Wastewater-based tracing of doping use by the general population and amateur athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigates the applicability of the chemical analysis of wastewater to assess the use of doping substances by the general population and amateur athletes. To this end, an analytical methodology that can identify and quantify a list of 15 substances from the groups of anabolic steroids, weight loss products, and masking agents in wastewater has been developed. The method uses solid phase extraction to increase the detection sensitivity of the target analytes, expected to be present at very low concentrations (ng L−1 range), and decrease possible matrix interferences. Instrumental analysis is performed by liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry, allowing data acquisition in both full scan and tandem MS mode. The method has been successfully validated at two concentration levels (50 and 200 ng L−1) with limits of quantification ranging between 0.7 and 60 ng L−1, intra- and inter-day precision expressed as relative standard deviation below 15%, procedural recoveries between 60 and 160% and matrix effects ranging from 45 to 121%. The stability of the analytes in wastewater was evaluated at different storage temperatures illustrating the importance of freezing the samples immediately after collection. The application of the method to 24-h composite wastewater samples collected at the entrance of three wastewater treatment plants and one pumping station while different sport events were taking place revealed the presence in wastewater, and hence the use, of the weight loss substances ephedrine, norephedrine, methylhexanamine, and 2,4-dinitrophenol. The use of these stimulants was visible just prior and during the event days and in greater amounts than anabolic steroids or masking agents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".