There is a standard test procedure that is recommended by Measurement Canada. I won't get into the detail; it's quite involved. But I have spoken to several people who work in this field and suggest that the current standard procedure, field procedure, is too open to the risk of interpretation.
Therefore, you may well get an organization, a fly-by-night business, that says they're certified, they've made all the standards, they meet all their criteria, so they're going to slap the sticker on and allow the 100-millilitre tolerance, as an example, which could be the sign of a wearing machine, and they won't have to inspect this for another two years.
Is there the possibility under this scenario of creating further injury and further problems and complications if there's no standard, set, defined, and interpreted guideline for tests?