Rogue-Nation3

A very interesting video

The issue listed here

Summary

Tabacco and Cocaine found in mummies



The problem is this
 Tabacco and cocaine plants are native to south america

this leads to an interesting point
It indicates contact by egypt with south america
in an earlier point of prehistory

So lets take a look together at this

First
A history of Tobacco 
A history of Cocaine

The discovery process of the cocaine mummies
Procedure used
who discovered it
Counter claims

Evidence 

So lets start with something simple
Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories

Quote:Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[/url]
For the prevailing model(s) describing the geographic origins and early migrations of humans in the Americas, see Settlement of the Americas.
For more details on Native American genetic heritage, see Genetic history of indigenous peoples of the Americas.

Reenactment of a Viking landing in L'Anse aux Meadows

Claims of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact relate to visits to, the discovery of or interaction with the Americas and/or indigenous peoples of the Americas by people from Africa, Asia, Europe, or Oceania before Columbus's first voyage to the Caribbean in 1492.[1] Such contact is generally accepted in prehistory, but has been hotly debated in the historic period.[2]

Two historical cases of pre-Columbian contact have widespread support amongst the scientific and scholarly mainstream. There is considerable evidence in support of successful explorations which led to Norse settlement of Greenland and the L'Anse aux Meadowssettlement in Newfoundland[3] some 500 years before to Columbus.

The scientific and scholarly responses to other post-prehistory, pre-Columbian contact claims have varied. Some such contact claims are examined in reputable peer-reviewed sources. Other contact claims, typically based on circumstantial and ambiguous interpretations of archaeological finds, cultural comparisons, comments in historical documents, and narrative accounts, have been dismissed as fringe science or pseudoarcheology.[4][5]

scrolling down to

Quote:Claims of Egyptian coca and tobacco[edit]

The mummy of Ramesses II

Traces of coca and nicotine found in some Egyptian mummies have led to speculation that Ancient Egyptians may have traveled to the New World. The initial discovery was made by a German toxicologist, Svetlana Balabanova, after examining the mummy of a priestess called Henut Taui. Follow-up tests of the hair shaft, performed to rule out contamination, gave the same results.[120]

A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[121] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[121] Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[121] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[121] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[122]

Mainstream scholars remain skeptical, and they do not see this as proof of ancient contact between Africa and the Americas, especially because there may be possible Old World sources.[123][124] Two attempts to replicate Balabanova's finds of cocaine failed, suggesting "that either Balabanova and her associates are misinterpreting their results or that the samples of mummies tested by them have been mysteriously exposed to cocaine."[125]

A re-examination in the 1970s of the mummy of Ramesses II revealed the presence of fragments of tobacco leaves in its abdomen. This became a popular topic in fringe literature and the media and was seen as proof of contact between Ancient Egypt and the New World. The investigator, Maurice Bucaille, noted that when the mummy was unwrapped in 1886 the abdomen was left open and that "it was no longer possible to attach any importance to the presence inside the abdominal cavity of whatever material was found there, since the material could have come from the surrounding environment."[126] Following the renewed discussion of tobacco sparked by Balabanova's research and its mention in a 2000 publication by Rosalie David, a study in the journal Antiquity suggested that reports of both tobacco and cocaine in mummies "ignored their post-excavation histories" and pointed out that the mummy of Ramesses II had been moved five times between 1883 and 1975.[124]

Well If I followed correctly this is the potential star of the show

Henut Taui

Quote:Henut Taui

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henut_Taui#p-search]
For other ladies with same or similar name, see Henuttawy.




Henuttaui[1]
in hieroglyphs
Henut Taui, or Henuttaui, Henuttawy (fl. ca 1000 BCE) was an Ancient Egyptian priestess during the 21st Dynasty whose remains were mummified. She is mainly known for being one of the so-called "cocaine mummies".

Background[edit]
Little to nothing is known about her life. She was a priestess and chantress in the temple of Amun at Thebes, and after her death her body was embalmed and buried in the Deir el-Bahari necropolis.

After the discovery of her tomb, her mummy became a property of the king of Bavaria (likely Ludwig I), who later donated it to the Staatliche Sammlung für Ägyptische Kunst of Munich, where it is still located today (ÄS 57).[2] Her coffin, once located at the National Archaeology Museum of Lisbon,[3] is now in Munich too.[4]

Rediscovery[edit]
See also: Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories § Claims of Egyptian coca and tobacco
In 1992, German toxicologist Svetlana Balabanova discovered traces of cocaine, hashish and nicotine on Henut Taui's hair as well as on the hair of several others mummies of the museum[5] which is significant,[2] in that the only source for cocaine and nicotine had been considered to be the coca and tobacco plants native to the Americas, and were not thought to have been present in Africa until after Columbus voyaged to America.[6]
This result was interpreted by theorists and supporters of contacts between pre-Columbian people and ancient Egyptians, as a proof for their claims. Nevertheless, two successive analysis on other groups of Egyptian mummies and human remains, failed to fully reproduce Balabanova's results, showing in fact positive results only for nicotine.[7][6]

After these experiments, even assuming that cocaine was actually found on mummies, it is likely that this could be a contamination occurred after the discovery. The same argument can be applied to nicotine but, in addition, various plants other than tobacco are a source of nicotine and two of these, Withania somnifera and Apium graveolens, were known and used by ancient Egyptians.[7]

References[edit]

1. Jump up^ Daressy, G. (1907), “Les cercueils des prètres d'Ammon”, ASAE 8, p. 13 (see A 136).
   
   
2. ^ Jump up to:a b Rice, M., Who is who in Ancient Egypt, 1999 (2004), Routledge, London, ISBN 0-203-44328-4, pp. 64-65.
   
   
3. Jump up^ Daressy, G., op. cit., p. 19 (see A 136).
   
   
4. Jump up^ Porter, B. & Moss, R., Topographical bibliography of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic texts, reliefs and paintings. I. The Theban necropolis, part 2. 2nd edition, Oxford University Press 1964, p. 639.
   
   
5. Jump up^ Balabanova, S. et al. (1992), "First Identification of Drugs in Egyptian Mummies", Naturwissenschaften 79, p. 358.
   
   
6. ^ Jump up to:a b "Curse of the Cocaine Mummies" written and directed by Sarah Marris. (Producers: Hilary Lawson, Maureen Lemire and narrated by Hilary Kilberg). A TVF Production for Channel Four in association with the Discovery Channel, 1997.
   
   
7. ^ Jump up to:a b Counsell, David J. "Intoxicants in Ancient Egypt? Opium, nymphea, coca, and tobacco", in David, Rosalie (ed), Egyptian mummies and modern science, Cambridge University Press 2008, pp. 211-15. ISBN 978-0-511-37705-1
   

My first issue appears right here at the end

It is an editing of view points

it is likely that this could be a contamination occurred after the discovery.

This will be covered but is a hazard of wikipedia
note no reference has been provided for this phrase.. It is propaganda in history

No reference to said proof of statement

lets take a look

Please note this is not in any order.. 

I am doing this my way..

Tabacco

Quote:Tobacco is a product prepared from the leaves of the tobacco plant by curing them. The plant is part of the genus Nicotianaand of the Solanaceae (nightshade) family. While more than 70 species of tobacco are known, the chief commercial crop is N. tabacum. The more potent variant N. rustica is also used around the world.

Tobacco contains the alkaloid nicotine, which is a stimulant. Dried tobacco leaves are mainly used for smoking in cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, and flavored shisha tobacco. They can also be consumed as snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco and snus.

Ra ra skip a few same thread

Quote:Nicotiana[edit]

Main article: Nicotiana
See also: List of tobacco diseases

[/url]
Nicotine is the compound responsible for the addictive nature of tobacco use.

Tobacco ([url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotiana_rustica]Nicotiana rustica) flower, leaves, and buds

Many species of tobacco are in the genus of herbs Nicotiana. It is part of the nightshade family (Solanaceae) indigenous to North and South America, Australia, south west Africa, and the South Pacific.

Most nightshades contain varying amounts of nicotine, a powerful neurotoxin to insects. However, tobaccos tend to contain a much higher concentration of nicotine than the others. Unlike many other Solanaceae species, they do not contain tropane alkaloids, which are often poisonous to humans and other animals.

Despite containing enough nicotine and other compounds such as germacrene and anabasine and other piperidine alkaloids (varying between species) to deter most herbivores,[18] a number of such animals have evolved the ability to feed on Nicotiana species without being harmed. Nonetheless, tobacco is unpalatable to many species, and accordingly some tobacco plants (chiefly N. glauca) have become established as invasive weeds in some places.

History of Tobacco

Quote:Tobacco has a long history from its usages in the early Americas. Increasingly popular with the arrival of Spain to America, which introduced tobacco to the Europeans by whom it was heavily traded. Following the industrial revolution, cigarettes were becoming popularized in the New World as well as Europe, which fostered yet another unparalleled increase in growth. This remained so until scientific studies in the mid-1900s demonstrated the negative health effects of tobacco smoking including lung and throat cancer.

Same thread.. la la la la.. Skip a few

Quote:Early history[edit]

Tobacco was first discovered by the native people of Mesoamerica and South America and later introduced to Europe and the rest of the world.

