Please provide any other data that is on the report (not your identity) including the testing laboratory and instrument or method used.
Who is questioning this reading? When normalized to creatinine (176) this should not be interpreted as positive
. Well below cutoff (68). It is very important to make that adjustment in low level readings (under 20,000 ng)
At that very low reading there are literally thousands of potential causes for EtS.
This finding should be summarily dismissed because the fact that the amount was quantified (120) indicates a confirmatory test was run and that test did not detect EtG which is always produced in greater amounts than EtS.
Here is a link to Dr. Greg Skipper's site. You may want to read this and see the importance of this process. Ethylglucuronide/Ethyl Sulfate
Regarding your question about the alcohol containing transdermal patch. Yes it could be responsible for the reading. While there is no specific research relating to same, Dr. Skipper provided testimony in a court case wherein he noted "topical alcohol on joints" of the subject had resulted in an EtG reading of 1500 ng. (see Miller v. Redwood
, testimony of Skipper)