The concept of method validation is a somewhat vague and complex requirement for accreditation. Do you think it should be up to the individual laboratory, the accrediting body, a regulatory agency, or journal editors to determine how to validate a method? Should an external organization evaluate the quality of a laboratory's validation data as a mechanism to confirm that a method is indeed fit for purpose or should this determination be the sole responsibility of the laboratory? Can you think of an example where the quality of a method validation was later challenged? What type of impact could such a situation have on previously published results?