Tobacco had already long been used in the Americas by the time European settlers arrived and the practice to Europe, where it became popular. Eastern North American tribes have historically carried tobacco in pouches as a readily accepted trade item, as well as smoking it in pipe ceremonies, whether for sacred ceremonies or those to seal a treaty or agreement.[1][2] Tobacco is considered a gift from the Creator, and tobacco smoke is seen as carrying one's thoughts and prayers to the spirits.[3]

In addition to its use in spiritual ceremonies, tobacco is also used in ethnobotany for medical treatment of physical conditions. As a pain killer it has been used for earache and toothache and occasionally as a poultice. Some indigenous peoples in California have used tobacco as one ingredient in smoking mixtures for treating colds; usually it is mixed with the leaves of the small desert sage, Salvia dorrii, or the root of Indian balsam or cough root, Leptotaenia multifida (the addition of which was thought to be particularly good for asthma and tuberculosis).[4] In addition to its traditional medicinal uses, tobacco was also used as a form of currency between Native Americans and Colonists from the 1620s on.[5]

Religious use of tobacco is still common among many indigenous peoples, particularly in the Americas. Among the Cree and Ojibwe of Canada and the north-central United States, it is offered to the Creator, with prayers, and is used in sweat lodges, pipe ceremonies, and is presented as a gift. A gift of tobacco is traditional when asking an Ojibwe elder a question of a spiritual nature.

Nicotiana

Quote:Nicotiana (/ˌnɪkoʊʃiˈeɪnə, nɪˌkoʊ-, -kɒti-, -ˈɑːnə, -ˈænə/[3][4][5]) is a genus of herbaceous plants and shrubs of the family Solanaceae, that is indigenous to the Americas, Australia, south west Africa and the South Pacific. Various Nicotiana species, commonly referred to as tobacco plants, are cultivated as ornamental garden plants. N. tabacum is grown worldwide for production of tobacco leaf for cigarettesand other tobacco products.

Of note it is added that it is native to areas other then North and South America

Cocaine

Quote:Cocaine, also known as coke, is a strong stimulant mostly used as a recreational drug.[10] It is commonly snorted, inhaled as smoke, or as a solution injected into a vein.[9] Mental effects may include loss of contact with reality, an intense feeling of happiness, or agitation.[9] Physical symptoms may include a fast heart rate, sweating, and large pupils.[9] High doses can result in very high blood pressure or body temperature.[11] Effects begin within seconds to minutes of use and last between five and ninety minutes.[9] Cocaine has a small number of accepted medical uses such as numbing and decreasing bleeding during nasal surgery.[12]


Cocaine is addictive due to its effect on the reward pathway in the brain.[10] After a short period of use, there is a high risk that dependence will occur.[10] Its use also increases the risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, lung problems in those who smoke it, blood infections, and sudden cardiac death.[10][13] Cocaine sold on the street is commonly mixed with local anesthetics, cornstarch, quinine, or sugar, which can result in additional toxicity.[14] Following repeated doses a person may have decreased ability to feel pleasureand be very physically tired.[10]

Cocaine acts by inhibiting the reuptake of serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine.[10] This results in greater concentrations of these three neurotransmitters in the brain.[10] It can easily cross the blood–brain barrier and may lead to the breakdown of the barrier.[15][16] Cocaine is a naturally occurring substance found in the coca plant which are mostly grown in South America.[9] In 2013, 419 kilograms were produced legally.[17] It is estimated that the illegal market for cocaine is 100 to 500 billion USD each year.[10] With further processing crack cocaine can be produced from cocaine.[10]

After cannabis, cocaine is the most frequently used illegal drug globally.[18] Between 14 and 21 million people use the drug each year.[10] Use is highest in North America followed by Europe and South America.[10] Between one and three percent of people in the developed world have used cocaine at some point in their life.[10] In 2013 cocaine use directly resulted in 4,300 deaths, up from 2,400 in 1990.[19] The leaves of the coca plant have been used by Peruvians since ancient times.[14] Cocaine was first isolated from the leaves in 1860.[10] Since 1961 the international Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs has required countries to make recreational use of cocaine a crime.[20]

Skip a few.. same article

Quote:Discovery

[/url]
Coca leaf in Bolivia

For over a thousand years South American indigenous peoples have chewed the leaves of Erythroxylon coca, a plant that contains vital nutrients as well as numerous alkaloids, including cocaine. The coca leaf was, and still is, chewed almost universally by some indigenous communities. The remains of coca leaves have been found with ancient Peruvian mummies, and pottery from the time period depicts humans with bulged cheeks, indicating the presence of something on which they are chewing.[99] There is also evidence that these cultures used a mixture of coca leaves and saliva as an anesthetic for the performance of trepanation.[100]

When the Spanish arrived in South America, most at first ignored aboriginal claims that the leaf gave them strength and energy, and declared the practice of chewing it the work of the Devil.[101] But after discovering that these claims were true, they legalized and taxed the leaf, taking 10% off the value of each crop.[102] In 1569, Nicolás Monardes described the indigenous peoples' practice of chewing a mixture of tobacco and coca leaves to induce "great contentment":

Quote:When they wished to make themselves drunk and out of judgment they chewed a mixture of tobacco and coca leaves which make them go as they were out of their wittes.[103]

In 1609, Padre Blas Valera wrote:

Quote:Coca protects the body from many ailments, and our doctors use it in powdered form to reduce the swelling of wounds, to strengthen broken bones, to expel cold from the body or prevent it from entering, and to cure rotten wounds or sores that are full of maggots. And if it does so much for outward ailments, will not its singular virtue have even greater effect in the entrails of those who eat it?[104]

 leads us to

Coca

Quote:From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca#p-search]
This article is about the four cultivated plants in the family Erythroxylaceae. For the drug, see Cocaine. For other uses, see Coca (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with Coca-Cola or cocoa.
Coca

Erythroxylum novogranatense var. novogranatenseleaves and berries
Product name
Coca
Source plant(s)
Erythroxylum coca var. coca, Erythroxylum coca var. ipadu, Erythroxylum novogranatense var. novogranatense, Erythroxylum novogranatense var. truxillense
Part(s) of plant
Leaf
Geographic origin
Andes[1]
Active ingredients
Cocaine, benzoylecgonine, ecgonine, others
Legal status

• AU: S9 (Prohibited)
  
• CA: Schedule I
  
• UK: Class A
  
• US: Schedule II
  
• UN: Narcotic Schedule I
  
• Controlled unless decocainized
  

Coca is any of the four cultivated plants in the family Erythroxylaceae, native to western South America.
The plant is grown as a cash crop in Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru, even in areas where its cultivation is unlawful.[2] There are some reports that the plant is being cultivated in the south of Mexico as a cash crop and an alternative to smuggling its recreational product cocaine.[3] It also plays a role in many traditional Andean cultures as well as the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta (see Traditional uses).
Coca is known throughout the world for its psychoactive alkaloid, cocaine. The alkaloid content of coca leaves is relatively low, between 0.25% and 0.77%.[4] The native people use it for a stimulant, like coffee, an energy source. Coca leaf extract had been used in Coca-Cola products since 1885, with cocaine being completely eliminated from the products in or around 1903.[5][6] Extraction of cocaine from coca requires several solvents and a chemical process known as an acid / base extraction, which can fairly easily extract the alkaloids from the plant.

Contents
  [hide] 

• 1Description
  
• 2Species and evolution
  • 2.1Herbicide resistant varieties
    
• 3Cultivation
  
• 4Pharmacological aspects
  
• 5History
  
• 6Traditional uses
  • 6.1Medicine
    
  • 6.2Nutrition
    
  • 6.3Religion
    
  • 6.4Traditional preparation
    • 6.4.1Chew
      
    • 6.4.2Tea
      
• 7Commercial and industrial uses
  • 7.1New markets
    
• 8Literary references
  
• 9International prohibition of coca leaf
  
• 10Legal status
  • 10.1Netherlands
    
  • 10.2United States
    
  • 10.3Australia
    
• 11See also
  
• 12References
  
• 13External links
  

Description[edit]
The coca plant resembles a blackthorn bush, and grows to a height of 2 to 3 metres (7 to 10 feet). The branches are straight, and the leaves are thin, opaque, oval, and taper at the extremities. A marked characteristic of the leaf is an areolated portion bounded by two longitudinal curved lines, one line on each side of the midrib, and more conspicuous on the under face of the leaf.

The flowers are small, and disposed in clusters on short stalks; the corolla is composed of five yellowish-white petals, the anthers are heart-shaped, and the pistil consists of three carpels united to form a three-chambered ovary. The flowers mature into red berries.
The leaves are sometimes eaten by the larvae of the moth Eloria noyesi.

Species and evolution[edit]
There are two species of cultivated coca, each with two varieties:

• Erythroxylum coca
  • Erythroxylum coca var. coca (Bolivian or Huánuco Coca) – well adapted to the eastern Andes of Peru and Bolivia, an area of humid, tropical, montane forest.
    
  • Erythroxylum coca var. ipadu (Amazonian Coca) – cultivated in the lowland Amazon Basin in Peru and Colombia.
    
  
  
• Erythroxylum novogranatense
  • Erythroxylum novogranatense var. novogranatense (Colombian Coca) – a highland variety that is utilized in lowland areas. It is cultivated in drier regions found in Colombia. However, E. novogranatense is very adaptable to varying ecological conditions. The leaves have parallel lines on either side of the central vein.
    
