The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Guest on 16.02.13 10:40

@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.

In that case you would have to assume that no-one ever bled in the other apartments or Robert Murats house. Even after clean up or washing clothes in biological powder the dogs can still find blood. So no blood ever in these places, just apartment 5a?

Secondly, Eddie alerted in places Keela didn't so he must have been alerting to cadaver scent. Keela did not find blood in the bedroom and no alert, yet Eddie signalled by barking near the wardrobe.

As I said two different methods of alerting...



'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'.
The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by bobbin on 16.02.13 10:47

@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.

snipped from your previous posting
Keela was trained to freeze exclusively to blood - again from a dead or living person. She was not trained to bark.
snipped
Martin Grime is very careful to use the word 'Live' not 'living'.
Live and living.
Live means 'alive' at the time the blood was shed.
Fresh blood is not dried blood.
Fresh blood is living, dried blood is dead. Dogs not recognising the smell of fresh blood.
Living person, alive at the time does not mean 'living now'.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Leafylane on 16.02.13 11:03

@bobbin wrote:
@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.

snipped from your previous posting
Keela was trained to freeze exclusively to blood - again from a dead or living person. She was not trained to bark.
snipped
Martin Grime is very careful to use the word 'Live' not 'living'.
Live and living.
Live means 'alive' at the time the blood was shed.
Fresh blood is not dried blood.
Fresh blood is living, dried blood is dead. Dogs not recognising the smell of fresh blood.
Living person, alive at the time does not mean 'living now'.

Martin Grime's statement they can alert to ''dried blood from a live human being'' seems pretty unambiguous to me. And surely the dogs proved him to be correct when they both alerted to the key fob. Forensics found Gerry McCanns blood on it - therefore proving they had correctly alerted to dried blood from a living person.

Leafylane

Posts : 19
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by bobbin on 16.02.13 11:22

@Leafylane wrote:
@bobbin wrote:
@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.

snipped from your previous posting
Keela was trained to freeze exclusively to blood - again from a dead or living person. She was not trained to bark.
snipped
Martin Grime is very careful to use the word 'Live' not 'living'.
Live and living.
Live means 'alive' at the time the blood was shed.
Fresh blood is not dried blood.
Fresh blood is living, dried blood is dead. Dogs not recognising the smell of fresh blood.
Living person, alive at the time does not mean 'living now'.

Martin Grime's statement they can alert to ''dried blood from a live human being'' seems pretty unambiguous to me. And surely the dogs proved him to be correct when they both alerted to the key fob. Forensics found Gerry McCanns blood on it - therefore proving they had correctly alerted to dried blood from a living person.

Gerry McCann might well be still alive but his daughter, according to the forensic anaylsis of material's indicated by the dogs, is not.
Hence Martin Grimes, use of the word 'Live' and not 'living'. He is allowing for the fact that dried blood from a 'live' human being can be indicative of a dead person as well as a living one.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Guest on 16.02.13 11:28

The EVRD dog Barks when finding cadaver scent, if it were blood he would freeze.

From the TRAINING section of Martin Grimes report...

Pavlov's theory is used in the
case of the E.V.R.D. system of alert. He has been 'conditioned' to give a
verbal alert when coming into contact with 'dead body scent'


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by sami on 16.02.13 11:32

@bobbin wrote:
@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.

snipped from your previous posting
Keela was trained to freeze exclusively to blood - again from a dead or living person. She was not trained to bark.
snipped
Martin Grime is very careful to use the word 'Live' not 'living'.
Live and living.
Live means 'alive' at the time the blood was shed.
Fresh blood is not dried blood.
Fresh blood is living, dried blood is dead. Dogs not recognising the smell of fresh blood.
Living person, alive at the time does not mean 'living now'.


And a cadaver is always dead. Of course Gerry McCann may disagree.

sami

Posts : 965
Reputation : 53
Join date : 2012-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Woofer on 16.02.13 11:33

Leafylane - nail clippings have not gone through decomposition so would not get an alert.

____________________
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear - Jiddu Krishnamurti
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Ribisl on 16.02.13 11:36

@Leafylane wrote:

Martin Grime's statement they can alert to ''dried blood from a live human being'' seems pretty unambiguous to me. And surely the dogs proved him to be correct when they both alerted to the key fob. Forensics found Gerry McCanns blood on it - therefore proving they had correctly alerted to dried blood from a living person.

