I usually avoid writing about work, but I couldn't pass this one up.
This is from a transcript of a symposium on glaucoma surgery (from which I am expected to produce a coherent manuscript):
"Could nonpenetrating glaucoma procedures be the next step in that evolution, whether we are talking about using rooster comb to inflate to outflow channels, or using a pork rind to maintain filtration through the sacrectomy route."
Can you guess which parts are the transcriber's mistakes?? It may be harder than you think.