Re: EtG hair analysis.

[Guest guest]

Hi again SWF..Info on hair analysis below... probably would be negative because to be positive you have to persistently abuse ETOH not just have a false positive or two. for me the logical thing to do is remove the alcohol gel the probable culprit from your employment situation will probably solve all problems and be the cheapest solution. failing that would do the polygraph and hair analysis only if there was no choice only from a reputable lab with lots of experience such as trimega.. good luck.. The use of hair alcohol analysis to establish and verify persistent alcohol abusers within the world particularly the UK and europe has steadily increased in recent years. As the hair grows, it absorbs special markers called fatty

acid ethyl esters (FAEE’s) and ethyl glucuronide (EtG) into its structure, which remain in the hair indefinitely. These markers are only produced when there is alcohol in the bloodstream, such that the more markers there are, the more alcohol you have consumed. The company that commercialised this in the UK is Trimega Laboratories Limited. In contrast to other drugs consumed, alcohol is not deposited directly in the hair. For this reason the investigation procedure looks for direct products of ethanol metabolism. The main part of alcohol is oxidized in the human body. This means it is released as water and carbon dioxide. One part of the alcohol reacts with fatty acids to produce esters. The sum of the concentrations of four of these fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEEs: ethyl myristate, ethyl palmitate, ethyl oleate and ethyl stearate) are used as indicators of the alcohol consumption. The amounts found in hair are

measured in nanograms (one nanogram equals only one billionth of a gram), however with the benefit of modern technology, it is possible to detect such small amounts. However there is one major difference between most drugs and alcohol metabolites (FAEE) in the way in which they enter into the hair: on the one hand like other drugs FAEEs enter into the hair via the ceratinocytes, the cells responsible for hair growth. These cells form the hair in the root and then grow through the skin surface taking any substances with them. On the other hand the sebaceous glands produce FAEEs in the scalp and these migrate together with the sebum along the hair shaft (Auwärter et al., 2001, Pragst et al., 2004). So these glands lubricate not only the part of the hair that is just growing at 0.3 millimeters per day on the skin surface, but also the more mature hair growth, providing it with a protective layer of fat. Etg alone

is still not reliable. FAEEs (nanogram = one billionth of a gram) appear in hair in almost one order of magnitude higher than (the relevant order of magnitude of) Etg (picogram = one trillionth of a gram). It has been technically possible to measure FAEEs since 1993, whereas the technique for measuring (the relevant range of) Etg is still in its infancy. In practice, most hair which is sent for analysis has been cosmetically treated in some way (bleached, permed etc.). It has been proven that FAEEs are (surprisingly) not significantly affected by such treatments (Hartwig et al., 2003a). So far no systematic investigations in this regard have been carried out for Etg FAEE concentrations in hair from other body sites can be interpretated in a similar fashion as scalp hair (Hartwig et al., 2003b). Etg: no information available. Extensive studies

involving over 1000 donors have been carried out since 2000. These have enabled us to establish reliable reference ranges for FAEEs with respect to drinking habits of the various groups: non-drinkers < 0,4 ng/mg Excessive drinkers > 1ng/mg There are no reliable reference ranges for Etg from comprehensive studies. Further investigations are in progress to examine the applicability of the method in practice of the detection of alcohol abuse. Literature Pragst F., Balikova M.A.: State of the art in hair analysis for detection of drugs and alcohol abuse; Clinica Chimic Acta 370 2006 17-49. Auwärter V.: Fettsäureethylester als Marker exzessiven Alkoholkonsums – Analytische Bestimmung im Haar und in Hautoberflächenlipiden mittels Headspace-Festphasenmikroextraktion und

Gaschromatographie-Massenspektrometrie. Dissertation Humboldt-Universität Berlin 2006. Pragst F., Auwärter V., Kiessling B., Dyes C.: Wipe-test and patch-test ror alcohol misuse based on the concentration ratio of fatty acid ethyl esters and squalen CFAEE/CSQ in skin surface lipids. Forensic Sci Int 2004; 143:77-86.saclorie@... wrote: I am so sorry for what you are going through. I certainly relate to how you feel, your frustration with this inaccurate test, the lack of any adequate and fair avenue for you to prove your

innocence, and your anger that they are trying to take your license without valid cause. Here are my thoughts ~ Maybe something I say will help you. The lie detector test could be very helpful in reassuring them that you did not drink. However, it is expensive ($1,000+, I believe) and would not help you at all in any future positives. I'm not sure what the hair test would be for. I don't know of any lab in the U.S. that does EtG testing on hair and I seriously doubt that they would send it to Europe! I don't think they test hair for ethanol. It seems to me that, as you said, if a urine sample were positive for EtG, doesn't it follow that the hair sample would also be positive? I also believe that hair testing is most useful in showing more chronic use rather than single exposure. But I would ask myself if this were the intent of your monitoring program to determine, or are they

just looking for positive vs. negative. My guess is that they are looking for the latter, which would certainly not help you. My suggestion would be to propose an alternative plan to them. I would suggest that you start observed Antabuse. The purpose would be twofold: (1) Your levels are a bit higher than what are typically reported here for accidental exposure. The Antabuse may help you identify what is causing your positive tests by triggering a mild reaction when you come in contact in the future. If the hand sanitizer is the culprit, you could then figure out a way to avoid future contact. (2) In the case of future positive EtG's, you can provide your case manager with a log of Antabuse administration, which should prove to them that you did not drink. I would suggest having people you work with be your observers. As for the medical evaluation, I think that's a complete waste of money. I've sunk so much

money into trying to determine the medical cause of my problem, to absolutely no avail. I think the results would show nothing, and that would actually be used against you to show that you are lying. Believe me, if there were a way to prove innocence through a medical evaluation, I'd like to know what it is and where I can go to do it! My thoughts are surely with you ~ Please keep us posted! Lorie -------------- Original message -------------- From: "standswithfist731" <standswithfist731 > Well, I got a call from case manager last evening telling me I had a positive ETG test (this is the second one) and I had two options. One is to take a lie detector test and a hair strand test that would cost

