Expert Review Panel for Dietary Supplements

4. Based on the supporting information, is the method written clearly and concisely? If no, please specify the needed revisions. 5. Based on the supporting information, what are the pros/strengths of the method? 6. Based on the supporting information, what are the cons/weaknesses of the method?

Yes

Method is well-written and complete. It uses basic equipment and instruments. Sample preparation procedure and derivitization is fairly simple. The attention to detail regarding derivitization of samples (particularly the sample color) is a plus.

Does not appear to have complete data for all matrices. One question would be how the different matrices would potentially negatively impact the derivitization.

7. Any general comments about the method?

Overall, it seems like a very good method. The only gaps are sources for reference standards, missing a few compounds, and data for all matrices in SMPR.

Recommendation for the Method

V. Final Recommendation Do you recommend this method be adopted as a First Action and published in the Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC INTERNATIONAL? Please specify rationale.

Not at this point due to cons/weaknesses specified previously.