For those of us writing pulmonary function reports, how many times have we been in the situation where the results are at, or just above, or just below, the lower limit of normal? Too often, the person writing the report must make a judgement with very limited information and then write a report that is meaningful, and indeed helpful, to the clinician who requested the test. This line in the sand of normal versus abnormal, used since the beginning of time, is really a non-sense, especially with the many known factors that influence lung development that have lifelong impact on respiratory health.1 Indeed, for the example of spirometry, the forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) ratio could be within the normal range in a person with asthma,2 3 so what does ‘normal’ mean? Moreover, the recent issue of geographical ancestry