HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by HIPKIN, L. J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by HIPKIN, L. J.

There are several methods of extracting urine before assay for gonadotrophin and there has been some controversy about the best procedure. In an earlier investigation (Hipkin, 1967) two different kaolin—acetone procedures were compared. Both extracts contained gonadotrophin-inhibiting material which was probably responsible for the differences in potency when large doses of extract were assayed. Since the inhibitory material can interfere with the assay for gonadotrophin the tannic acid method of Johnsen (1958) has been investigated from this aspect.

Six 4 1. pools of urine were collected from patients known to have normal pituitary function. Half of each pool was extracted by Albert's method as modified by Borth, Lunenfeld & Menzi (1961) to give extract A, and the remainder by that of Johnsen (1958) to yield extract J. The extracts were tested for gonadotrophic and inhibitory activities by methods described previously (Hipkin, 1967).

The mean weight of solid extracted by procedure