I think you are right in saying that Keela cannot distinguish whether the source of the blood sample is alive or deceased. That's why Eddie went in first to locate traces of cadaver scent before Keela went in search for the existence of human blood. It would then be reasonable to assume that those locations where both dogs alerted must indicate the existence of blood trace associated with a dead body.

Eddie and Keela together established that there was a cadaver in 5A and in the Scenic, and PJ reported that there had been no death reported in the same apartment prior to May 2007. But without obtaining a DNA match from the blood sample, it cannot be concluded that the blood was Madeleine's and therefore she must be dead. Sadly for her, what followed was a sequence of missed opportunities and obstruction of justice.

____________________
There is a taint of death, a flavour of mortality in lies... Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad

Ribisl

Posts : 807
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-02-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Leafylane on 16.02.13 12:46

@Woofer wrote:Leafylane - nail clippings have not gone through decomposition so would not get an alert.



Maybe not with nail clippings, but it would only take a small amount of blood/flesh to be attached - as in when you catch your nail and it rips down to the flesh (ouch) - that part would give off cadaverscent. Martin Grime does tell us that his dogs could detect the minutest traces. Nail parts identified as belonging to Kate and Gerry McCann were found in the car. Is the car a place one would normally choose to cut one's nails? I dunno - except to say that I personally would'nt do it.

Leafylane

Posts : 19
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by bobbin on 16.02.13 13:13

@Leafylane wrote:
@Woofer wrote:Leafylane - nail clippings have not gone through decomposition so would not get an alert.



Maybe not with nail clippings, but it would only take a small amount of blood/flesh to be attached - as in when you catch your nail and it rips down to the flesh (ouch) - that part would give off cadaverscent. Martin Grime does tell us that his dogs could detect the minutest traces. Nail parts identified as belonging to Kate and Gerry McCann were found in the car. Is the car a place one would normally choose to cut one's nails? I dunno - except to say that I personally would'nt do it.

If nail clippings were found with a piece of tissue attached by forensics, then if the tissue were Maddie's it would have shown as such.
The fact that there is no forensic report of such means it is speculation and we could then start to speculate about anything at all. The sad fact is that Madeleine's presence is hard to detect in apartment 5a, meaning that her 'evidence of presence' has been cleaned away, extremely thoroughly, blood findings damaged by bleach etc.
Her parents claim she was there, bed time, milk and biscuit time, story time on the bed time, and yet no evidence of her time their, save some blood spats and cadavour odour signalled by the dogs whose 100% accuracy has been established.
Her parents cannot have cleaned, or had cleaned on their behalf, so much child presence without knowing about it.
Time to face the facts, Gerry, try as hard as you may, the dogs are not going away.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Leafylane on 16.02.13 13:17

candyfloss wrote:
@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.

In that case you would have to assume that no-one ever bled in the other apartments or Robert Murats house. Even after clean up or washing clothes in biological powder the dogs can still find blood. So no blood ever in these places, just apartment 5a?

[url=http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm[/quote[/url]]

Martin Grime tells us that his dogs will alert to minute, ancient scents - therefore like yourself I have wondered why no alerts were made in other apartments or in the other cars. Common sense dictates that SOMEONE must have bled etc somewhere at some time in all of those places.

The only thing I can come up with (and this is pure speculation) is that it may be to do with the length of time the dogs spend 'searching'. In a recent TV prog a Sniffer dogs handler expressed her delight in how quickly her dog had made a detection - she went on to say that it sometimes took her dog up to 15 minutes inspecting an object before she made up her mind to alert.

This may possibly explain why Eddie did not alert to any of the other cars. He spent less than 30 seconds at each of those cars, in fact he did not even do a full circuit of car no. 3 before moving on. On the other hand his handler called him back for a full 2 minutes to the Renault.

Maybe if he had done the same routine with the other nine cars, there might have been an alert at one or more of those. Who knows?

Leafylane

Posts : 19
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by bobbin on 16.02.13 13:30

[quote="Leafylane"]
candyfloss wrote:
@Leafylane wrote:In reply to Bobbin

Quote from Martin Grime

Q. The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver?

A. The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for ‘live’ human odours. No trained dog will recognize the smell of fresh blood. What they find and give the alerts for is dried blood from a live human being.


End Quote.

Actually it is misleading to call Eddie a cadaver dog as that was only part of his overall function. He was a Victim Recovery dog not a Dead Victims Only Recovery dog.