  • Erythroxylum novogranatense var. truxillense (Trujillo Coca) – grown primarily in Peru and Colombia. the leaves of E. novogranatense var. truxillense does not have parallel lines on either side of the central vein like all other varieties.
    

[*]All four of the cultivated cocas were domesticated in pre-Columbian times and are more closely related to each other than to any other species.[2]

There are two main theories relating to the evolution of the cultivated cocas. The first (put forth by Plowman[7] and Bohm[8]) suggests that Erythroxylum coca var. coca is ancestral, while Erythroxylum novogranatense var. truxillense is derived from it to be drought tolerant, and Erythroxylum novogranatense var. novogranatense derived from Erythroxylum novogranatense var. truxillense.

Recent research based on genetic evidence (Johnson et al. in 2005,[9] Emche et al. in 2011,[10] and Islam 2011[11]) does not support this linear evolution and instead suggests a second domestication event as the origin of the Erythroxylum novogranatense varieties. There may be a common, but undiscovered ancestor.[10]

Wild populations of Erythroxylum coca var. coca are found in the eastern Andes; the other 3 taxa are only known as cultivated plants.

The two subspecies of Erythroxylum coca are almost indistinguishable phenotypically. Erythroxylum novogranatense var. novogranatense and Erythroxylum novogranatense var. truxillense are phenotypically similar, but morphologically distinguishable. Under the older Cronquist system of classifying flowering plants, this was placed in an order Linales; more modern systems place it in the order Malpighiales.

[*]


Skip a few same article

Quote:Traces of coca have been found in mummies dating 3000 years back.[27] Other evidence dates the communal chewing of coca with lime 8000 years back.[28] Beginning with the Valdivian culture, circa 3000 BC, there is an unbroken record of coca leaf consumption by succeeding cultural groups on the coast of Ecuador until European arrival as shown in their ceramic sculpture and abundant caleros or lime pots. Coca consumption among the North Coast Peruvian tribes begins around 2000 BC as evidenced by the caleros found by Junius Bird at Huaca Prieta and the emergence of dedicated lime containers in the Jetetepeque river valley. Extensive archaeological evidence for the chewing of coca leaves dates back at least to the 6th century AD Moche period, and the subsequent Inca period, based on mummies found with a supply of coca leaves, pottery depicting the characteristic cheek bulge of a coca chewer, spatulas for extracting alkali and figured bags for coca leaves and lime made from precious metals, and gold representations of coca in special gardens of the Inca in Cuzco.[29][30]


Coca chewing may originally have been limited to the eastern Andes before its introduction to the Inca. As the plant was viewed as having a divine origin, its cultivation became subject to a state monopoly and its use restricted to nobles and a few favored classes (court orators, couriers, favored public workers, and the army) by the rule of the Topa Inca (1471–1493). As the Incan empire declined, the leaf became more widely available. After some deliberation, Philip II of Spain issued a decree recognizing the drug as essential to the well-being of the Andean Indians but urging missionaries to end its religious use. The Spanish are believed to have effectively encouraged use of coca by an increasing majority of the population to increase their labor output and tolerance for starvation, but it is not clear that this was planned deliberately.[citation needed]

Coca was first introduced to Europe in the 16th century, but did not become popular until the mid-19th century, with the publication of an influential paper by Dr. Paolo Mantegazza praising its stimulating effects on cognition. This led to invention of coca wine and the first production of pure cocaine. Coca wine (of which Vin Mariani was the best-known brand) and other coca-containing preparations were widely sold as patent medicines and tonics, with claims of a wide variety of health benefits. The original version of Coca-Cola was among these. These products became illegal in most countries outside of South America in the early 20th century, after the addictive nature of cocaine was widely recognized. In 1859, Albert Niemann of the University of Göttingen became the first person to isolate the chief alkaloid of coca, which he named "cocaine".[31]

In the early 20th century, the Dutch colony of Java became a leading exporter of coca leaf. By 1912 shipments to Amsterdam, where the leaves were processed into cocaine, reached 1000 tons, overtaking the Peruvian export market. Apart from the years of the First World War, Java remained a greater exporter of coca than Peru until the end of the 1920s.[32] Other colonial powers also tried to grow coca (including the British in India), but with the exception of the Japanese in Formosa, these were relatively unsuccessful.[32]

In recent times (2006), the governments of several South American countries, such as Peru, Bolivia and Venezuela, have defended and championed the traditional use of coca, as well as the modern uses of the leaf and its extracts in household products such as teas and toothpaste. The coca plant was also the inspiration for Bolivia's Coca Museum.

[*]

South America origin

We interrupt this reading with another video that should have been in the first post


WEEEEE




Another one similar
same images ect..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57gaB1VtJiQ



I am cutting out a few things to keep it shorter

mostly like with the Cocaine thing
chemistry ect

Tried to keep to history of ancient past
then the plant 
basic then ancient

WOW,,,, , this needs to be on our FB I would think, maybe Mystic Wanderer or one of our other FB Mods will know the answer to this.
Very Interesting.

We have a basic history of the plants..

Wait.. Do we?

Notice that the Tobacco plants has family now in West africa..

When you double check me.. Notice something

Tobacco is listed as native to South America

but rarely is it mentioned as from the other areas..

Cocaine derived from the Coca plant native to south America


Both instances led some of the people to pretty much start looking to say.. Well we must have had an extinct version we do not know about..

The funny thing is that is not covered indepth

I mention it because of a point from history..
The Romans had a morning after pill (wrong use of words but in effect is better phrase
the plant was harvested to extinction by the romans

So the small possibility exist 


Let us take our next step in this..

Svetlana Balabanova

This woman is the one who started this debate

However finding S#$% on her to link to so you can review her training ect.. good luck..

Their are potential links but those interested have google
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1CAASU...vy4nom_v3o


Da lazy scholar is the title for a reason

But we must dig still

American Drugs in Egyptian Mummies

Quote:File:  <mummy.htm>                                                                          <Home URL>             <Index>                     <American Archeology>

[For teaching purposes only, do not review, quote or abstract]
 
American Drugs in Egyptian Mummies
 
S. A. Wells
 
Abstract:
 

       The recent findings of cocaine, nicotine, and hashish in Egyptian mummies by Balabanova et. al. have been  criticized on grounds that: contamination of the mummies may have occurred, improper techniques may have been used, chemical decomposition may have produced the compounds in question, recent mummies of drug users were mistakenly evaluated, that no similar cases are known of such compounds in long-dead bodies, and especially that pre-Columbian transoceanic voyages are highly speculative.  These criticisms are each discussed in turn.  Balabanova et. al. are shown to have used and confirmed their findings with accepted methods.  The possibility of the compounds being byproducts of decomposition is shown to be without precedent and highly unlikely.  The possibility that the researchers made evaluations from  faked mummies of recent drug users is shown to be highly unlikely in almost all cases.  Several additional cases of identified American drugs in mummies are discussed.  Additionally, it is shown that significant evidence exists for contact with the Americas in pre-Columbian times.  It is determined that the original findings are supported by substantial evidence despite the initial criticisms.  [Please refer also to <Edlin>]

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

       In a one-page article appearing in Naturwissenschaften, German scientist Svetla Balabanova (1992) and two of her colleagues reported findings of cocaine, hashish and nicotine in Egyptian mummies.  The findings were immediately identified as improbable on the grounds that two of the substances were known to be derived only from American plants - cocaine from Erythroxylon coca, and nicotine from Nicotiana tabacum.  The suggestion that such compounds could have found their way to Egypt before Columbus' discovery of America seemed patently impossible.

 

       The study was done as part of an ongoing program of investigating the use of hallucinogenic substances in ancient societies.  The authors themselves were quite surprised by the findings (Discovery, 1997) but stood y their results despite being the major focus of criticism in the following volume of aturwissenschaften.  Of the nine mummies evaluated, all showed signs of cocaine and hashish Tetrahydrocannabinol), whereas all but one sampled positive for nicotine.  It is interesting too that the concentrations of the compounds suggest uses other than that of abuse.  (For example, modern drug addicts often have concentrations of cocaine and nicotine in their hair 75 and 20 times higher respectively than that found in the mummy hair samples.) It is even possible that the quantities found may be high due to concentration in body tissues through time.

 

       Without question, the study has sparked an interest in various disciplines.  As Balabanova et. al. predicted, "...the results open up an entirely new field of research which unravels aspects of past human life-style far beyond [sic] basic biological reconstruction."

 

The Criticisms

 

       The biggest criticism of the findings of Balabanova et. al. was not necessarily directed at the extraction process per se, although this was discussed.  The biggest criticism was that cocaine and nicotine could not possibly have been used in Egypt before the discovery of the New World, and that transatlantic journeys were not known - or at least they are highly speculative.  It is safe to say that the criticisms of the study would have been minimal or nonexistent if the findings had been made of Old World drugs.  Such findings, in fact, would not have been at all unusual as the use of stimulants were known in Egypt.  Poppy seeds and lotus plants have been identified for just this use in manuscripts (the Papyrus Ebers) and in hieroglyphs (as Balabanova et. al. show).

 

       Schafer (1993) argues that, "the detection of pharmacologically active substances in mummified material never proves their use prior to death." He argues that such compounds could have been introduced as part of the mummification process.  The suggestion is that (especially) nicotine could have been introduced around the mummy (and subsequently absorbed into its tissue) as an insecticide (being used as a preservative) within relatively modern times.  A similar criticism was raised by Bjorn (1993) who wondered if nicotine might have been absorbed by the mummies from cigarette smoke in the museums where the mummies have been preserved.  According to Schafer, the only way to show that the compounds were taken into the bodies while they were alive would be to find different concentrations at different distances from the scalp - a procedure not undertaken by the authors.

