4.4 Article

Clenbuterol - regional food contamination a possible source for inadvertent doping in sports

Journal

DRUG TESTING AND ANALYSIS
Volume 4, Issue 6, Pages 534-538

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/dta.1330

Keywords

clenbuterol; food contamination; sports drug testing; inadvertent doping; LC-MS; MS

Funding

  1. Manfred Donike Institute for Doping Analysis e.V. (Cologne, Germany)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The misuse of the sympathomimetic and anabolic agent clenbuterol has been frequently reported in professional sport and in the livestock industry. In 2010, a team of athletes returned from competition in China and regular doping control samples were taken within the next two days. All urine samples contained low amounts (pg/ml) of clenbuterol, drawing the attention to a well-known problem: the possibility of an unintended clenbuterol intake with food. A warning that Chinese meat is possibly contaminated with prohibited substances according to international anti-doping regulations was also given by Chinese officials just before the Bejing Olympic Games in 2008. To investigate if clenbuterol can be found in human urine, a study was initiated comprising 28 volunteers collecting urine samples after their return from China. For the quantification of clenbuterol at a low pg/ml level, a very sensitive and specific isotope dilution liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay was developed using liquid/liquid re-extraction for clean-up with a limit of detection and quantification of 1 and 3?pg/ml, respectively. The method was validated demonstrating good precision (intra-day: 2.95.5 %; inter-day: 5.18.8%), accuracy (89.5102.5%) and mean recovery (81.4%). Clenbuterol was detectable in 22 (79%) of the analyzed samples, indicating a general food contamination problem despite an official clenbuterol prohibition in China for livestock. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available