GEN-MKT-18-7897-A
Jan 5, 2016 | Blogs, Forensic | 0 comments
What does every scientist think about in the lab? Validation. This is the feeling I encountered while reading a recent scientific report on nature.com. What struck me was not only the study itself which discounted cannabinoid incorporation into hair as a method for confirming consumption, but the test was carried out on the SCIEX QTRAP® 5500 linear ion-trap mass spectrometer. Here the authors produced a comprehensive LC-MS/MS study in which segmented hair samples (1 cm segments) were analyzed for THCA-A. Instead of using established GC/MS methods they were able to prove the validity of false positives as they applied to the presence of cannabinoids in hair samples.
Perhaps you have a study waiting to be published. Alternatively, maybe you are looking to push your lab into more extensive forensic testing this coming year. High-Resolution Accurate-Mass MS such as the X500R is proving to be the must-have instrument in every lab. However, how do you choose the right technology for your team? What is right for one lab is not the best option for another. Before you start spending, it is good to know some instruments come with way more technology than your lab might ever need while others are simply too routine. If you are in the market for mass spectrometry, here are some key points to remember:
The toolkit is loaded with research information including:
Forensic Toxicology Tests
The above article certainly brings into question the integrity of acquired results when challenged in the courtroom. If your lab is using old technology, we want to hear from you. Tell us what kind of experiments you are running and what are the setbacks you have encountered?
For research use only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
Regulated laboratories are evolving faster than ever. New analytical modalities, higher sample throughput, increasing regulatory scrutiny, and leaner teams are reshaping how work gets done. At the same time, expectations for data integrity, standardization, and operational efficiency continue to increase complexity and/or scope. In this environment, LC-MS software is no longer simply an instrument control platform—it has become a critical part of a laboratory’s quality management system. The question is no longer whether your lab has changed, but whether your software has evolved to support the way regulated labs operate today, and if they are ready and able to meet the demands, they will face tomorrow.
Analyst software has long been a trusted foundation in regulated LC-MS laboratories—and for many, it still performs reliably today. But regulated environments are evolving faster than ever. As labs transition to Windows 11, strengthen cybersecurity policies, modernize IT infrastructure, and prepare for future compliance expectations, software decisions are no longer just about what works today—they’re about managing tomorrow’s risk. Analyst will not be supported on Windows 11. While some labs may continue operating in unsupported environments temporarily, the bigger question is: when that risk becomes reality, will your lab be reacting under pressure—or executing a planned mitigation strategy with confidence?
As regulatory scrutiny increases and detection requirements tighten, laboratories are facing a new question: How can TFA be measured reliably, sensitively, and at scale?
Posted by
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Share this post with your network