 

       Another interesting criticism of Schafer (1993) is that Balabanova et. al. might have been the victims of faked mummies.  Apparently people (living in the not too far distant past) believed that mummies contained black tar called bitumen and that it could be ground up and used to cure various illnesses.  In fact the very word 'mummy' comes from the Persian 'mummia' meaning bitumen (Discovery, 1997).  A business seems to have developed wherein recently dead bodies where deliberately aged to appear as mummies and that some of the perpetrators of such deeds were drug abusers.

 

       The criticism that seems most popular is that the identified drugs might have been products of "necrochemical and necrobiochemical processes" (Schafer, 1993; Bjorn, 1993).  One explanation is that Egyptian priests used atropine-alkaloid-containing plants during the mummification process that subsequently underwent changes in the mummy to resemble the identified compounds.

 

       Yet another argument is that there is nothing in the literature showing that any of the three compounds have been identified in bodies that have been dead for some time.

 

Reply to the Critics
 
Analytical Techniques and Contamination

 

       “In the study, samples were taken from nine mummies that were dated from between 1070 B.C. to 395 A.D.  The samples including hair, skin and muscle were taken from the head and abdomen.  Bone tissue was also taken from the skull.  All tissues were pulverized and dissolved in NaCl solution, homogenized, and centrifuged.  A portion of the supernatant was extracted with chloroform and dried and then dissolved in a phosphate buffer.  Samples were then measured by both radioimmunoassay (Merck; Biermann) and gas chromatography / mass spectrometry (Hewlett Packard) - hereinafter GCMS. “

 

       “This is the procedure used to produce what McPhillips (1998) considered indisputable evidence for confirming products of substance abuse in hair.  Within recent years, hair analysis has been used more commonly in this kind of screening process and the techniques employed have been optimized.  Mistakes are known to have occurred in some cases evaluating for metals, but the ability to detect drugs such as cocaine, nicotine, and hashish seem not been problematic (Wilhelm, 1996).   The two possible mistakes in analyzing hair for drugs include false positives, which are caused by environmental contamination; and false negatives, where actual compounds are lost because of such things as hair coloring or perming.  In recent years, these techniques of hair analysis have revealed the interesting findings of arsenic in the hair of Napoleon Bonaparte, and laudanum in the hair of the poet Keats. “

 

       “The procedure includes a thorough washing of the hair to remove external contaminants followed by a process of physical degradation using a variety of methods (such as digestion with enzymes or dissolution with acids, organic solvents, etc.,).  Following these preparatory procedures, the hair is then analyzed.   Antibody testing (e.g. radio immunoassay) is a well-established procedure although there is small potential of obtaining false positive results.  These are mainly caused by the cross-reactivity of the antibody with other compounds, including minor analgesics, cold remedies and antipsychotic drugs - compounds not likely to be found in Egyptian mummies.  Because of the possible false positives, chromatography (GC-MS) is routinely utilized to confirm the results.  “

 

       “The suggestion of nicotine contamination from cigarette smoke is eliminated by the use of solvents and/or acids in the cleaning process - methods used by Balabanova et. al. and all other researchers that have documented drugs in mummies. “

 

       “The validity of Balabanova's findings seems to be vindicated at least so far as the analytical methods used in the study.  The authors' methods as well as those in the additional findings reported here (see below) have used the combination of immunological and chromatographic methods to both analyze and confirm samples. “

 

Faked Mummies

 

       “The argument that the mummies might have been modern fakes was investigated by David (Discovery, 1997).   David is the Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, and undertook her own analysis of mummies, independent of Balabanova's group.   In addition, she traveled to Munich to evaluate for herself the mummies studied by Balabanova's group.   Unfortunately the mummies weren't available for filming and they were being kept isolated from further research on grounds of religious respect.   David had to resort to the museum's records.   She found that, except for the city's famous mummy of Henot Tawi (Lady of the Two Lands) the mummies were of unknown origin and some were represented only by detached heads. “

 

       “David's inability to examine the mummies herself may have kept the possibility of faked ones open; however, her evaluation of the museum's records seemed to indicate otherwise.   The mummies were preserved with packages of their viscera inside.   Some even contained images of the gods.   In addition the state of mummification itself was very good.   The isolated heads may have been fakes (evidence one way or the other is lacking) but the intact bodies examined in Balabanova's research were clearly genuine. “

 

Chemical Changes

 

       “The argument that the identified drugs might be byproducts of decomposition is highly unlikely.   The argument appears to resemble a 'Just So' story of biochemical evolution without the benefit of natural selection.   Schafer (1993) admits that natural decomposition or mummification has never led to the synthesis of cocaine or related alkaloids but leaves the possibility open anyway.   He argues that the compounds in question might theoretically have been produced by atropine-alkaloid-containing plants (such as were present in species that were utilized in the mummification process). “

 

       “The benefit of the doubt in this case clearly goes to Balabanova et. al. Until it is shown how cocaine could be produced in this way, the argument is hypothetical at best. “

 

Isolated Example

 

       “The detection of drugs in human hair is a fairly recent endeavor (McPhillips, 1998; Sachs, 1998).   A few compounds were identified during the 1980's but it wasn't until the 1990s that drug screening via hair analysis became accepted and used as a possible alternative to urine sampling.   The criticism that no known cases of cocaine, nicotine, or hashish have been reported in human hair must, therefore be interpreted with clarification.   None of these compounds had been observed in human hair because the process had not been fully developed, nor had the application even been considered until quite recently.   Even then the claim is not true. “

 

       “Cartwell et. al. (1991) using a radio immunoassay method detected cocaine metabolites in pre-Columbian mummy hair from South America.   In this study two out of eight mummies analyzed showed cocaine metabolites.   All samples tested were confirmed by a separate laboratory (Psychomedics Corporation, Santa Monica, California) using GC-MS.   The two mummies testing positive were from the Camarones Valley in northern Chile.   The artifacts as well as the mummies at this site were typical of Inca culture. “

 

       “Since the initial work of Balabanova et. al., other studies have revealed the same drugs (cocaine, nicotine, and hashish) in Egyptian mummies, confirming the original results.   Nerlich et. al. (1995), in a study evaluating the tissue pathology of an Egyptian mummy dating from approximately 950 B.C., found the compounds in several of the mummy's organs.   They found the highest amounts of nicotine and cocaine in the mummy's stomach, and the hashish traces primarily in the lungs.   These findings were again identified using both radio immunoassay and GSMS techniques.   Very similar results were again found in yet another study by Parsche and Nerlich (1995).   Again, the findings were obtained using the immunological and chromatographic techniques. “

 

       “David's work (Discovery, 1997) though not finding cocaine, did confirm the presence of nicotine.   This finding has seemed a little less threatening to conservative scholarship in that it seems possible (albeit unlikely) that a nicotine-producing plant may have existed in Africa within historic times - only becoming extinct recently. “

 

       “Such a possibility might allow for a comfortable resolution to conservative scholarship but doesn't explain the evidence of cocaine.   Additionally, the possibility of a native plant going extinct is unlikely.   Much more reasonable would be that an introduced species under cultivation could go extinct, yet this only begs the question of the original provenance of the species. “

 

       “In any event, considering the several confirmations of Balabanova's work (as well as that of Caldwell et. al. prior to her study) it appears that the argument against their findings based on too little evidence is quickly vanishing (if not already obviated). “

 

Pre-Columbian Voyages to America

 

       “The major reason for the initial criticisms to Balabanova's work is the disbelief in pre-Columbian transoceanic contacts.   Egyptologist John Baines (Discovery, 1997) went so far as to state, "The idea  that the Egyptians should have traveled to America is overall absurd...and I also don't know anyone who spends time doing research in these areas, because they're not perceived to be areas that have any real meaning for the subjects.  " Another interpretation on why researchers haven't considered the subject closer is given by Kehoe (1998), "After mid-century, any archaeologist worried about money or career avoided looking at pre-Columbian contacts across saltwater [p. 193].." It appears that acknowledging that pre-Columbian contacts occurred was not academically acceptable.   Kehoe (1998) also gives examples of several researchers whose work has been academically marginalized because it supported these views (e.g. Stephen Jett, Carl Johannessen, Gordon Ekholm, Paul Tolstoy, and George Carter). “

 

       “Surprising at it may seem, evidence for early ocean voyages to America from the Old World is not lacking - nor is it negligibly verifiable.   Within the last two years, two periodicals, focusing on these contacts have been established.   The first, entitled Pre-Columbiana, is edited by Stephen C. Jett, Professor of Clothings and Textiles at the University of California, Davis; the second is entitled Migration and Diffusion and is edited by Professor Christine Pellek in Vienna, Italy.   There is certainly quite a bit of spurious reports of early contacts from the Old World, however, a general disregard for all of the evidence is, anymore, itself evidence of academic negligence, as these two periodicals indicate. “

 

       “A bibliography of these early contacts is given by John Sorensen (1998) in the first issue of Pre-Columbiana.   It is a good example of the kinds of evidence being uncovered by legitimate researchers and institutions.   The bibliography is itself a condensation of a two-volume work of these publications and includes titles such as: The world's oldest ship? (showing evidence for a pre-Columbian ship in America) published in Archaeology; Peruvian fabrics (showing very strong similarities between Peru and Asia) published in Anthropological papers of the American Museum of Natural History; Robbing native American cultures: Van Sertima's Afrocentricity and the Olmecs (showing evidence for connections between Africa and the Olmecs of Middle America) published in Current Anthropology; Possible Indonesian or Southeast Asian Influences in New World textile industries (showing at least three textile-related inventions that appear in both Indonesia and the New World) published in Indonesian Textiles; and, Genes may link Ancient Eurasians, Native Americans, published in Science.”