400.00 or go to Medical University in ton for an extensive medical eval that would cost about a thousand dollars.My husband has been laid off his work and we are barely making ends meet and I have no one to borrrow from. This is my second + ETG. I had a conference with the staff regarding it and it was summarized as being accidental exposure and thrown out. It measured 3000ng and the second is 3600ng. I work in a dialysis unit and hand santitizer is mounted on the machine and I use it up to 200 times a day easily. I ask then if I need to change my jobs. They said no. I ask that what if this happens again. I was told not to worry about it. My case manager told me on the phone that I was told to use soap and w ater and to avoid the santitizer at all cost. That is a big lie. He told me several other lies as well. I am so sick of this. I am not having a lie detector test and why should it not show up in a hair

strand if it showed up in a piss test (HELLO) I definitely am not going to ton. I have been doing urine screens for 7 years now, and I guess I am at the end of my road for this BS. I am suppose to call Monday and let him know if I have decidied to do one of the two options. I told him on the phone that I am not doing it. I then ask what's next, my license?????????????He said no he is not saying that! Probably just another lie. Well this time they will have to come and get them. I am not surrendering any more! Oh yeah this BS was suppose to come to an end next month. I can't believe this crap!I suppose I will loose my license.

[Guest guest]

Thanks so much for the info. I talked with my cse manager again

yesterday and have a meeting on Thursday to see " where we go from

here " . I also emailed Dr Skipper several days ago but have not heard

back from him as of yet. He was the MRO that ruled the first ETG as

incendental exposure, so I really don't know why I haven't heard

from him. Anyway, I am so ready to get this behind me. I appreciate

very much your wisdom regarding ETG. I am so sorry for what you are

going through. I certainly relate to how you feel, your frustration

with this inaccurate test, the lack of any adequate and fair avenue

for you to prove your innocence, and your anger that they are trying

to take your license without valid cause. Here are my thoughts ~

Maybe something I say will help you.

>

> The lie detector test could be very helpful in reassuring them

that you did not drink. However, it is expensive ($1,000+, I

believe) and would not help you at all in any future positives.

>

> I'm not sure what the hair test would be for. I don't know of

any lab in the U.S. that does EtG testing on hair and I seriously

doubt that they would send it to Europe! I don't think they test

hair for ethanol. It seems to me that, as you said, if a urine

sample were positive for EtG, doesn't it follow that the hair sample

would also be positive? I also believe that hair testing is most

useful in showing more chronic use rather than single exposure. But

I would ask myself if this were the intent of your monitoring

program to determine, or are they just looking for positive vs.

negative. My guess is that they are looking for the latter, which

would certainly not help you.

>

> My suggestion would be to propose an alternative plan to them. I

would suggest that you start observed Antabuse. The purpose would be

twofold: (1) Your levels are a bit higher than what are typically

reported here for accidental exposure. The Antabuse may help you

identify what is causing your positive tests by triggering a mild

reaction when you come in contact in the future. If the hand

sanitizer is the culprit, you could then figure out a way to avoid

future contact. (2) In the case of future positive EtG's, you can

provide your case manager with a log of Antabuse administration,

which should prove to them that you did not drink. I would suggest

having people you work with be your observers.

>

> As for the medical evaluation, I think that's a complete waste

of money. I've sunk so much money into trying to determine the

medical cause of my problem, to absolutely no avail. I think the

results would show nothing, and that would actually be used against

you to show that you are lying. Believe me, if there were a way to

prove innocence through a medical evaluation, I'd like to know what

it is and where I can go to do it!

>

> My thoughts are surely with you ~ Please keep us posted!

> Lorie

>

>

>

> -------------- Original message --------------

> From: " standswithfist731 " <standswithfist731@...>

>

> Well, I got a call from case manager last evening telling me I had

> a positive ETG test (this is the second one) and I had two

options.

> One is to take a lie detector test and a hair strand test that

would

> cost 400.00 or go to Medical University in ton for an

> extensive medical eval that would cost about a thousand dollars.My

> husband has been laid off his work and we are barely making ends

> meet and I have no one to borrrow from. This is my second + ETG. I

> had a conference with the staff

> regarding it and it was summarized as being accidental exposure

and

> thrown out. It measured 3000ng and the second is 3600ng. I work in

a

> dialysis unit and hand santitizer is mounted on the machine and I

> use it up to 200 times a day easily. I ask then if I need to

change

> my jobs. They said no. I ask that what if this happens again. I

was

> told not to worry about it. My case manager told me on the phone

> that I was told to use soap and w ater and to avoid the santitizer

at

> all cost. That is a big lie. He told me several other lies as

well.

> I am so sick of this. I am not having a lie detector test and why

> should it not show up in a hair strand if it showed up in a piss

> test (HELLO) I definitely am not going to ton. I have been

> doing urine screens for 7 years now, and I guess I am at the end

of

> my road for this BS. I am suppose to call Monday and let him know

if

> I have decidied to do one of the two options. I told him on the

> phone that I am not doing it. I then ask what's next, my

> license?????????????He said no he is not saying that! Probably

just

> another lie. Well this time they will have to come and get them. I

> am not surrendering any more! Oh yeah this BS was suppose to come

to

> an end next month. I can't believe this crap!I suppose I will

loose

> my license.

>