies because of the presence of faecal contamination – we need at least a semi-quantitative method from which we can evaluate risk. In our context, we’re usually satisfied with levels of E. coli less than 10/100 ml.
Thanks for the link anyway. Perhaps someone might buy a kit and subject it to a thorough comparison with other methods…
I followed the link but there’s nothing on the website which gives this method any more credibility than the numerous presence/absence tests for bacteria which are already available. Even if, as they claim, they are able to isolate faecal contamination by this method, unless something is published which shows how they might quantitatively relate their results to levels faecal contamination (equivalent to E. coli/100 ml). I can’t see this being a very useful addition to the analytical toolkit. We generally don’t go around condemning water supplies because of the presence of faecal contamination – we need at least a semi-quantitative method from which we can evaluate risk. In our context, we’re usually satisfied with levels of E. coli less than 10/100 ml.
Thanks for the link anyway. Perhaps someone might buy a kit and subject it to a thorough comparison with other methods…
Regards,
Andrew