Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science

Testing for Many Designer Drugs At Once 281

LilaG writes "Drug tests spot banned substances based on their chemical structures, but a new breed of narcotics is designed to evade such tests. These synthetic marijuana drugs, found in 'herbal incense,' are mere chemical tweaks of each other, allowing them to escape detection each time researchers develop a new test for one of the compounds. Now chemists have developed a method that can screen for multiple designer drugs at once, without knowing their structures. The test may help law enforcement crack down on the substances. The researchers used a technique called 'mass defect filtering,' which can detect related compounds all at once. That's because related compounds have almost equal numbers to the right of the decimal point in their molecular masses. The researchers tested their technique on 32 herbal products ... They found that every product contained one or more synthetic cannabinoid; all told, they identified nine different compounds in them — two illegal ones and seven that are not regulated. The original paper appears (behind a paywall) in Analytical Chemistry." From the article: "The research is timely, too. 'Many drugs of abuse in the Olympics are designer drugs,' he [Gary Siuzdak] says, in the steroid family. Grabenauer plans to extend her method to other designer drug families."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Testing for Many Designer Drugs At Once

Comments Filter:
  • Re:until we (Score:5, Informative)

    by khasim ( 1285 ) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Monday June 18, 2012 @10:29PM (#40365997)

    Until we apply a modicum of science to determining what vectors cause drug abuse in society, all we're doing is inventing new ways to fill prisons.

    There are a lot of "for profit" prisons being run by corporations. So generating more inmates may be a goal. More inmates mean more revenues for those corporations.

    And this is an easy way for politicians to appear "tough on crime" when they need election points.

  • Re:Not Regulated... (Score:4, Informative)

    by joocemann ( 1273720 ) on Monday June 18, 2012 @11:34PM (#40366307)

    What purpose does that standard serve? Do you, irrationally, expect the screen to prove anything?

    The screen will turn your honest employee into a liar; you will select for drug users that are good at passing screens.

    Reality is reality. Sorry to squash the dream.

  • Re:Not Regulated... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19, 2012 @12:21AM (#40366537)

    blah blah ... self inflicted efficiently[sic] loss is not the same as a nature[sic] one. There is a difference between an employee who come[sic] in drunk once a week and suffers from a 20% decrease in productivity on those days and another one who is just occasionally off their game and has a similar decrease. The first one probably deserves to be fired, while the other one might just not get any raises.

    Why? They're equally productive to me as an employer --- and only the drunk actually has the potential to improve.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19, 2012 @12:36AM (#40366575)

    making drugs isn't just about target blacks; it's about targeting many minorities. marijuana was made illegal because arizona wanted a reasons to go after mexicans. opium was made illegal to go after chinese.

  • Re:Not Regulated... (Score:5, Informative)

    by reverseengineer ( 580922 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2012 @12:56AM (#40366669)
    Drug laws vary widely of course, but as an example, the US DEA drug schedules [usdoj.gov] both directly specify molecules, including derivatives and precursors in some cases, and also have some entries like "barbiturates not specifically listed." In addition, they include the statement, "This document is a general reference and not a comprehensive list. This list describes the basic or parent chemical and does not describe the salts, isomers and salts of isomers, esters, ethers and derivatives which may also be controlled substances."
  • Re:Not Regulated... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19, 2012 @01:30AM (#40366783)

    There's also the Federal Analogue Act that bans any substance that is "substantially similar" to a controlled substance. What this means is totally insane, and completely subjective. The dopamine your body produces endogenously is potentially illegal, since it's substantially similar to mescaline (3,4-dihydroxyphenethylamine, and 3,4,5-trimethoxyphenethylamine). Your serotonin is equally problematic, since 5-hydroxytryptamine is substantially similar to dimethyltryptamine (DMT), which is Schedule I, *and also produced endogenously*.

    CAPTCHA: hormone

  • by Splab ( 574204 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2012 @03:07AM (#40367089)

    Really? Might wanna go look up Krokodil and Russia. That's the result of prohibition.

    Ban the good drugs and fiends will go for whatever substitute they can cook up and trust me, we definitely want people who go sit in the corner looking at the pretty colors rather than people coming into the ER with their flesh rotten to the bones:
    http://mylifeasateenageloser.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/127550-horrifying-side-effects-of-krokodil.jpg [wordpress.com] (NOT SAFE FOR ANYONE!)

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Working...