Hello folks,
I came across some material posted by US Biotek which seems to suggest that their method of testing organic acids is much more accurate and reliable than the other leading lab (I am guessing Metametrix!). I am pasting just a part of it and the full article can be found at this link.
http://www.usbiotek.com/Downloads/information/MarkOATLArticle-V6.pdf"Organic acid analysis can be a powerful tool in the hands of a competent clinician, only if however, the results can be trusted. Organic acids have been measured and reported for more than two decades via GC/MS. And, now this accurate assay is combined with a sample collection technique in which the integrity of the organic acids is not compromised. This provides for a highly complex profile with trustworthy results.
Stability and reproducibility are essential components of successful laboratory assays. In this study, liquid urine analysis proved to be insufficiently stable for about one in seven organic acids. In addition, analysis via LC/MS/MS was insufficiently reproducible. Conversely, analysis by GC/MS, after collection with the Dip ‘N Dry, optimized stability with incredibly accurate and precise results. Both stability and reproducibility were dramatically superior by this method, as proven in this study.
From the wealth of sound literature in support of GC/MS analysis, it was predicted that LC/MS/MS results may be outweighed by that acquired from GC/MS analysis. It was also expected that the Dip ‘N Dry collection technique would outperform liquid urine analysis. This proved to be the case. What was not expected, though, was the extreme variability and instability encountered with LC/MS/MS and liquid urine collection, respectively. This poses some serious ramifications. Resulting false-positives and/or false-negatives provide for a questionable patient report with unnecessary, and perhaps inappropriate supplement recommendations. From a clinical perspective, this is disheartening. Organic acid analysis aims to monitor subtle changes in a variety of clinically relevant biological compounds, producing a test of high complexity. This complexity should not be burdened with results that are unreliable and irreproducible."
I did a quick check and Metametrix does seem to do it using the LC/MS/MS method. My question is - Can any of you experienced consultants shed more light on this issue if you happen to know more? If you have used both labs, have you found one better than the other? I guess it can be hard to tell unless one orders the test for the same client using both labs at the same time!! But I wanted to get some feedback regarding this.
Thank you.
Ramya Ramakrishnan M.A., N.C.
Holistic Nutrition Consultant
