Originally Posted by
TSORon
The bottle may say on it that it contains a product, but there is no way to be sure that those contents have not been replaced with something dangerous without testing it. Its something ETD systems are particularly good at.
Care to put some meat on your bald-faced assertion that ETD systems are particularly good at identifying "something dangerous"? In the past month, how many swabs were positive, and how many of the positive swabs led to the discovery of "something dangerous"?
I'd be flabbergasted if the ratio is better than 1000 to 1.
But please respond with a ratio, and not another assertion.