2 ms·
> However, a number of chemicals identified were relatively unknown, with no information as to what they are used for or how they could have contaminated a hum
by webmaven 6y ago
> However, a number of chemicals identified were relatively unknown, with no information as to what they are used for or how they could have contaminated a human body.
>One chemical detected, for example, is known as LL-D-253alpha. The researchers say very little is known about this compound and there currently seems to be no known commercial uses for it.
It seems likely that these 'relatively unknown chemicals' are metabolites (not necessarily of human metabolism) or otherwise byproducts of breakdown or combination of known chemicals.
Something as simple as an outdoor painted surface that gets exposed to car fumes and soot, ultraviolet light, pesticides, herbicides and any number of other contaminates, along with random biological agents such as molds, mildews and so on, is bound to produce some pretty exotic compounds over time in at least trace amounts, traces that will be concentrated at the top of the food chain (which is us). And then our own microbiome gets to work on that stew as well. As far as I know, no one is actively looking for whatever random unfamiliar chemicals may be spontaneously produced in these ways. I would guess that no one is even actively looking for traces of random unfamiliar chemicals that may be produced when you microwave spaghetti sauce in a plastic container.
- fuzzfactor 6y ago>traces that will be concentrated at the top of the food chain (which is us) Also when trace analysis becomes more sensitive or focused as technology advances, alarms can be raised over things which were never detectable in the past. These operators seem to have sophisticated instruments optimized for this type of pursuit. I also use very capable gear, but mainly for leading industrial chemical analysis over the last 4 decades. No biology involved, but very many kinds of chemical companies. And I've got news for them. Very few pure reference materials are actually available even to the major manufacturers' chemical plant or research labs. What they would like to have made into "analytical standards" for absolute confirmation I would like too. Oh well. So I spend decades improving my abilities to make my own, if I don't do it who will? That's one reason we even have mass spectrometers on the bench to begin with, to work around that little snafu. Regardless, it can take a while to get good enough for your results to be worth money. For instance when MTBE was a thing, I was able to report to clients more details of what was in their purchase than the producing oil & chemical companies themselves were able to do, but not nearly as well the first year as it was after that.