In that case you would have to assume that no-one ever bled in the other apartments or Robert Murats house. Even after clean up or washing clothes in biological powder the dogs can still find blood. So no blood ever in these places, just apartment 5a?

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm[/quote]

Martin Grime tells us that his dogs will alert to minute, ancient scents - therefore like yourself I have wondered why no alerts were made in other apartments or in the other cars. Common sense dictates that SOMEONE must have bled etc somewhere at some time in all of those places.

The only thing I can come up with (and this is pure speculation) is that it may be to do with the length of time the dogs spend 'searching'. In a recent TV prog a Sniffer dogs handler expressed her delight in how quickly her dog had made a detection - she went on to say that it sometimes took her dog up to 15 minutes inspecting an object before she made up her mind to alert.

This may possibly explain why Eddie did not alert to any of the other cars. He spent less than 30 seconds at each of those cars, in fact he did not even do a full circuit of car no. 3 before moving on. On the other hand his handler called him back for a full 2 minutes to the Renault.

Maybe if he had done the same routine with the other nine cars, there might have been an alert at one or more of those. Who knows?

The dogs is doing his work, sniffing out with his nose, with its millions of
sniff cells, and trained to home in on a certain type of smell only.
He' is not
trying to follow someone's agenda.
If you are out in the woods, starving hungry after a long hike, you could just
kill a lovely crispy bacon sandwich, and you can smell the bacon frying somewhere, are you
going to head towards it or wander off like some ne'er do well, in the opposite direction, away from the bacon butty van parked in the lay-by at the edge of the wood.
Just because we can't detect what the dog is detecting doesn't mean to say it's not obvious to the dog if a smell is worth homing in on or not.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Guest on 16.02.13 13:32

Ah back to the old chestnut of Martin Grimes cuing his dogs The dog spent no time around the other cars because he didn't detect any smells near them. If you notice the cars were very well spaced, so that the dogs could distinguish where the smell was coming from. Eddie obviously didn't linger near the other cars and moved on where he did linger near to the Scenic. Martin Grimes knows his dogs inside out, and what to look for, the dogs have never been wrong, as he says in his statement, and gives many examples.

This is thread is getting in the same old routine as all the other dog threads. It is about 5A forensics taken 4/5/07, so Leafylane, I think it is best to agree to disagree.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Jenns on 16.02.13 13:47

The "cueing" or handler influence would surely be negated anyway by the handler knowing that physical evidence or at least a bodily tissue sample of some sort would be necessary to back up the alert.

Samples were found............ although finally reported to be inconclusive.......... at all the sites the dogs alerted to, weren`t they?

The dog was encouraged to investigate the bathroom of 5A several times too, but did not alert......even though a bathroom could be a "prime site" for such evidence to be found.

Jenns

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-11-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Leafylane on 16.02.13 15:32

candyfloss wrote:Ah back to the old chestnut of Martin Grimes cuing his dogs The dog spent no time around the other cars because he didn't detect any smells near them. If you notice the cars were very well spaced, so that the dogs could distinguish where the smell was coming from. Eddie obviously didn't linger near the other cars and moved on where he did linger near to the Scenic. Martin Grimes knows his dogs inside out, and what to look for, the dogs have never been wrong, as he says in his statement, and gives many examples.

This is thread is getting in the same old routine as all the other dog threads. It is about 5A forensics taken 4/5/07, so Leafylane, I think it is best to agree to disagree.

Fair enough. My last comment will be that Martin Grime clearly behaved very differently when he arrived at the Renault which was easily identifiable as the McCanns car - than he did at the other cars. The video shows that.

Thank you all for a civilised debate.

Leafylane

Posts : 19
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by tigger on 16.02.13 16:02

@Leafylane

The video show Grimes calling the dogs back to at least one other car as well as I recall. But some people see what they want to see.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Guest on 16.02.13 16:53

I think it's good to have the debate about the dogs here because the consensus is that Madeleine's body was behind the couch in 5A even though no trace of her DNA could be found in any other part of the apartment.

I don't question the dogs or Martin Grimes, their performance speaks for itself.

It suggests that the place was cleaned. But where I'm struggling is how could it be cleaned so well that there were no traces of the kids yet there were traces of little Charlie from before. I'd accept saliva on the bedspread but it's the hairs that puzzle me. I may be making the wrong assumption but the report looks clear enough to me.

In the first report they assigned 8 hairs to type L and and 53 to type C - Kate McCann.
The second tests seem a more comprehensive. Kate shares type C with Jose Roque and type L is broken into L and La which to me signify Charlie and probably his mother.

