Talk:Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. | |
| Unassessed | rated as Unassessed-Class on the assessment scale | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Do think, the redict from "Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin" to "Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin Concentration" is right? I think it's not the same, isn't it? 137.248.254.132 08:51, 6 June 2006
I agree that MCH should not be redirected to MCHC, as the two are distinct -although related- concepts. It might also be helpful to mention in each article that "MCH is not to be confused with MCHC" and vice versa. --Jay Litman 17:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] thinking analysers?
it says that This makes the machine think there are a low number of very dense red blood cells. - I don't think machines can 'think'! it would be more apporpriate to write This makes machines to mis-analyse that there are a.... instead 202.37.167.175 04:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
True, analysers don't 'think.' I am going to reword this sentance to make it sound a little more technical. Also, there is currently no reference for the effect of cold agglutin on MCHC analysis. --Jay Litman 17:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I also just noticed that there isn't a reference for cold agglutin that describes its relationship to MCHC analysis. I can't seem to find a decent one on the internet, but I will keep looking --Jay Litman 18:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
