Drug Testing Entire Cities at Once 562
Ellis D. Tripp writes "Researchers have developed a technique for determining what illicit drugs people might be consuming in a given area, by testing a sample from the local sewage treatment plant. As little as a teaspoonful of untreated wastewater can reveal drug use patterns in a given community. Obviously, any drugs found can't be tied to any specific user, but how much longer until the drug warriors want to deploy automatic sampling units farther upstream of the sewage treatment plant?" From the article: "one fairly affluent community scored low for illicit drugs except for cocaine. Cocaine and ecstasy tended to peak on weekends and drop on weekdays, she said, while methamphetamine and prescription drugs were steady throughout the week."
but..... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:but..... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:but..... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:but..... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:but..... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually they will
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_urine#Gardenin
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:but..... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:but..... (Score:5, Informative)
Another interesting application, if they check further upstream, could be identifying areas containing drug labs. Looking for high concentrations of drugs and various manufacturing by-products in the waste stream could identify neighbourhoods containing labs. I used to be vaguely acquainted with a police forensic chemist who told me that they regularly laughed at some of the amphetamine labs they busted - in some cases, 60%-80% of their yield was going down the drain.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Goes to show you how ridiculously profitable this stuff is under our current legal system.
No wonder people kill each other over it.
Not that I'm a fan of legalizing meth, mind you.
Re:but..... (Score:5, Insightful)
question for moderators: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The US has problems BECAUSE of its incarceration also...
Re:question for moderators: (Score:5, Informative)
Not exactly nobody else. The US is in the good company of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia. [unece.org]
Re:but..... (Score:5, Insightful)
So if the users wish to keep themselves quietly locked away at their own expense, then they should live with the consequences of the choices they make as adults, after all, it really is only a problem for the rest of society because of the high cost of those drugs and the dangerous criminal element associated with distributing those substances, who, in fact have a significant financial interest in making sure those substances remain illegal.
Whilst I am content to pay taxes for the medical treatment of a drug addicts, or to assist in rehabilitation services for them, having to pay the enormous cost of enforcing the illegality of those substances, or imprisoning the addicts, or the crimes that result because of the high cost of those substances and their addictive nature. As far as I am concerned those idiot wowsers are far more of a problem for me than the drug addicts, as the drug addicts are problem, which rather bluntly, eventually solves itself.
Childish misconception. (Score:5, Insightful)
People have been robbing and burgling long before drugs and they will be at it long after this phony war is over. Saying that drug addicts are behind it is foolish. The dangerous criminal element are generally not drug addicts, and they are by far more dangerous to other drug dealers then to regular folk.
Re:but..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure people will still steal, but the size of the problem is hugely reduced as they need to steal a whole lot less and as a significant benefit, those law enforcement resources which are currently wasted on the drug problem can be allocated to the burglary and mugging problem which currently is virtually ignored.
The dangerous and violent criminal element is stripped of it's resources, and becomes a far more manageable problem and can be more effectively targeted with the now freed up law enforcement resources.
Re:but..... (Score:5, Insightful)
On this planet, however, "good enough" is good enough for any alcohol drinker (or a drug user.) Getting an affordable drug when one needs it surely beats robbing a store and potentially getting killed. Drug users may be reckless but still not suicidal. Some addicts would be glad to stop, but their bodies changed to require the drug, and if forced to abstain they feel extreme pain. Under the threat of such pain an addict will rob and kill; however given an option I believe many would accept the government-sponsored drug, the pain will be gone just as well as when using a street drug.
Re:but..... (Score:4, Insightful)
So prohibition is completely illegitimate, your premise is your are protecting people by imprisoning them, denying them their rights and turning them into hardened criminals, by creating the situation where as a result of their addictions they will associate with hardened violent offenders, and are creating a situation where funding is provided the growth and increased power of the most hardened and violent elements, which they in turn use the drug money to further corrupt and damage society. What is you goal, the elimination of drug problem by complete destruction of human society.
I see absolutely no dilemma in making adults responsible for their own decision.
As for distribution, obviously all harmful substances should be distributed in a controlled environment where an attempt is made to dissuade them from their poor choices and rehabilitation services are always made available, so that it does not reflect your assertion of mass marketing distribution system similar to tobacco and alcohol.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
However even if that wasn't the case legalisation is still a better option than the current climate of criminalisation
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Another interesting application, if they check further upstream, could be identifying areas containing drug labs. Looking for high concentrations of drugs and various manufacturing by-products in the waste stream could identify neighbourhoods containing labs.
Well, if I understand you correctly, I don't think you can really 'check upstream' for drug labs, because the drugs aren't flowing downhill. They enter the home from the highway and road system, not from the upstream water supply. If you have drug use in one area, I don't think you can extrapolate from water flow where exactly the drugs came from; you'd be better off looking at traffic pattern maps.