 

       “And the list goes on and on - some evidence being better than others - but as a whole it seems pretty much irrefutable. Claims to the contrary seem to be made by individuals with a vested interest in the isolationist position. The evidence, pro and con, when evaluated objectively, would seem without question, to favor the diffusionist position (which claims that pre-Columbian contacts took place). “

 

Considerations

 

       “The initial reaction to the findings of Balabanova et. al. was highly critical.   These criticisms were not based on a known failing in the authors' research methodology, rather they were attempts to cast doubt on an implication of the research - that cocaine and nicotine were brought to Egypt from the New World before Columbus.   This conclusion is not acceptable to conservative investigators of the past.   In fact it suggests a deep-rooted aversion to what Balabanova suggested might mean an unraveling of aspects of history contrary to basic reconstructions.   This aversion, according to Kehoe (1998) stems from the conviction that Indians were primitive savages destined to be overcome by the civilized world - that the acme of evolutionary success resided in the conquering race itself.   ‘Childlike savages could never have voyaged across oceans.’ “

 

       “Balabanova's findings bring yet other evidence forward that humanity is not so easily pinioned into the pre-conceived notions of primitive and advanced - even as this might be related to the presumed technology of earlier times.   The quest for discovery - to find new worlds - is not just a modern selective advantage of our species.   Perhaps it is the defining characteristic. “

 
Literature Cited:
 
Balababova, S., F. Parsche, and W. Pirsig.  1992.  First identification of drugs in Egyptian mummies.  Naturwissenschaften 79:358.
 
Bisset, N.G. and M.H. Zenk. 1993.  Responding to 'First identification of drugs in Egyptian mummies'.  Naturwissenschaften 80:244-245.
 
Bjorn, L.O. 1993.  Responding to 'First identification of drugs in Egyptian mummies'.  Naturwissenschaften80:244.
 
Cartwell, L.W. et. al. 1991.  Cocaine metabolites in pre-Columbian mummy hair.  Journal of the Oklahoma State Medical Association 84:11-12.
 
Discovery Information. 1997.  Curse of the Cocaine Mummies. Thirty-six page transcript of program viewed on US National TV in January 1997 and July 1999.
 
Kehoe, A.B. 1998.  The Land of Prehistory, A Critical History of American Archaeology.  Routledge, New York and London. 266 pp.
 
McIntosh, N.D.P. 1993.  Responding to 'First identification of drugs in Egyptian mummies'.  Naturwissenschaften 80:245-246.
 
McPhillips, M. et. al. 1998.  Hair analysis, new laboratory ability to test for substance use.  British Journal of Psychiatry 173: 287-290.
 
Nerlich, A.G. et. al. 1995.  Extensive pulmonary hemorrhage in an Egyptian mummy.  Virchows Archiv 127:423-429.
 
Parsche, F. 1993.  Reply to "Responding to 'First identification of drugs in Egyptian mummies'".  Naturwissenschaften 80:245-246.
 
Parsche, F. and A. Nerlich.  1995. Presence of drugs in different tissues of an Egyptian mummy. Fresenius'.  Journal of Analytical Chemistry 352:380-384.
 
Sachs, H. and P. Kintz. 1998.  Testing for drugs in hair, critical review of chromatographic procedures since 1992.  Journal of Chromatography (B) 713:147-161.
 
Schafer, T. 1993.  Responding to 'First identification of drugs in Egyptian mummies'.  Naturwissenschaften 80:243-244.
 
Sorenson, J.L. 1998.  Bibliographia Pre-Columbiana.  Pre-Columbiana 1(1&2):143-154.
 
Wells, S. A.  American Drugs in Egyptian Mummies:  A Review of the Evidence. www.colostate.edu,
      
Wilhelm, M. 1996.  Hair analysis in environmental medicine.  Zentralblatt fur Hygeine und Umweltmedizin 198: 485-501.
 

This is just a summary but it does give you a nice list of additional rabbit holes to chase down


One I followed...
googling a paper

The Occurrence of Cocaine in Egyptian Mummies - New research provides strong evidence for a trans-Atlantic dispersal by humans

TBC

Cftbc.. lol.. LIPOFW

some it it reaches the above point

The last link is a pdf 

it has tons of information but does not clone and copy well
it is eleven pages

back to Svetlana Balabanova

IT was interesting because she listed in different places

She was part of a german forensics team

She was listed as a toxicoligist

Toxicology

Quote:Toxicology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Toxicologist)
[/url]
For the scientific journal, see Toxicology (journal).

[hide]

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)

This article needs attention from an expert in Medicine. The specific problem is: that the article is lacking scope of the real discipline, both in actual content and in its pointing to more specialized, related articles. (June 2014)
The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (July 2012)

Toxicology is a discipline, overlapping with biology, chemistry, pharmacology, medicine, and nursing, that involves the study of the adverse effects of chemical substances on living organisms[1] and the practice of diagnosing and treating exposures to toxins and toxicants. The relationship between dose and its effects on the exposed organism is of high significance in toxicology. Factors that influence chemical toxicity include the dosage (and whether it is acute or chronic), route of exposure, species, age, sex, and environment. Toxicologists are experts on poisons and poisoning.

Contents
  [hide] 

• 1History
  
• 2Basic principles
  
• 3Testing methods
  • 3.1Non-human animals
    
  • 3.2Alternative testing methods
    
  
  
• 4Dose response complexities
  
• 5Types
  • 5.1Medical toxicology
    
  • 5.2Clinical toxicology
    
  • 5.3Computational toxicology
    
  
  
• 6Toxicology as a profession
  • 6.1Requirements
    
  • 6.2Duties
    
  • 6.3Compensation
    
  
  
• 7Etymology and pronunciation
  
• 8See also
  
• 9References
  
• 10Further reading
  
• 11External links
  

History[edit]

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithograph]Lithograph of Mathieu Orfila

Dioscorides, a Greek physician in the court of the Roman emperor Nero, made the first attempt to classify plants according to their toxic and therapeutic effect.[2] Ibn Wahshiyya wrote the Book on Poisons in the 9th or 10th century.[3] This was followed up in 1360 by Khagendra Mani Darpana.[4]

Mathieu Orfila is considered the modern father of toxicology, having given the subject its first formal treatment in 1813 in his Traité des poisons, also called Toxicologie générale.[5]

In 1850, Jean Stas became the first person to successfully isolate plant poisons from human tissue. This allowed him to identify the use of nicotine as a poison in the famous Bocarmé murder case, providing the evidence needed to convict the Belgian Count Hippolyte Visart de Bocarmé of killing his brother-in-law.[6]

Theophrastus Phillipus Auroleus Bombastus von Hohenheim (1493–1541) (also referred to as Paracelsus, from his belief that his studies were above or beyond the work of Celsus – a Roman physician from the first century) is also considered "the father" of toxicology.[7] He is credited with the classic toxicology maxim, "Alle Dinge sind Gift und nichts ist ohne Gift; allein die Dosis macht, dass ein Ding kein Gift ist." which translates as, "All things are poisonous and nothing is without poison; only the dose makes a thing not poisonous." This is often condensed to: "The dose makes the poison" or in Latin "Sola dosis facit venenum".[8]:30

Basic principles[edit]
The goal of toxicity assessment is to identify adverse effects of a substance.[9] Adverse effects depend on two main factors: i) routes of exposure (oral, inhalation, or dermal) and ii) dose (duration and concentration of exposure). To explore dose, substances are tested in both acute and chronic models.[10] Generally, different sets of experiments are conducted to determine whether a substance causes cancer and to examine other forms of toxicity.[10]

Factors that influence chemical toxicity:[8]

• Dosage
  • Both large single exposures (acute) and continuous small exposures (chronic) are studied.
    
