Randox rogues show ISO doesn’t balance


We saw before that Randox Testing Services paid UKAS for ISO accreditation of forensic testing.  Accreditation couldn’t stop employees rendering the results unreliable by falsifying QC results.  Randox called in the police.

The Daily Mail reports on the continuing investigation,

Dr Tully also raised the possibility that the problem may spread wider than just Randox.

She said: ‘The organisation concerned held accreditation to the appropriate quality standard, but the malpractice was not discovered by the usual quality checks. 

‘This raises a number of questions, including: a, whether or not malpractice is more widespread than at one organisation; and b, whether or not the quality standards need to be strengthened.’

But she went on: ‘No reasonable set of quality standards could guarantee to prevent determined malpractice by skilled but corrupt personnel and the inevitable cost of adding additional safeguards should be balanced against risk.’

Randox said last night it is paying for the retesting to be carried out in independent labs. (emphasis added)

Dr Tully is correct: balance safeguards against risks.  ISO doesn’t balance.

Once again, accreditation isn’t paying for the increase in costs its obsessive collection of evidence demands.

Maybe we need a new ISO standard that’s more oppressive.  Maybe the inspectors should be fired because they didn’t do their jobs well enough (though nobody is asking).  Maybe the RTS needs to improve its management to get the best out of its staff.  Maybe without accreditation, staff would have not felt so oppressed that they had to resort to deception.  Time will tell.

The ISO is catching up again by putting anti-corruption and risk assessment into its latest version of ISO 17025.  Will anyone assess the risks from wasting resources on accreditation?  It’s just to provide fodder for keeping the cartel running and inspectors employed, as jobs in real science vanish.

Randox: you run your own EQA scheme; take up the challenge – produce a simpler, better system of quality assurance that lets labs dump UKAS.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Forensic science, Laboratory medicine, Practical problems and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s