|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
C13 to C12 Ratio of Natural and Synthetic Testosterone
Tom Kunich wrote: "k.papai" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: wrote: The difference is small (~3 parts per thousand PDB), but readily measurable if you've got good technique. It arise from the fact that synthetic testosterone is produced from plant sterols, which are lower in 13C than animal hormones/tissues/etc. due to isotopic discrimination. Andy Coggan This isotope test are very difficult. The manufacturer of the testing equiptment says "quite regularly there are errors." Exactly my point from yesterday. I don't see how isotopic tests of C12/C13 could hold any value with WADA or UCI. The amounts being tested are phenomonally miniscule. You need hard evidence and so far there is NONE. There's more to this than meets the eye - the amount of testosterone in urine is VERY small. The amount used to TEST is a great deal smaller. That means that the differential analysis can have large errors simply from chance. Think of it this way - if you have three molecules of C12 and one of C13 NORMALLY all it takes if for an addition C13 to be in a test sample to demonstrate a change of from 4/1 to 4/2 - 25% vs 50%. A 100% increase. Tom, that's cool, but C13 is an ATOM. No way in 2006 we have tech that good that can fu**ing tell real testosterone from plant-derived T. NO F-ing way. Not. Anyone challenge me?? Here's another source of error - the idea is to filter out everything BUT testosterone using a column of some sort and then to break the testosterone down into its components molecules and then use a mass spectrometer to measure the weight. I hav used mass specs. I was an A+ student in O-Chem. P-Chem. Honours Biology, and similar. Triple Integrals at one point in my academia studentia were nearly trivial. -Ken Papai (and Laff-at-me wonders about sh*t and he hasn't a clue and still thinks Lance s*cks, what a d*ck. Phone me at the State Bar. Unlike Laff I exist and can help you.). Columns are far from perfect and since the absolute quantities are low, it is fairly easy for the technician to catch more than the testosterone in the mix and to break down other components of the urine as well. Yet another source of error. What's more - unless the observer is a specifically and highly trained individual in the art of GC/Mass Spec, it would be highly unlikely that he could even detect a faulty separation process. And believe me, it IS and art and not a science. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
C13 to C12 Ratio of Natural and Synthetic Testosterone
k.papai wrote:
Tom, that's cool, but C13 is an ATOM. No way in 2006 we have tech that good that can fu**ing tell real testosterone from plant-derived T. NO F-ing way. Not. Anyone challenge me?? I do. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. I hav used mass specs. I was an A+ student in O-Chem. P-Chem. Honours Biology, and similar. Triple Integrals at one point in my academia studentia were nearly trivial. You still don't know what you're talking about. Mass specs can tell the difference between C12 and C13. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Landis fails drug test | bicycle_disciple | Techniques | 77 | August 3rd 06 11:18 PM |
Testosterone test: isotope test | gabriel faure | Racing | 66 | August 3rd 06 09:15 PM |
Info on The Measurements | Phil Holman | Racing | 12 | August 3rd 06 01:40 PM |
Report: Synthetic Testosterone Found in Fraud Landis Urine Sample | Joe King | Racing | 4 | August 2nd 06 02:47 AM |
Just Soap - The Pedal-Powered Natural Soap | Ablang | Techniques | 1 | April 27th 05 05:08 AM |