  
  
• Route of exposure
  • Ingestion, inhalation or skin absorption
    
  
  
• Other factors
  • Species
    
  • Age
    
  • Sex
    
  • Health
    
  • Environment
    
  • Individual characteristics
    

Testing methods[edit]
Toxicity experiments may be conducted in vivo (using the whole animal) or in vitro (testing on isolated cells or tissues), or in silico (in a computer simulation).[11]

Non-human animals[edit]
The classic experimental tool of toxicology is testing on non-human animals.[8] As of 2014, such animal testing provides information that is not available by other means about how substances function in a living organism.[12]

Alternative testing methods[edit]
While testing in animal models remains as a method of estimating human effects, there are both ethical and technical concerns with animal testing.[13]

Since the late 1950s, the field of toxicology has sought to reduce or eliminate animal testing under the rubric of "Three Rs" - reduce the number of experiments with animals to the minimum necessary; refine experiments to cause less suffering, and replace in vivo experiments with other types, or use more simple forms of life when possible.[14][15]

Computer modeling is an example of alternative testing methods; using computer models of chemicals and proteins, structure-activity relationships can be determined, and chemical structures that are likely to bind to, and interfere with, proteins with essential functions, can be identified.[16] This work requires expert knowledge in molecular modeling and statistics together with expert judgment in chemistry, biology and toxicology.[16]

In 2007 the National Academy of Sciences published a report called "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy" which opened with a statement: "Change often involves a pivotal event that builds on previous history and opens the door to a new era. Pivotal events in science include the discovery of penicillin, the elucidation of the DNA double helix, and the development of computers. ...Toxicity testing is approaching such a scientific pivot point. It is poised to take advantage of the revolutions in biology and biotechnology. Advances in toxicogenomics, bioinformatics, systems biology, epigenetics, and computational toxicology could transform toxicity testing from a system based on whole-animal testing to one founded primarily on in vitro methods that evaluate changes in biologic processes using cells, cell lines, or cellular components, preferably of human origin."[17] As of 2010 that vision was still unrealized.[18] As of 2014 that vision was still unrealized.[12]
In some cases shifts away from animal studies has been mandated by law or regulation; the European Union (EU) prohibited use of animal testing for cosmetics in 2013.[19]

Dose response complexities[edit]
Most chemicals display a classic dose response curve – at a low dose (below a threshold), no effect is observed.[8]:80 Some show a phenomenon known as sufficient challenge – a small exposure produces animals that "grow more rapidly, have better general appearance and coat quality, have fewer tumors, and live longer than the control animals".[20] A few chemicals have no well-defined safe level of exposure. These are treated with special care. Some chemicals are subject to bioaccumulation as they are stored in rather than being excreted from the body;[8]:85–90 these also receive special consideration.

Several measures are commonly used to describe toxic dosages according to the degree of effect on an organism or a population, and some are specifically defined by various laws or organizational usage. These include:

• LD50 = Median lethal dose, a dose that will kill 50% of an exposed population
  
• NOEL = No Observed Effect Level, the highest dose known to show no effect
  
• NOAEL = No Observed Adverse Effect Level, the highest dose known to show no adverse effects
  
• PEL = Personal Exposure Limit, the highest concentration permitted under US OSHA regulations
  
• STEL = Short-Term Exposure Limit, the highest concentration permitted for short periods of time, in general 15–30 minutes
  
• TWA = Time-Weighted Average, the average amount of an agent's concentration over a specified period of time, usually 8 hours.
  
• TTC = Threshold of Toxicological Concern have been established for the constituents of tobacco smoke[21]
  

Types[edit]
Medical toxicology[edit]
Main article: Medical toxicology
Medical toxicology is the discipline that requires physician status (MD or DO degree plus specialty education and experience).
Clinical toxicology[edit]

"Clinical toxicology" redirects here. For the journal, see Clinical Toxicology.

Clinical toxicology is the discipline that can be practiced not only by physicians but also other health professionals with a master's degree in clinical toxicology: physician extenders (physician assistants, nurse practitioners), nurses, pharmacists, and allied health professionals.

Computational toxicology[edit]
Computational toxicology is a discipline that develops mathematical and computer-based models to better understand and predict adverse health effects caused by chemicals, such as environmental pollutants and pharmaceuticals.[22] Within the Toxicology in the 21st Century project,[23][24] the best predictive models were identified to be Deep Neural Networks, Random Forest, and Support Vector Machines, which can reach the performance of in vitro experiments.[25][26][27][28]

Toxicology as a profession[edit]

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

A toxicologist is a scientist or medical personnel who specializes in the study of symptoms, mechanisms, treatments and detection of venoms and toxins; especially the poisoning of people. To work as a toxicologist one should obtain a degree in toxicology or a related degree like biology, chemistry, pharmacology or biochemistry. Toxicologists perform many different duties including research in the academic, nonprofit and industrial fields, product safety evaluation, consulting, public service and legal regulation.

Requirements[edit]
To work as a toxicologist one should obtain a degree in toxicology or a related degree like biology, chemistry or biochemistry. Bachelor's degree programs in toxicology cover the chemical makeup of toxins and their effects on biochemistry, physiology and ecology. After introductory life science courses are complete, students typically enroll in labs and apply toxicology principles to research and other studies. Advanced students delve into specific sectors, like the pharmaceutical industry or law enforcement, which apply methods of toxicology in their work. The Society of Toxicology (SOT) recommends that undergraduates in postsecondary schools that don't offer a bachelor's degree in toxicology consider attaining a degree in biology or chemistry. Additionally, the SOT advises aspiring toxicologists to take statistics and mathematics courses, as well as gain laboratory experience through lab courses, student research projects and internships.

Duties[edit]
Toxicologists perform many more duties including research in the academic, nonprofit and industrial fields, product safety evaluation, consulting, public service and legal regulation. In order to research and assess the effects of chemicals, toxicologists perform carefully designed studies and experiments. These experiments help identify the specific amount of a chemical that may cause harm and potential risks of being near or using products that contain certain chemicals. Research projects may range from assessing the effects of toxic pollutants on the environment to evaluating how the human immune system responds to chemical compounds within pharmaceutical drugs. While the basic duties of toxicologists are to determine the effects of chemicals on organisms and their surroundings, specific job duties may vary based on industry and employment. For example, forensic toxicologists may look for toxic substances in a crime scene, whereas aquatic toxicologists may analyze the toxicity level of wastewater.

Compensation[edit]
The salary for jobs in toxicology is dependent on several factors, including level of schooling, specialization, experience. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) notes that jobs for biological scientists, which generally include toxicologists, were expected to increase by 21% between 2008 and 2018. The BLS notes that this increase could be due to research and development growth in biotechnology, as well as budget increases for basic and medical research in biological science.

Etymology and pronunciation[edit]
The word toxicology (/ˌtɒksɪˈkɒlədʒi/) is a neoclassical compound from New Latin, first attested circa 1799,[29] from the combining forms toxico- + -logy, which in turn come from the Ancient Greek words τοξικός toxikos, "poisonous", and λόγος logos, "subject matter").

See also[edit]

• Aquatic toxicology
  
• Automatism (toxicology)
  
• Certain safety factor
  
• Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study(CHEERS) (in the US)
  
• Ecotoxicology
  
• Entomotoxicology
  
• Environmental toxicology
  
• Enzyme inhibition
  
• Forensic toxicology
  
• History of poison
  
• In vitro toxicology
  
• Indicative limit value
  
• Medical toxicology
  
• Modes of toxic action
  
• Occupational toxicology
  
• Overdose
  
• Pollution
  
• Toxicity
  
• Toxicogenomics
  
• Toxicology Mechanisms and Methods (journal)
  
• Toxinology
  
• Unacceptable Levels (2013 documentary film)
  

References[edit]

1. Jump up^ Schrager, TF (October 4, 2006). "What is Toxicology".
   
2. Jump up^ Hodgson, Ernest (2010). A Textbook of Modern Toxicology. John Wiley and Sons. p. 10. ISBN 0-470-46206-X.
   
3. Jump up^ Levey, Martin (1966). Medieval Arabic Toxicology: The Book on Poisons of ibn Wahshiyya and its Relation to Early Native American and Greek Texts.
   
4. Jump up^ Bhat, Sathyanarayana; Udupa, Kumaraswamy (1 August 2013). "Taxonomical outlines of bio-diversity of Karnataka in a 14th century Kannada toxicology text Khagendra Mani Darpana". Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine. 3 (8): 668–672. PMC 3703563 . PMID 23905027. doi:10.1016/S2221-1691(13)60134-3.
   
5. Jump up^ "Biography of Mathieu Joseph Bonaventure Orfila (1787–1853)". U.S. National Library of Medicine.
   
6. Jump up^ Wennig, Robert (April 2009). "Back to the roots of modern analytical toxicology: Jean Servais Stas and the Bocarmé murder case". Drug Testing and Analysis. England. 1 (4): 153–155. PMID 20355192. doi:10.1002/dta.32.
   
7. Jump up^ "Paracelsus Dose Response in the Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology WILLIAM C KRIEGER / Academic Press Oct01".
   
8. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Ottoboni, M. Alice (1991). The dose makes the poison : a plain-language guide to toxicology (2nd ed.). New York, N.Y: Van Nostrand Reinhold. ISBN 0-442-00660-8.
   
9. Jump up^ Committee on Risk Assessment of Hazardous Air Pollutants, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council (1994). Science and judgement in risk assessment. The National Academic Press. p. 56. ISBN 978-0-309-07490-2.
   
10. ^ Jump up to:a b "Human Health Toxicity Assessment". United States Environmental Protection Agencies.
    
11. Jump up^ Bruin, Yuri. et. al (2009). "Testing methods and toxicity assessment (Including alternatives)". Academic Press. ELSEVIER: 497–514. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-373593-5.00060-4.
    
12. ^ Jump up to:a b "The importance of animal in research". Society of Toxicology. 2014.
    
13. Jump up^ "Existing Non-animal Alternatives". AltTox.org. 8 September 2011.
    
14. Jump up^ "Alternative toxicity test methods: reducing, refining and replacing animal use for safety testing" (PDF). Society of Toxicology.
    
15. Jump up^ Alan M. Goldberg. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique: Is It Relevant Today? Altex 27, Special Issue 2010
    
16. ^ Jump up to:a b Leeuwen van.C.J.; Vermeire T.G. (2007). Risk assessment of chemicals: An introduction. New York: Springer. pp. 451–479. ISBN 978-1-4020-6102-8.
    
17. Jump up^ National Research Council (2007). Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. National Academies Press. ISBN 9780309151733. Lay summary
    
18. Jump up^ Krewski D, Acosta D Jr, Andersen M, Anderson H, Bailar JC 3rd, Boekelheide K, Brent R, Charnley G, Cheung VG, Green S Jr, Kelsey KT, Kerkvliet NI, Li AA, McCray L, Meyer O, Patterson RD, Pennie W, Scala RA, Solomon GM, Stephens M, Yager J, Zeise L. "Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy". J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 13: 51–138. PMC 4410863 . PMID 20574894. doi:10.1080/10937404.2010.483176.
    
19. Jump up^ Adler. S.; et. al (2011). "Alternative (non-animal)methods for cosmetic testing: current status and future prospects - 2010". Arch Toxicol. Springer-Verlag. 85 (1): 367–485. doi:10.1007/s00204-011-0693-2.
    
20. Jump up^ Ottoboni 1991, pp. 83-85.
    
21. Jump up^ Talhout, Reinskje; Schulz, Thomas; Florek, Ewa; Van Benthem, Jan; Wester, Piet; Opperhuizen, Antoon (2011). "Hazardous Compounds in Tobacco Smoke". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 8 (12): 613–628. ISSN 1660-4601. PMC 3084482 . PMID 21556207. doi:10.3390/ijerph8020613.
    
22. Jump up^ Reisfeld, B; Mayeno, A. N. (2012). "What is Computational Toxicology?". Computational Toxicology. Methods in Molecular Biology. 929. pp. 3–7. ISBN 978-1-62703-049-6. PMID 23007423. doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-050-2_1.
    
23. Jump up^ Hartung, T (2009). "A toxicology for the 21st century--mapping the road ahead". Toxicological Sciences. 109 (1): 18–23. PMC 2675641 . PMID 19357069. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfp059.
    
24. Jump up^ Berg, N; De Wever, B; Fuchs, H. W.; Gaca, M; Krul, C; Roggen, E. L. (2011). "Toxicology in the 21st century--working our way towards a visionary reality". Toxicology in Vitro. 25 (4): 874–81. PMID 21338664. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2011.02.008.
    
25. Jump up^ "Toxicology in the 21st century Data Challenge". www.tripod.nih.gov.
    
26. Jump up^ "NCATS Announces Tox21 Data Challenge Winners". www.ncats.nih.gov.
    
27. Jump up^ Unterthiner, T.; Mayr, A.; Klambauer, G.; Steijaert, M.; Ceulemans, H.; Wegner, J. K.; & Hochreiter, S. (2014) "Deep Learning as an Opportunity in Virtual Screening". Workshop on Deep Learning and Representation Learning (NIPS2014).
    
28. Jump up^ Unterthiner, T.; Mayr, A.; Klambauer, G.; & Hochreiter, S. (2015) "Toxicity Prediction using Deep Learning". ArXiv, 2015.
    
29. Jump up^ Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, Merriam-Webster.
    

Further reading[edit]

• Caito, Samuel; Almeida Lopes, Ana Carolina B.; Paoliello, Monica M. B.; Aschner, Michael (2017). "Chapter 16. Toxicology of Lead and Its Damage to Mammalian Organs". In Astrid, S.; Helmut, S.; Sigel, R. K. O. Lead: Its Effects on Environment and Health. Metal Ions in Life Sciences. 17. de Gruyter. pp. 501–534. doi:10.1515/9783110434330-016.
  
• Andresen, Elisa; Küpper, Hendrik (2013). "Chapter 13. Cadmium toxicity in plants". In Astrid Sigel, Helmut Sigel and Roland K. O. Sigel. Cadmium: From Toxicology to Essentiality. Metal Ions in Life Sciences. 11. Springer. pp. 395–413. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5179-8_13. (subscription required)
  
• Thévenod, Frank; Lee, Wing-Kee (2013). "Chapter 14. Toxicology of cadmium and its damage to mammalian organs". In Astrid Sigel, Helmut Sigel and Roland K. O. Sigel. Cadmium: From Toxicology to Essentiality. Metal Ions in Life Sciences. 11. Springer. pp. 415–490. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5179-8_14. (subscription required)
  

External links[edit]

Look up toxicology in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• Toxicology at DMOZ
  

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Toxicology.

• National Library of Medicine's "Toxicology Tutor" provides basic information on the science of toxicology.
  
• Toxipedia
  
• Information Toxicology International
  
• Society of Toxicology
  

TBC

Forensic Toxicology

Quote:Forensic toxicology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_toxicology#p-search]
Part of a series on
Forensic science

Physiological
[hide]

• Anthropology
  
• Biology
  
• Bloodstain pattern analysis
  
• Botany
  
• Dentistry
  
• DNA phenotyping
  
• DNA profiling
  
• Entomology
  
• Epidemiology
  
• Medicine
  
• Palynology
  
• Pathology
  
• Podiatry
  
• Toxicology
  

Social
[show]
Criminalistics
[show]
Digital forensics
[show]
Related disciplines
[show]
Related articles
[show]

• Outline
  
• Category
  

• v
  
• t
  
• e
  

Forensic toxicology is the use of toxicology and other disciplines such as analytical chemistry, pharmacology and clinical chemistryto aid medical or legal investigation of death, poisoning, and drug use. The primary concern for forensic toxicology is not the legal outcome of the toxicological investigation or the technology utilized, but rather the obtainment and interpretation of results. A toxicological analysis can be done to various kinds of samples. A forensic toxicologist must consider the context of an investigation, in particular any physical symptoms recorded, and any evidence collected at a crime scene that may narrow the search, such as pill bottles, powders, trace residue, and any available chemicals. Provided with this information and samples with which to work, the forensic toxicologist must determine which toxic substances are present, in what concentrations, and the probable effect of those chemicals on the person.

Determining the substance ingested is often complicated by the body's natural processes (see ADME), as it is rare for a chemical to remain in its original form once in the body. For example: heroin is almost immediately metabolised into another substance and further to morphine, making detailed investigation into factors such as injection marks and chemical purity necessary to confirm diagnosis. The substance may also have been diluted by its dispersal through the body; while a pill or other regulated dose of a drug may have grams or milligrams of the active constituent, an individual sample under investigation may only contain micrograms or nanograms.

Contents
  [hide] 

• 1Examples
  • 1.1Urine
    
  • 1.2Blood
    
  • 1.3Hair sample
    
  • 1.4Other
    
  • 1.5Other organisms
    
  
  
• 2Detection and classification
  • 2.1Gas chromatography
    
  • 2.2Detection of metals
    
  • 2.3Nonvolatile organic substances
    
  
  
• 3See also
  
• 4References
  
• 5External links
  

Examples[edit]
Urine[edit]
A urine sample is urine that has come from the bladder and can be provided or taken post-mortem. Urine is less likely to be infected with viruses such as HIV or Hepatitis B than blood samples.[1] Many drugs have a higher concentration and can remain for much longer in urine than blood. Collection of urine samples can be taken in a noninvasive way which does not require professionals for collection. Urine is used for qualitative analysis as it cannot give any indication of impairment due to the fact that drug presence in urine only indicates prior exposure.[2]

Blood[edit]
A blood sample of approximately 10 ml (0.35 imp fl oz; 0.34 US fl oz) is usually sufficient to screen and confirm most common toxic substances. A blood sample provides the toxicologist with a profile of the substance that the subject was influenced by at the time of collection; for this reason, it is the sample of choice for measuring blood alcohol contentin drunk driving cases.

Hair sample[edit]
Hair is capable of recording medium to long-term or high dosage substance abuse. Chemicals in the bloodstream may be transferred to the growing hair and stored in the follicle, providing a rough timeline of drug intake events. Head hair grows at rate of approximately 1 to 1.5 cm a month, and so cross sections from different sections of the follicle can give estimates as to when a substance was ingested. Testing for drugs in hair is not standard throughout the population. The darker and coarser the hair the more drug that will be found in the hair. If two people consumed the same amount of drugs, the person with the darker and coarser hair will have more drug in their hair than the lighter haired person when tested. This raises issues of possible racial bias in substance tests with hair samples.[3]

Other[edit]
Other bodily fluids and organs may provide samples, particularly samples collected during an autopsy. A common autopsy sample is the gastric contents of the deceased, which can be useful for detecting undigested pills or liquids that were ingested prior to death. In highly decomposed bodies, traditional samples may no longer be available. The vitreous humour from the eye may be used, as the fibrous layer of the eyeball and the eye socket of the skull protects the sample from trauma and adulteration. Other common organs used for toxicology are the brain, liver, and spleen.

