Laundering clothes with modern detergents containing sodium percarbonate can result in false negative<br>results when certain presumptive and confirmatory tests are used to detect the presence of blood. This is<br>problematic as blood evidence can be inadvertently overlooked and criminal activity concealed, simply<br>by laundering bloodstained clothes in detergent. The aim of this research was to determine if the<br>incidence of positive results using tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) reagent, luminol, Bluestar1 Magnum,<br>ABAcard1 Hematrace1 and RSIDTM-Blood was affected by treatment in hot and cold water, with and<br>without the detergent, sodium percarbonate. This study identified that RSID-Blood consistently<br>produced positive results irrespective of water temperature or the addition of sodium percarbonate. All<br>other reagents returned positive results in the absence of sodium percarbonate, regardless of water<br>temperature. The introduction of sodium percarbonate initiated negative results regardless of water<br>temperature when testing with tetramethylbenzidine reagent, Bluestar1 Magnum and ABAcard1<br>Hematrace1. Luminol in the presence of sodium percarbonate responded differently to the temperature<br>change of the water. Cold water returned positive results, however, hot water returned negative results.<br>This research indicates that RSIDTM-Blood surpassed other blood screening tests identifying blood on<br>sodium percarbonate treated cotton fabric. The results for luminol were varied depending on water<br>temperature, however, luminol performed better as a presumptive test than TMB or Bluestar1 Magnum
正在翻譯中..