Everyone knows how much ground a child can cover in 5 minutes flat, why would the McCann children be any different?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Jenns on 16.02.13 17:07

Mr Grimes explained during the video that the dog had given an an initial sign of recognition or interest , which prompted a follow up in order to pin down the source.

This seemed to happen in the area after the McCann car and before the next one along.

Prior to reaching the McCann car , he calls the dog back and leads him around those vehicles, too.

Following the positive response to the McCann car, he is then also seen to lead the dog several times around other vehicles........especially around and under the boot and door base areas to which he had quite clearly signalled on their car .

The dog seemed to be given ample time to alert to those sites in other vehicles too, but did not..........( not even if being cued to please his handler!! )

In the same way, the dog was encouraged round and round that bathroom but alerted to nothing.







,

Jenns

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-11-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by saltnpepper on 16.02.13 17:21

If Eddie alerted to blood,mucus,urine,faeces,saliva,semen or any other fluids fom a living person,would he be used to find where dead bodies have lain?
Think about it ... he would bark in every single house the world over
To alert in the apartment where a girl went missing with no proof of abduction is damning & anyone who has researched Eddie's work knows that too,if not...why not?
avatar
saltnpepper

Posts : 154
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-04-30
Location : wales

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Guest on 16.02.13 17:34

Call me simple: Eddie was always sent in first. If he alerted somewhere, Keela was brought in.
If Keela alerted to the same spot where Eddie barked, there must be at least blood. If she doesn't, it MUST be cadaver. She did not react in the master bedroom. So there definitely was blood behind the sofa and cadaver scent in the bedroom, as well as on pieces of clothing.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by tigger on 16.02.13 17:36

@saltnpepper wrote:If Eddie alerted to blood,mucus,urine,faeces,saliva,semen or any other fluids fom a living person,would he be used to find where dead bodies have lain?
Think about it ... he would bark in every single house the world over
To alert in the apartment where a girl went missing with no proof of abduction is damning & anyone who has researched Eddie's work knows that too,if not...why not?

thumbsup Thank goodness for common sense!

By the way, you look lovely (your avatar) big grin

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Casey5 on 16.02.13 17:37

Don't forget, Eddie only alerted to the McCanns' clothing, apartment, car etc. and to no other.
He was taken through the tapas 7 apartments and other vehicles and didn't alert.
Keela was only used after Eddie had given an alert afaik, so if he didn't alert then she wasn't used.

Casey5

Posts : 339
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Spaniel on 16.02.13 17:55

It's said that every £ note carries traces of drugs, mainly due to rolling and sniffing, but drug detecting dogs don't mark every passenger carrying money.
They mark people carrying drugs. Therefore during training, a distinction must have been trained into them.

We don't know the methods used by Grime, and indeed they were unique, but if a dog can distinguish between a drug addled £note or a tiny amount of drug in a wrap, why would they be interested in a car where a kid had grazed its knee?

I was about to suggest that abduction supporters are unaware of quite how clever a dog is using his nose. On second thought, I believe that's what scares them silly, they do know.

There are dogs who sniff out solely cash of course. They are not going to mark you for the fifty quid in your wallet, but large amounts. How flipping clever is that?

Read here, it's a short piece, but eye opening.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-197623/Dogs-help-sniff-crime-cash.html
avatar
Spaniel

Posts : 742
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-01-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by onion on 16.02.13 18:14

Can I just say... doctors know well how to use disinfectants and enough knowledge of chemicals for hygiene purpose in the hospitals. They also know how to get rid of blood stains in a surgical ward in order to not contaminate when another patient comes into the same ward. Hygiene is a BIG thing in hospitals you know. And any biological fluid (be it blood/urine/feces/sweat/pus/inflammation/vomit etc etc) as contamination to another patient is a BIG no no! So you see what I'm trying to say is... doctors know (enough) how to/not to clean and where to/not to clean.

onion

Posts : 6
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-08-13
Location : Belfast

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 5A Forensics taken 04/05/07

Post by Guest on 16.02.13 18:17

Very clever, Spaniel, very clever indeed. Just like sniffing disease in a grape-vine long before it's visible to the eye, epilepsy before the onset of an attack, cancer and many other disease and, yes, money, drugs, bombs, you name it. Yet, they're totally unreliable and "everyone knows that" ... Nonetheless, they're being used all the time.

Sorry to remain off topic, but having had dogs myself all my life, I couldn't resist.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum