Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Bob F. on March 19, 2012, 09:05:46 PM
-
Calling all chemists, professional and, aahhh, amature: I'm an ER nurse & SWMBO is a Med Tech in same hospital lab. We're were seeing a lot of "bath salts" for a while but they're now illegal, for what that's worth. Hearing on the news about "synthetic marijuana" hitting big & kids coming to ED with high BP, etc. We're seening kids completely gorked but showing negative UDS. Our lab test for 10 drugs. How the hell are they masking this????????????
-
Not a chemist but I know this one!
The tests you are using are not looking for the stuff you are dealing with.
Explain to the head of toxicology testing that failing to add appropriate new tests exposes them both professionally and personally to liability, as well as exposing the hospital. Be sure to mention the availability of government money and an armored vehicle to transport specimins in.
stay safe.
-
Calling all chemists, professional and, aahhh, amature: I'm an ER nurse & SWMBO is a Med Tech in same hospital lab. We're were seeing a lot of "bath salts" for a while but they're now illegal, for what that's worth. Hearing on the news about "synthetic marijuana" hitting big & kids coming to ED with high BP, etc. We're seening kids completely gorked but showing negative UDS. Our lab test for 10 drugs. How the hell are they masking this????????????
What 10 drug types do you look for?
I sure I can't guess them all but...
Opiates
LSD
THC
Alcohol
Methamphetamines
Coke/crack
Barbiturates
Oxycodone type drugs
-
tricyclids & extasy also
-
As a former analytical chemist, I can answer this: the cannabinoids used in the synthetic marijuana do not trigger the THC test. They are different enough from THC such that they are not picked up by testing in a routine drug panel. You can detect some characteristic metabolites through GC/MS, but you have to know exactly what you are looking for.
Skilled chemists can make synthetic cannabinoids that are not illegal but still have psychoactive effects just by changing a couple of molecules. The science has far outstripped the law in these cases.
-
This *expletive deleted*it is very hard to detect.
And it's very, very wicked, too, and very popular. One of the more extreme cases I've heard is a guy who went crazy plucked his own eyeball out while high on bath salts (IIRC).
-
can you test for lsd?
-
This *expletive deleted* is very hard to detect.
And it's very, very wicked, too, and very popular. One of the more extreme cases I've heard is a guy who went crazy plucked his own eyeball out while high on bath salts (IIRC).
Are you sure that wasn't just the final scene from The Man With the X-Ray Eyes? :angel:
-
Indeed.
For what it's worth, many states have banned "synthetic marijuana". Here's more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_cannabis
-
Navy has just booted a hundred or so in the past 6 months or so for Spice and here in my unit there have been a couple of guys popped for it. No tests but were ratted out.
-
Don't probe too deep for knowledge. Might need some rubber vet gloves and boots around here. :O
There happen to be a couple of stories tonight on MSN.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/19/10760892-asian-leaf-kratom-making-presence-felt-in-us-emergency-rooms
http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/19/10759284-side-effects-of-synthetic-pot-aka-spice-may-be-missed-by-er-docs
And don't forget to watch out for signs of the cinnamon challenge.
jim
-
smoked bacon
-
It's pretty hard to treat someone if you don't know what the problem it. Worst bath salts case I personally was seemed to be self-propagation, the more crap this kid did, the more he wanted, been stormin' for 4 days till his also gorked GF called some friends for help.
-
I hear its the new meth, which was the new heroin, which was the new crack, which was the new cocaine, which was the new heroin...
Also, I wonder how safe this new mj-ish stuff is relative to old-school mj?
-
I hear its the new meth, which was the new heroin, which was the new crack, which was the new cocaine, which was the new heroin...
Also, I wonder how safe this new mj-ish stuff is relative to old-school mj?
Old school is a lot safer. Other than it's bred potency, we've got a few thousand years of data on it. =D
The new synthetic stuff? They tweak it enough so it's legally "different", or will pass drug tests for the old stuff, and the testing is "Do you feel something?" and if the answer is "Yeah", they ship it out.
Pretty much the equivalent of people dying from methanol bathtub gin during Prohibition.
-
I smoked the fake stuff once. Smells weird and tastes even weirder. The high was similar to the real deal but felt less comfortable. It only lasted about fifteen minutes. Guy who had it is a felon on parole (hard drugs) and uses it because he can't pop on the real stuff. Basically for him, it's better then nothing when he's bored with booze.
-
Guy who had it is a felon on parole (hard drugs) and uses it because he can't pop on the real stuff. Basically for him, it's better then nothing when he's bored with booze.
With an endorsement like that, no wonder it has taken the nation by storm! :lol:
Old school is a lot safer. Other than it's bred potency, we've got a few thousand years of data on it. =D
The new synthetic stuff? They tweak it enough so it's legally "different", or will pass drug tests for the old stuff, and the testing is "Do you feel something?" and if the answer is "Yeah", they ship it out.
Pretty much the equivalent of people dying from methanol bathtub gin during Prohibition.
I suspected as much.
-
can you test for lsd?
Supposedly. As I understand it, most tests don't, as it's very difficult to detect the miniscule amounts needed without special tests.
-
I hear its the new meth, which was the new heroin, which was the new crack, which was the new cocaine, which was the new heroin...
Also, I wonder how safe this new mj-ish stuff is relative to old-school mj?
