On female ejaculation

Addiego et al. (1981) reported a case study in which a woman's urethral orgasmic expulsions differed from her urine in concentrations of urea, creatinine, and tartrate inhibitable acid phosphatase (a more appropriate term than prostatic acid phosphatase used by Addiego et al. [cf. Stolorow, Hanucher, & Stuver, 1976; Sensabaugh & Kahane, 1982]). Addiego et al. referred to, but did not report data from, pilot work with urine and orgasmic expulsion specimens by the subject in the absence of the research (p. 17). Because specimens were collected in the absence of the research team, the results were not submitted for publication. Addiego et al. believed that the analyses first reported concerning this issue should be based on specimens in as nearly a controlled condition as possible and that the team should be able to report that members had seen the source of the specimens and how they were collected. Sensabaugh and Kahane (1982), concerned about the implications of the work by Addiego et al. (1981) for adjudicating rape cases, obtained four specimens of female ejaculate in an unspecified manner. Their finding that acid phosphatase concentration was approximately one order of magnitude greater in the putative female ejaculate specimens than in urine (p. 2), tends to support the finding by Addiego et al. that not all female orgasmic expulsions differ from urine.