You probably can identify areas with labs based on the methods they used to survey drug usage, but I don't
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Wow. Kinda makes huffing glue seem like sniffing cocaine off a striper's ass.
Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Interesting)
Will there be a need for sewer search warrants in the future? Hmm...
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You give up title to garbage put at the curb, so sewer outflow should be fair game (depending on where it was sampled, possible backflow, etc).
Septic tanks and drainfields on wholly on private property would be another matter.
Re: (Score:2)
IANAL, but:
You give up title to garbage put at the curb, so sewer outflow should be fair game (depending on where it was sampled, possible backflow, etc).
IANAL either, but I seem to remember things a bit differently. Garbage tossed in a *public* dumpster is fair game. Trash in your trash can is still yours, up until the sanitation guys actually toss it in the truck. I vaguely remember something about it having to mix with the common garbage before it becomes fair game (though that could just be from a movie...).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
IANAL either, but I seem to remember things a bit differently. Garbage tossed in a *public* dumpster is fair game. Trash in your trash can is still yours, up until the sanitation guys actually toss it in the truck.
To the contrary, I've always heard that it is public property once you place the garbage out for collection. This is backed up by a Google search, which turned up among others:
Garbage is Public Property on Curb [wasteage.com]
Admittedly, though, you can probably "prove" anything with the right Google search.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What's preventing them from testing the sewer water directly out of a house, instead of a waste plant.
If you live in the US, the 4th amendment.
The US *could* uphold the constitution for this (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably not. (Score:4, Insightful)
An applicable Slashdot analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
You're probably correct on this, though I wouldn't be surprised to see someone argue it in court.
Here's a workable Slashdot analogy for this: Just as one shouldn't link an IP address to a person (as the RIAA has tried to do), one shouldn't necessarily link what comes out of a household's sewage pipe to the person that lives there, either.
My point being, just as someone can leech off an unsecured Wi-Fi in a home, someone from outside the household (i.e. visiting friend, relative) could conceivably use the bathroom.
Then again, deployment of this type of surveilance would be kept plenty busy hunting down gross point sources like drug labs that they'd likely not bother to deal with individual drug use.
Re:An applicable Slashdot analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead they use that cocaine in the sewer as probable cause to get a search warrant to search the house. See all the trash searching leading to warrants in the past...
And they wouldn't test all the houses, they'd test the ones they want to get a warrant for - for whatever other reason (resident has wrong skin colour, known drug users seem to visit often, etc, etc) that isn't good enough for a warrant by itself.
Tracing child pornography downloads to your IP wouldn't be enough to get you convicted, it might get a them a search warrant though...
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:4, Interesting)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Interesting)
The difference being that if you have something incriminating to get rid of, you don't have to throw it in your trash can and leave it on the curb. In essence, the laws on trash are basically that you don't need to be "authorized" in order to pick up garbage, recycle it, dispose of it, reuse it, compost it, etc.
In contrast, people don't generally have an option of what to do with their urine and feces -- for most people, it's leaving the building in a wastewater pipe. And you do need the be licensed out the wazoo and have legal agreements with a homeowner and the state before you can just tap into wastewater outflow.
I suspect it would come down to the "expectation of privacy" standard, and most people don't expect their wastewater can be seen by anyone before it is processed, but it's a normal expectation that anyone can peek in an unsecured garbage can.
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Informative)
I wonder, if they start doing more and more extensive tests, could they eventually determine the household in which the drugs come from? What's preventing them from testing the sewer water directly out of a house, instead of a waste plant.
Economics.
Re:Tracing Of Users? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If (hard) drugs were legal, it would be very hard to prove murder by overdose, etc. You could kill pretty much anyone you want: just lace something with a drug and say "Oh, he liked LSD on his cereal in the morning. It was a horrible accident." (I don't really know how lethal LSD is, but you get the idea).
How would the situation be any different to drugs that are currently legal, but lethal in sufficient quanities ?
Like, oh, I don't know, alcohol ? Or sleeping pills ?
There are _lethal_ drugs today that
Re: (Score:3)
However, even if it was amazingly toxic and legal and you decided to lace someones cornflakes with it in order to kill them it wouldn't make any difference at all whether LSD was legal or illegal. You'd still have a dead body and suspicious set of circumstances which would most likely be investigated by the police, with LSD being legal the police would
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If guns were legal, it would be very hard to prove every murder committed with them wasn't a suicide.
Re: (Score:2)
Utah results are in... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I took a massive dose of LDS... (Score:5, Funny)
I'll never touch the stuff again.
