Effects of Fluid Load on Human Urine Characteristics Related to Workplace Drug Testing *
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During workplace drug testing, urine is tested for dilution, substitution and adulteration. Donors argue that these findings are due to medical, health or working conditions or diet and genetic differences. There is a paucity of data correlating changes in urine characteristics after a fluid load to various body parameters. Therefore, five urine specimens (one in the morning, one prior to drinking 800 mL of a beverage, and three time intervals thereafter) from 12 males and 12 females were tested for four different beverages on separate occasions. Of the 480 samples, 376 were in sufficient amounts. Of these 376, 36 (10%) had creatinine <20 mg/dL but ≥2 mg/dL; 27 (75%) of 36 had specific gravity <1.0030 but >1.0010. Thus, these 27 samples can be considered to be dilute; 20 (74%) of 27 were from females. For males with at least one dilute sample, body fat was 11% less and resting metabolic rate (RMR) was 29% more than males with no dilute samples (p > 0.05); for females with at least one dilute sample, height was 8% less and weight 20% less than females with no dilute samples (p > 0.05). Individuals with a higher RMR appear to have a greater potential for producing dilute urine specimens than those with a lower RMR. Thus, a dilute sample does not necessarily indicate that it was intentionally diluted. Such samples must be carefully evaluated in consideration with recent consumption of liquid by donors to avoid false accusations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".