I on the other hand have a sneaky suspicion it went something like this:
1. TSA purchases thousands of test strips to detect peroxides because they are (unjustifiably, in my opinion) afraid of peroxides.
2. TSOs find out the hard way that passengers don´t like them to dip the strips into their drinks/medicines/etc.
3. Higher TSA power decides to use strips in alternate "waving above flask" manner, without regard for the methodological principles behind the test strips.
4. Testing is deemed a success, because no planes explode because of peroxides.
Don't forget the part where the TSA can't figure out that people drinking a drink and not dying means there are no peroxides in said drink.
Did you read the information in the links you provided? The vapor detection, i.e., contactless, systems do not indicate that they can test for peroxide. The systems that can test for peroxide all describe dropping the liquid on a strip or other testing mechanism, i.e., contacting the liquid. So, what "proof" has been provided to show Bubba is incorrect?
His was a blanket statement, no real need for me to show him as incorrect, his statement was incorrect on its face. Nor did I provide a comprehensive listing of test strips, as I stated. Please feel free to do your own research on the subject, I have provided you with a bit of direction to start you out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combat Medic
Opening a factory sealed container will trigger a (usually) 30day expiration. If all of the containers are opened so that the test strips can be waived over them then those containers are on their way to being destroyed.
Pretty generic reasoning there CM. Please be a bit more specific
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanSimmons
What are your professional credentials for chemical testing?
Obviously I am a TSO, and that is all that is needed for the testing we do. But since you bring it up, interesting that no one is asking Bubba what his “Professional” credentials are to be making such outlandish and unsupported statements. I’m sure that if he were to explain his own credentials we would all have a better understanding of why he feels he can make that statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaLoop
This device indeed does detect explosive traces in the air. It detects (according to its manufacturer´s specifications) TNT, RDX, PETN and NG. It does not detect peroxides.
My case still stands.
On thin air.
Read more. You missed quite a bit.
__________________
Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it.
-Ayn Rand
His was a blanket statement, no real need for me to show him as incorrect, his statement was incorrect on its face. Nor did I provide a comprehensive listing of test strips, as I stated. Please feel free to do your own research on the subject, I have provided you with a bit of direction to start you out.
Pretty generic reasoning there CM. Please be a bit more specific
Obviously I am a TSO, and that is all that is needed for the testing we do. But since you bring it up, interesting that no one is asking Bubba what his “Professional” credentials are to be making such outlandish and unsupported statements. I’m sure that if he were to explain his own credentials we would all have a better understanding of why he feels he can make that statement.
On thin air.
Read more. You missed quite a bit.
Once again Ron answers a bunch of posts with "Nuh Uh!"
His was a blanket statement, no real need for me to show him as incorrect, his statement was incorrect on its face. Nor did I provide a comprehensive listing of test strips, as I stated. Please feel free to do your own research on the subject, I have provided you with a bit of direction to start you out.
Pretty generic reasoning there CM. Please be a bit more specific
Obviously I am a TSO, and that is all that is needed for the testing we do. But since you bring it up, interesting that no one is asking Bubba what his “Professional” credentials are to be making such outlandish and unsupported statements. I’m sure that if he were to explain his own credentials we would all have a better understanding of why he feels he can make that statement.
On thin air.
Read more. You missed quite a bit.
Such wise analysis!
May I provide you with a complimentary megaphone? It might increase the chances of reforming your disreputable agency.
Obviously I am a TSO, and that is all that is needed for the testing we do. But since you bring it up, interesting that no one is asking Bubba what his “Professional” credentials are to be making such outlandish and unsupported statements. I’m sure that if he were to explain his own credentials we would all have a better understanding of why he feels he can make that statement.
I am a scientist, a full professor in one of the world´s most prestigious universities. One of the many things we do in my laboratory is detect peroxides in liquid solutions. According to both Scopus and the Web of Knowledge I have ~30 peer-reviewed publications in indexed journals with the word "peroxide" or "H2O2" in the title or abstract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSORon
On thin air.
Read more. You missed quite a bit.
Since I seem to miss "quite a bit" of your information, could you please point me exactly to the part in which a test strip (not an electronic "sniffer" like the one you showed here, which, by the way, also does not detect peroxides) waved above a solution is capable of detecting peroxides.
You could provide a real service to my lab here - if such a miraculously sensitive technology exists in a simple test strip form, it would be very useful for our studies...
