How analysis laboratories can avoid conducting fake analyses

This post was last edited by zbx on 2010-8-11 02:43. There are mainly two situations in which false analysis occurs. First, analysts are lazy and do not conduct the analyses as required, so they fabricate numbers and report them. This is due to the large number of samples that need to be analyzed; they lack the capacity to handle them all, or simply choose not to do the work – this relates to the individual integrity of the analysts. Another situation is when the analysts report that the results exceed the limits, and the process engineers demand that the results be adjusted to meet the standards. This is a result of the company’s management system, which imposes fines for non-compliance. To avoid this, one should act with integrity and honesty, and maintain close communication with management. Some sample analyses are conducted too frequently; there’s no need for that. In our department, the process supervisor has stated that such analyses are unnecessary, but if orders are given to carry them out, there’s nothing that can be done about it

This is a bit troublesome. Here, the analysts and the production staff are separate; there is no link between their interests. Everyone does their own job. After the laboratory technicians complete the analyses, the data is stored in the internal database, and then the operators access this database to review the analyses and make necessary adjustments. Basically, false results are quite rare

It’s really troublesome! Because many of the data to be analyzed aren’t very important, and since I’m the one who collects the samples, I feel annoyed every time a task requires sample collection. There are the two situations mentioned on the second floor: one is that the analysts themselves are not responsible for the analysis data, and the other is that those in charge of the position request that the analysis data be modified. As for the solution, I think it’s not just a matter of the quality of analysts; management and leadership should also reflect on themselves.

There are abnormal data here; reports are issued without reinspection results, and a penalty in RMB will be imposed.

Analysis and production fall under different departments; unless there is laziness on the part of the analysts, it is then the responsibility of the quality management department

The analysis and production departments are separate, so there should be no fraud. Our company’s analysts (working in shifts) monitor and take samples of the products 24 hours a day; those on the day shift take comprehensive samples at 8 o’clock. Only after comparing the data from both groups is an analysis report prepared and sent to the workshop.

Fraud is now a common occurrence in various companies, factories, and even universities. My personal experience: 1. At a company where I used to work, in order to cope with inspections and evaluations by **a certain department, the manager asked his subordinates to fabricate system operation records for the entire previous year within one day. 2. One of my friends, who is a master’s student at a prestigious university, is preparing to publish a paper and asked me to help him process the experimental data by fitting an equation (a master’s student from such a prestigious university doesn’t even know how to use Origin! ). The resulting data deviates significantly and cannot be fitted. He asked me to modify the data according to the ideal equation and then fit the equation, and that way it would be perfect. I even joked with him, saying, “The reason why Chinese universities lack the research capabilities of American ones is because there are so many students and teachers who fabricate data like you!” ”

The testing agency is only responsible for the samples; if fraud occurs and a recheck reveals that the test results differ significantly from those of the stored samples, problems will arise. Generally, when issues occur, the accuracy of the test results from the stored samples is investigated

The analysis department and the production department should be separated, and there should be no fraud. A couple of years ago, when I was at a company, it was the production manager who supervised us. He always pressured me to turn many substandard materials into qualified ones; otherwise he would get angry with me. Instead of focusing on production, he told the quality control department to find a solution. It was purely for economic reasons, and I had no choice but to fire him.

Quality is not invented; it is created through production. If one has to constantly create records and modify data, then the analysis room loses its purpose. Analysis involves several aspects: production, sales, supply, and costs, all of which must be based on data. Without a strict system, various risks will be linked to the analysis, and such work becomes utterly uninteresting. Therefore, one must not only work diligently and responsibly but also ensure that the work has value. Establishing a sound quality system that is recognized by senior management and all employees is the true mark of professional competence. Things such as the procedures for handling non-conforming products and emergency release notices serve to provide everyone with guidelines to follow. I once encountered a situation where the truck ready to pick up the goods was already waiting at the warehouse entrance, but the product specifications did not meet the factory standards. During that deadlock, the production manager clearly told me: If you don’t issue the certificate of conformity, then you’ll just have to keep everyone waiting; I will never say, \"Go ahead, I’ll take responsibility!\" At the same time, the workshop supervisor, technicians, section chiefs, and dispatchers were all standing at the entrance of the laboratory watching; haha, what an experience that was! The world is full of dangers. Anger surged in my heart at that moment