And most importantly (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And most importantly (Score:5, Funny)
Stupidity reaching new lows (Score:5, Funny)
My standing policy for piss testing is they have to collect it orally if they want if from me. Hot from the pipe.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to teh Intarwebs we know that they can find plenty of volunteers for the job!
If they start pushing this tech "upstream"... (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2)
...pee in your yard. Trees like the nutrients!
On the one hand, if you want to take controlled substances and go undetected, then the viable solution is to find a non-mainstream method of disposing your waste.
On the other hand, if you are doing enough in the way of controlled substances for recreational to worry about it, odds are you are not going to be that picky when you need to get rid of excess waste.
Still, this opens the door to companies rather than testing employees for drugs to create temp storage tank for waste, sample, then dump.
meth (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:meth (Score:5, Informative)
ADD (Score:5, Interesting)
We all have constant levels in our systems, stable jobs, and interact well in society. Just because someone needs to take these drugs do not mean that we cannot hold a job, or that we are scabs on society... And just because (aside from the THC, which is not addictive) our meds are addictive, does not mean our usage varies, because we take our daily dose as covered by our medical insurance.
Re:ADD (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:ADD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:meth (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
yes, i used every day but i definitely used more heavily on the weekends.
Pssssssst (Score:2)
Who gives a shit? Piss on teh dirt.
Next week: drug warriors take aim at the Sun.
Re: (Score:2)
Determining that is number two on the list.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Gives a new meaning to "stool pigeon", doesn't it?
I blame... (Score:3, Funny)
On another note, I wonder if its possible to get a high of this water, and I worry about what the sharks with lasers might do when the rivers flow into the sea.
Maybe it COULD be personally identifiable.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Take it one step further: insurance companies who don't want druggie-risks in their system, who might start requiring DNA on file as a condition of being insured.
This has disturbing implications re privacy -- not now, but quite possibly a decade or two from now, especially given the direction the world is headed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm reminded that there have been murderers caught by similar methodology: I recall hearing of one some years ago, tracked by identifiable DNA from blood traces in the sewage main (well away from the perp's house), after the perp had flushed the drippy bits down the sink.
Now that I'm thinking about it, I also recall reading about how mass-spec has gotten reliable enough that feeding your victim to the chickens will no longer save you from a murder rap, because human DNA can be distinguished from
Affluent... (Score:2)
Can they do pro ball locker rooms? (Score:2, Insightful)
They can have my shit ... (Score:5, Funny)
So when does privacy end? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've got to say this is a very interesting idea. I've never heard anything like this.
That said, I'd like to ask a question of /.ers. Many here are obviously against anything they see as an encroachment of their privacy. I agree with them to varying degrees. But in this case, where would you draw the line and why? Is there really a privacy concern at testing from the waste water from a whole city or region? But what if you are testing at the main sewer pipe that serves 20k people? How about 10k? What about a neighborhood of 500?
As much as the "well they are breaking the law/what do you have to hide" appeals to me, I wouldn't support testing individual houses (or probably anything under a large chunk, say 10k).
Why 10k? It is quite anonymous, yet would be small enough that it might provide some good relative data as to where certain drugs are more of a problem (especially in bigger cities, like 1 million+).
Now once your waste water leaves your house and enters the pipes, it's no longer your property, right? Once garbage is placed out on the street (or in the garbage truck) it is no longer your property and the police can search it without a warrant right? This is the same thing isn't it? If not, when would waste water cease to be "yours"; considering that it is quickly mixed (permanently) with other waste water and unrecoverable.
Just wondering how you guys would draw the line.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So when does privacy end? (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as the "well they are breaking the law/what do you have to hide" appeals to me, [...]
It shoudn't. That's the sort of attitude tyrants depend on.
Just wondering how you guys would draw the line.
Well before the prosecution of victimless crimes like drug use. Alas, the legal system in most countries is far beyond where I would draw the line.
My Patent Announcement (Score:3, Funny)
Drugs by SIC code (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, I did a GROUP BY sic code and drug, descending frequency. The highest was construction workers, pot and cocaine. The second highest was school employees, alcohol. This doesn't mean who does what -- this means who gets busted for what in the tests, very different. Everything else was non-clustered.
BTW, the guy had the hottest girls for reception and collecting specimens. I think he hired girls who didn't pass the tests to work for him. Fun girls
Pillheads
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The second highest was school employees, alcohol.
Well, duh - of course teachers drink. They have to put up with little shits like I was all day long. Next you'll tell me that nurses smoke.
Unsnitary conditions.... (Score:2)
Hey Man, (Score:3, Funny)
Whoooaa....
Note to drug users: (Score:2, Funny)
Methamphetamine (Score:2, Interesting)
Coming from someone who has met more than my fair share of meth users, there is no such thing as a recreational meth user. Coke, weed, ecstacy, even heroine can be used recreationally by some (and not by others).
