Originally you said:
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.
(my emphasis)
I asked you to provide data to back up the assertion that ETD systems are particularly good at identifying "something dangerous".
You did not provide data, instead, you changed your tune significantly and now say:
Originally Posted by
TSORon
So, in the end, an ETD alarm is rarely a false negative. It’s an indication that further inspection is warranted.
I'm glad you recognized your mistake.