Other causes of failed PEth test for alcohol abuse?

PEth was discovered to be a minor metabolite of alcohol in the 1980s so nobody developed anything here it was merely identified. EtG was discovered in the 1950s. As minor alcohol metabolites these assays have no clinical significance so there would be no reason to use the tests in clinical care and therefore no reason a lab would go through the time consuming and costly FDA approval process to market it as a stand alone lab test to be ordered in patient care OR a forensic lab test used for testing a biological matrix for substances of abuse. Instead it was developed through the fast track laboratory developed test (lLDT) pathway which was designed as an avenue to develop stand alone tests for rare diseases in which the cost of developing through usual channels would far exceed its potential profitability or in emergent situations ( such as coronavirus). FDA approval of forensic tests require arduous validity and specificity testing including “forensic ingestion trials” which I’m the case of ethanol would require transdermal and vaporized exposures of any potential substances that could interfere with the concentration of the substance being tested. The EtG was introduced as a stand alone LDT to completely bypass the research required through the FDA approval process including determining sensitivity and specificity in 2003 and it was proposed by Dr Greg Skipper and NMS labs marketed it as 100% accurate and specific for ethanol to mislead others into believing it was a test for drinking. The same thing was done with EtS and then PEth. These were developed out of profit and greed only and it is despicably evil they were even introduced. As this is the third time they’ve done it with utter disregard for the consequences a reckoning is coming and we need to make sure those responsIble are held accountable publicly , civilly and criminally. The jig is up!

I had a positive blood spot peth (25ng) 4 months before my contract ended. This was I've two years ago now. I am shocked to see a post stating there is a pattern of these false positives near the end of a contract. How common is this?

So common that the only explanation is these are being done deliberately. This makes sense as those who introduced and promulgated the mythology that these biomarkers differentiate incidental exposure from drinking did so for opportunistically for profit and out of greed. These labs are not FDA approved and have no accountability as there is no agency that has the ability to both investigate false tests and impose these labs for wrongdoing. That is why they are able to misleadingly market tests these tests as indicative of proof of alcohol ingestion. As they are unregulated they can basically say whatever they want. The only agency that is able to investigate false or fraudulent tests is the College of American Pathologists and all they can do is force the labs to correct an erroneous test and "educate" them to do better next time no matter how serious the misconduct or how often it occurs. Likewise the agencies ordering these tests and the "approved" assessment and treatment centers that profit from the referrals generated by these tests when they return positive had no real accountability-particularly when no insurers are involved and the victim is responsible for payment. Giving someone a positive test near the end of the monitoring contract typically resets the contract and guarantees another windfall of cash for more assessments, more unneeded "treatment" and more costly testing which lining their pockets with cash and virtually no chance of getting caught for it and that is what these low-lives do.

Hi I’m a physician in recovery. I completed a five year contract with my state for monitoring and now I voluntarily continue monitoring. In the past 6 years of sobriety I have had 2 PEth tests come back positive and I’m at a complete loss to understand how that is possible. I chew sugar free gum and drink diet sodas so I’m wondering if the “sugar alcohols “ can play a part? So much of the literature accepts the results of this test as true, but I know for sure in my case that it is wrong. Anyone have thoughts?

I’ve had false positive tests as well. I think it’s because the enzyme that manufactures PEth (Phospholipase D) is hyperactive in MS and, of course, I have MS.

The point is....we DON’T know at least as much as we DO know about PEth. That is why, in my opinion, its use in this context is unethical.

I just got two positives test results and it’s ordered by the gal in my family court case and might lose my kids. I haven’t had a drink in 10 plus years

Get it rechecked and prepare to fight! Don’t take any guff!

Who do I get it rechecked by?

Requestatest.com

That is good advice. However, if the problem is preanalytical, it will likely be positive if retested.

I was not given a chance to retest the same sample, so that datapoint is lost.

So if a retest is positive, it still does not confirm drinking. It seems another type of test altogether, CDT maybe, starts to paint a better picture. Probably also good is an assessment by a shrink.