I had to translate an article about testing the shelf life of a viral diagnosticum of the fourth generation, and it seemed rather fishy to me (but I’m never a chemist). The authors used the “accelerated aging” method, heated the diagnosticum up for some periods of time to some temperatures, and then tested the “functional parameters”. The rationale is that a 10C increase in temperature results in double the rate of the reaction. They used the results to project the shelf life at 4 C.
As far as I can tell, they did not check test kits that have reached the point being stored at 4 C.
Can anybody say anything on the applicability of the Arrhenius equation in this case? I have very little idea on what goes into viral diagnosticums and how they decompose. It just seemed wrong.
I know very little about it, but there doesn’t seem to be anything wrong. If anything, Arrhenius equation over-estimates reaction rates constants because it presupposes no barrier to the acquisition of the activation energy. Do you have any reason to believe that this diagnostic equipment has an internal source of energy which is not the temperature?
I had to translate an article about testing the shelf life of a viral diagnosticum of the fourth generation, and it seemed rather fishy to me (but I’m never a chemist). The authors used the “accelerated aging” method, heated the diagnosticum up for some periods of time to some temperatures, and then tested the “functional parameters”. The rationale is that a 10C increase in temperature results in double the rate of the reaction. They used the results to project the shelf life at 4 C.
As far as I can tell, they did not check test kits that have reached the point being stored at 4 C.
Can anybody say anything on the applicability of the Arrhenius equation in this case? I have very little idea on what goes into viral diagnosticums and how they decompose. It just seemed wrong.
I know very little about it, but there doesn’t seem to be anything wrong. If anything, Arrhenius equation over-estimates reaction rates constants because it presupposes no barrier to the acquisition of the activation energy.
Do you have any reason to believe that this diagnostic equipment has an internal source of energy which is not the temperature?