Much less safe. Old school mj is pretty safe unless it is laced or otherwise combined/contaminated with other agents. Roughly double as risky as tobacco, give or take. In other words, virtually no short term risk except for asthmatics/allergies but long term health risks. You'd be extremely hard pressed to find an example of THC lethal overdose, if it has EVER happened.
New stuff is ... Extremely variable. Some of it is pretty friggin dangerous, others mildly so. From what I understand, it is wildly variable in terms of risk and effects. That is actually the largest risk. You have little to no knowledge of reactions, because of the complete lack of QC and difficulty in effective testing.
vaskidmark is point on. Hospitals very much need a secondary tox screen for these. It will unfortunately be significantly more complicated compared to garden variety opiates, THC, amphetamines, ethanol and barbiturates.
-
vaskidmark is point on. Hospitals very much need a secondary tox screen for these. It will unfortunately be significantly more complicated compared to garden variety opiates, THC, amphetamines, ethanol and barbiturates.
If we have to risk our children's lives to reduce the risk to our children's lives caused by illicit drugs, I'm sure it is for the best.
-
Supposedly. As I understand it, most tests don't, as it's very difficult to detect the miniscule amounts needed without special tests.
i've never even heard of anyone actually testing for acid. and you'd think i'd have run into at least one by now. and i know i never tested positive for it and if they test for it i shoulda. and i was pretty candid about what i liked to use so those in charge of testing knew
-
I've heard that the best and most reliable test for LSD is using hair follicles.
-
From what I understand, LCD metabolises so quickly that the actual drug is out of the system before the trip has barely begun.
They can't test for what is not there.
Drug testing on hair seems most relibable to catch almost everything, since once you put it in your system, traces grow out with your hair. And, if the hair is long enough, you can literally see a timeline of what was used when.
-
I've heard that the best and most reliable test for LSD is using hair follicles.
they must not test for it in va though i only got one hair test. they may just settle for one violation and not look further. i had a perfect score on those tests till 92
you ever see those lil tiny balls contained in a "contact" allergy cap? microdot is the size of one of those balls think of a ball the diameter of a mechanical pencil lead as the effective dose
-
From what I understand, LCD metabolises so quickly that the actual drug is out of the system before the trip has barely begun.
They can't test for what is not there.
Drug testing on hair seems most relibable to catch almost everything, since once you put it in your system, traces grow out with your hair. And, if the hair is long enough, you can literally see a timeline of what was used when.
It's expensive, because the hair essentially is vaporized in a gas chromatograph. The machine is expensive, and it's labor intensive, because a lab tech has to walk through the whole process with each sample. Granted, computers do a lot of the heavy lifting and analysis now, but it's still some "real lab work".
The other stuff is just dip-sticks, drop cards, or reagents that turn colors when the agent is present. Much closer to the "trained monkey labtech" end of the spectrum.
But I've got to tell you, LCD's taste horrible. I've no idea why anyone would use the stuff. Might as well chew on shards of the old CRT's instead. =D
-
Ah, this thread takes me back to writing my master's thesis back in 82 on the quantitative analysis of barbituates in urine using GC/MS. Now, most of these tests are all automated: load the sample into the cassette, press 'test' and walk away.
-
I'm on a few rehab sites and this bath salt stuff can ROYALLY *expletive deleted*ck you up. BAD, BAD, BAD stuff....
-
I'm on a few rehab sites and this bath salt stuff can ROYALLY *expletive deleted* you up. BAD, BAD, BAD stuff....
Funny how the legal stuff is worse for you than the illegal stuff.
-
Skilled chemists can make synthetic cannabinoids that are not illegal but still have psychoactive effects just by changing a couple of molecules.
In a former place of employment, I used to run prep-HPLCs to purify Delta-9 THC that the guys in the lab next door made synthetically. On a shift I was yielding about 200gm of 99.5%+ Delta-9 which we then mixed with ethanol. The stuff smelled divine.
-
It's expensive, because the hair essentially is vaporized in a gas chromatograph. The machine is expensive, and it's labor intensive, because a lab tech has to walk through the whole process with each sample. Granted, computers do a lot of the heavy lifting and analysis now, but it's still some "real lab work".
The hair samples would probably run in a LC Mass Spec machine which cost upwards of $100,000 and usually need an attachment called a PhD level Analytical chemist to run which costs even more.
Yes, its very expensive and very labor intensive work.
We used to have a PhD Chemist from India who ran our LC-MS and GC-MS machines would talk your ears off for hours about how she did the analysis if you had time to listen. =D
-
In a former place of employment, I used to run prep-HPLCs to purify Delta-9 THC that the guys in the lab next door made synthetically. On a shift I was yielding about 200gm of 99.5%+ Delta-9 which we then mixed with ethanol. The stuff smelled divine.
That's interesting. Assuming that your process was stripping out aromatic esters, that implies that the THC-Delta-9 actually has a scent. (Honest question) Is that true?
-
That's interesting. Assuming that your process was stripping out aromatic esters, that implies that the THC-Delta-9 actually has a scent. (Honest question) Is that true?
Yes, it had a nice smell to it.
Edit: It didn't hurt that it was mixed with ethanol either which has a very pleasant smell to me as well.
The THC smelled a bit like weak turpentine or pine-sol.