But noone uses meth recreationally. It's an all or nothing dr
Whitehouse vs Outhouse (Score:4, Funny)
Back to the fundamentals... (Score:2)
And this was posted by none other than.... (Score:5, Funny)
This is just pure coincidence, right?
Z.
I'm amazed that it got accepted, actually.... (Score:4, Interesting)
For a site populated by as many privacy advocates and libertarian types as
This isn't a new idea really (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/28659.ph
New York, you're BUSted! (Score:3, Funny)
don't laugh, Pittsburgh, you're next.
This is NOT for Enforcement Purposes (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
This Is A Polutant Thang, Not The Drug War (Score:5, Informative)
Now, water planners have to consider a much wider range of crap, from all the acetaminophen, birth control hormones, caffeine, and - yes - dope we're pissing away, as well as the usual collection of bacteria, viruses, organic matter, pez dispensers, and whatnot. It's not only that you don't want that stuff in the water supply, you don't want it collecting in the fish from the lake, Bambi's mom in the woods, or that water you merely boiled when out camping.
So, an increasing number water districts have to collect this information anyway. All that Fields did was analyze a portion of the data more intently. If your jurisdiction plans to stick a sensor into your waste stream at a point immediately before it commingles with that from your neighbors, you'll know about it 'way ahead of time, because it would be a Major project. Frankly, most water districts are so busy trying to keep everything flowing in the right direction, they couldn't be less interested in wasting time checking on your THC-related metabolic byproducts.
(two years) old news (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
For (unsubstantiated) example, your local waste water treatment station is most likely using bacteria to do some of the work, imagine what a large dose of antibiotics will do to that process.
Re:How long before... (Score:4, Informative)
Water meters measured INCOMING flow from potable water mains.
If there is sewage flowing through your meter you have a problem:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/05/29/drinking.se
Re:The drug profile of my neighborhood's sewage (Score:5, Funny)
Mmmm....tequila.
Next slashdot poll: Favorite tequila
- Cabo Wabo
- Oro Azul
- Don Julio
- Jose Ceurvo
- Sauza
- CabelleroNeal
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Followed perhaps by Corazon, then Milagro....
Please, take Sammy Hagar's tequila off your list. Never drink tequila with a rhyming name.
Blow Me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well I guess if you're not going to, I'll ask him later tonight.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually no I don't because I don't want your genes continuing.
These people you hate - what do you know of them, except that you hate them?
These politicians you vote for - what do they do when they're not feeding your fear and hate?
Why does this country, "home of the free and the brave," lock away 6x more of its population per capita than Europe? [wikipedia.org] What are we afraid of that we voluntarily throw away our bravery, conscience, constitution, respect for liberty, our fellow citizens and ourselves? How did we come to see these things as pitiable garbage?
What do we achieve when we turn a promising young man caught with marijuana into a criminal, destroying his ability to enter corporate America?
Is drug prohibition any more effective or less damaging to society than prohibition?
Do benighted true believers like you stomp all over the most well intentioned, innocent of people for asking the big questions? Are you, in all your zeal and good intention, incredibly damaging to everything you claim to love and cherish?
I feel badly for you, the country and the people that you help to destroy. I pray that you may somehow manage to escape from your ignorance, however unlikely it is that you will. I pray for us all. Please, Lord, show us all empathy and teach us all to love and do your work. May we learn to love our neighbors as we love our families.
Re:How can we end this war? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Getting High" (which by the way isn't really a suitable term for taking psychedelics since the effect is very different to "uppers", which is where the term comes from) may not be a human right, but I think it's fair to say that something being illegal just because it's fun is not a good thing.
I am a regular, but light LSD user. I take it about half as often as I drink alcohol in quantities sufficient to notice the effects. That equates to approximately 10 times a year. I actually find the effects of it improve my ability to do my job (once the "trip" is over that is) due to the way it allows me to be more creative by thinking of things in new ways that I might not have otherwise considered - important for the software design phase of any projects I'm working on.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ecstasy: kills lots of people by means of deregulating body temp. and/or making them overdose on water.
Overdosing on Ecstasy can certainly kill in the method you describe, and it's happened to a "friend of a friend" of mine (no-one I know personally). So yes, it has dangers, but so do many other substances we legally consume. If it was legal, the dangers would be well known. I don't think anyone has ever died from a single E (or even two) that contains a normal amount of the active ingredients (mostly MDMA, but not entirely in most samples).
LSD safe?? Some people never come back from the trip. Some others keep having recurring flashes and trips, even years after taking it.
I've heard this a lot, but have NEVER been given a real worl