This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Stephen E. Godfrey, MD
St Peters (Mo) Hospital

JAMA. 1988;259(12):1807.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—I read with concern the recent article by Handsfield et al¹ regarding prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis B virus in blood samples sent to the laboratory of their urban teaching hospital in Seattle. I agree that some samples of blood and body fluids sent to such a laboratory are inevitably from patients who have undetected infection with such viruses as HIV and hepatitis B, and I also agree that all specimens should therefore be considered potentially infectious and should be handled with appropriate precautions. However, I strongly disagree with the recommendation that the practice of labeling known infectious specimens should be abandoned.

Laboratory workers are entitled to be informed when they are dealing with known hazardous specimens. It is natural that such workers take their greatest care in situations in which increased risk is perceived, although similar care is recommended in all situations. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Senior Contributing Editor; Sharon Iverson, Assistant Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?