
Originally Posted by
Snakette
I want to thank you Dr. Bill. I read both articles that you suggested, and acquired very pertinent information that I had been searching for hours to find. In particular, the US DHHS Advisory site provided me with information that I intend to use in court on July 2nd if necessary. I received a false positive last week for 5/21, where I was volunteering on a blood drive and was exposed to both fumes of rubbing alcohol and anti-bacterial hand sanitizer. I knew that I had obstained from the usage of alcohol, but was not able to give a concrete explanation to my probation officer, who said he was recommending another 24 hours of community service to the court. The false positive had a negative impact on me .....
Here is another rich morsel of information for you. EtG is unstable in the urine sample and may increase or decrease in the container post-collection. That may not be particularly compelling in your case because EtS does not suffer that result (or so it is currently claimed).
When reading this result remember that all samples sent to the lab are unrefrigerated. This study alone negates any value or validity to EtG testing. That is one reason these results remain unpublished in any professional journal or public article.
Is it your contention that the readings above resulted from incidental exposure?
Do not rely upon exposure to rubbing alcohol unless it is ethanol based. Isopropanol will not result in EtG/EtS synthesis. Rubbing alcohol could be either. If ethanol based it is very high content >70% and that is
pure alcohol Comparing to whiskey that would be 140 proof.
O-3.
Sumandeep Rana, Wayne Ross, Redwood Toxicology Laboratory. Incidence of post-collection synthesis and hydrolysis of ethyl glucuronide (EtG) and ethyl sulfate (EtS) in random unpreserved urine specimens