The inspection of the contents of the stomach must be part of every postmortem examination if possible because it may provide qualitative information concerning the nature of the last meal and the presence of abnormal constituents. Using it as a guide to the time of death, however, is theoretically unsound and presents many practical difficulties, although it may have limited applicability in some exceptional instances. Generally, using stomach contents as a guide to time of death involves an unacceptable degree of imprecision and is thus liable to mislead the investigator and the court. Characteristic cell types from food plants can be used to identify a victim's last meal; knowledge about which can be useful in determining the victim's whereabouts or actions prior to death (Bock and Norris, 1997). Some of these cell types include

(Dickison, 2000):

• sclereids (pears)
  
• starch grains (potatoes and other tubers)
  
• raphide crystals (pineapple)
  
• druse crystals (citrus, beets, spinach)
  
• silica bodies (cereal grasses and bamboos)
  

In a case where a young woman had been stabbed to death, witnesses reported that she had eaten her last meal at a particular fast food restaurant. However, her stomach contents did not match the limited menu of the restaurant, leading investigators to conclude that she had eaten at some point after being seen in the restaurant. The investigation led to the apprehension of a man whom the victim knew, and with whom she had shared her actual final meal (Dickison, 2000). Time since death can be approximated by the state of digestion of the stomach contents. It normally takes at least a couple of hours for food to pass from the stomach to the small intestine; a meal still largely in the stomach implies death shortly after eating, while an empty or nearly-empty stomach suggests a longer time period between eating and death (Batten, 1995). However, there are numerous mitigating factors to take into account: the extent to which the food had been chewed, the amount of fat and protein present, physical activity undertaken by the victim prior to death, mood of the victim, physiological variation from person to person. All these factors affect the rate at which food passes through the digestive tract. Pathologists are generally hesitant to base a precise time of death on the evidence of stomach contents alone.

Other organisms[edit]
Bacteria, maggots and other organisms that may have ingested some subject matter may have also ingested any toxic substance within it.
Detection and classification[edit]

Detection of drugs and pharmaceuticals in biological samples is usually done by an initial screening and then a confirmation of the compound(s), which may include a quantitation of the compound(s). The screening and confirmation are usually, but not necessarily, done with different analytical methods. Every analytical method used in forensic toxicology should be carefully tested by performing a validation of the method to ensure correct and indisputable results at all times. A testing laboratory involved in forensic toxicology should adhere to a quality programme to ensure the best possible results and safety of any individual.

The choice of method for testing is highly dependent on what kind of substance one expects to find and the material on which the testing is performed. Biological samples are more complex to analyze because of factors such as the matrix effect and the metabolism and conjugation of the target compounds.

Gas chromatography[edit]
Gas-liquid chromatography is of particular use in examining volatile organic compounds.

Detection of metals[edit]
The compounds suspected of containing a metal are traditionally analyzed by the destruction of the organic matrix by chemical or thermal oxidation. This leaves the metal to be identified and quantified in the inorganic residue, and it can be detected using such methods as the Reinsch test, emission spectroscopy or X-ray diffraction. Unfortunately, while this identifies the metals present it removes the original compound, and so hinders efforts to determine what may have been ingested. The toxic effects of various metallic compounds can vary considerably.

Nonvolatile organic substances[edit]
Drugs, both prescribed and illicit, pesticides, natural products, pollutants and industrial compounds are some of the most common nonvolatile compounds encountered. Screening methods include thin-layer chromatography, gas-liquid chromatography and immunoassay. For complete legal identification, a second confirmatory test is usually also required. The trend today is to use liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry, preceded with sample workup as liquid-liquid extraction or solid phase extraction. Older methods include: spot test (see Pill testing), typically the Marquis Reagent, Mecke Reagent, and Froehde's reagent for opiates, Marquis Reagent and Simon's reagent for amphetamine, methamphetamine and other analogs, like MDMA, the Scott's test for cocaine, and the modified Duquenois reagent for marijuana and other cannabinoids. For compounds that don't have a common spot test, like benzodiazepines, another test may be used, typically mass spectrometry, or spectrophotometry.

See also[edit]

• Arsenic poisoning
  
• Drug test
  

References[edit]

1. Jump up^ Dinis-Oliveira, R; Carvalho, F. F.; Duarte, J. A.; Remião, F. F.; Marques, A. A.; Santos, A. A.; Magalhães, T. T (2010). "Collection of biological samples in forensic toxicology". Toxicology Mechanisms & Methods. 20 (7): 363–414. doi:10.3109/15376516.2010.497976.
   
2. Jump up^ Levine, Barry (1 March 1993). "Forensic Toxicology". Analytical Chemistry. 65 (5). doi:10.1021/ac00053a003.
   
3. Jump up^ Mieczkowski, Tom (1999). "The Further Mismeasure: The Curious Use of Racial Categorizations in the Interpretation of Hair Analyses" (PDF). Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology Meetings, November 1999, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
   

External links[edit]

• "Forensic Toxicology Information Guide". all-about-forensic-science.com. Retrieved 13 June 2014.
  

this is what she is listed as I believe

Drug Test

Quote:Drug test

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[/url]
For other uses, see Drug testing (disambiguation).
Drug test
Medical diagnostics
MeSH
D015813

[edit on Wikidata]

A drug test is a technical analysis of a biological specimen, for example urine, hair, blood, breath, sweat, and/or oral fluid/saliva — to determine the presence or absence of specified parent drugs or their metabolites. Major applications of drug testing include detection of the presence of performance enhancing steroids in sport, employers screening for drugs prohibited by law (such as cannabis, cocaine and heroin) and police officers testing for the presence and concentration of alcohol (ethanol) in the blood commonly referred to as BAC (blood alcohol content). BAC tests are typically administered via a breathalyzer while urinalysis is used for the vast majority of drug testing in sports and the workplace.

A drug test may also refer to a test that provides quantitative chemical analysis of an illegal drug, typically intended to help with responsible drug use.[1]

Contents
  [hide] 

• 1Detection periods
  
• 2Types
  • 2.1Urine drug screen
    
  • 2.2Breath test
    
  • 2.3Hair testing
    • 2.3.1Alcohol
      
  • 2.4Presumptive substance testing
    
  • 2.5Saliva drug screen / Oral fluid-based drug screen
    
  • 2.6Sweat drug screen
    
  • 2.7Blood
    
  • 2.8Anabolic steroids
    
  • 2.9Random drug testing
    
  • 2.10Diagnostic screening
    
• 3Methodologies
  • 3.1Urine drug testing
    
  • 3.2Spray drug testing
    
  • 3.3Hair drug testing
    
• 4Legality, ethics and politics
  • 4.1United Kingdom
    
  • 4.2United States
    
  • 4.3Australia
    
• 5Refusal
  • 5.1Historical cases
    
• 6See also
  
• 7References
  
• 8External links
  

Detection periods[edit]
The following chart gives approximate detection periods for each substance by test type.[2]

The detection windows depend upon multiple factors: drug class, amount and frequency of use, metabolic rate, body mass, age, overall health, and urine pH. For ease of use, the detection times of metabolites have been incorporated into each parent drug. For example, heroin and cocaine can only be detected for a few hours after use, but their metabolites can be detected for several days in urine. The chart depicts the longer detection times of the metabolites.

Oral fluid or saliva testing results for the most part mimic that of blood. The only exceptions are THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) and benzodiazepines. Oral fluid will likely detect THC from ingestion up to a maximum period of 6–12 hours. This continues to cause difficulty in oral fluid detection of THC and benzodiazepines.[3]

Breath air for the most part mimics blood tests as well. Due to the very low levels of substances in the breath air, liquid chromatography—mass spectrometry has to be used to analyze the sample according to a recent publication wherein 12 analytes were investigated.
Rapid oral fluid products are not approved for use in workplace drug testing programs and are not FDA cleared. Using rapid oral fluid drug tests
in the workplace is prohibited in only:[4]

• California
  
• Kansas
  
• Maine
  
• Minnesota
  
• New York
  
• Vermont
  

K2, also known as synthetic cannabinoids, is detectable for up to 3 days after single use or up to 30 days for chronic users. It wasn't tested for in the past but is now detectable in modern tests.

Approximate values for detection periods[5]Substance
Urine
Hair
Blood / Oral Fluid
Alcohol
6–24 hours[6] Note: Alcohol tests may measure ethyl glucuronide, which can stay in urine for up to 80 hours
up to 90 days[7]
12 to 24 hours
Amphetamines(except methamphetamine)
1 to 3 days[8]
up to 90 days
12 hours
Methamphetamine
3 to 5 days[9]
up to 90 days
1 to 3 days[9]
MDMA (Ecstasy)
3 to 4 days
up to 90 days
3 to 4 days
Barbiturates(except phenobarbital)
1 day
up to 90 days
1 to 2 days
Phenobarbital
2 to 3 weeks[10]
up to 90 days
4 to 7 days
Benzodiazepines
Therapeutic use: up to 7 days. Chronic use (over one year): 4 to 6 weeks
up to 90 days
6 to 48 hours
Cannabis
Passive inhalation: up to 22 minutes** Infrequent users: 7-10 Days; Heavy users:30 to 100 days;[11][12][13]
up to 90 days[11]
2 to 3 days in blood, up to 2 weeks in blood of heavy users[11] However, it depends on whether actual THC or THC metabolites are being tested for, the latter having a much longer detection time than the former. THC (found in marijuana) may only be detectable in saliva/oral fluid for 2 to 24 hours in most cases.
Cocaine
2 to 5 days (with exceptions for heavy users who can test positive up to 7–10 days, and individuals with certain kidney disorders)
up to 90 days
2 to 10 days
Codeine
2 to 3 days
up to 90 days
1 to 4 days
Cotinine (a breakdown product of nicotine)
2 to 4 days
up to 90 days
2 to 4 days
Morphine
2 to 4 days
up to 90 days
1 to 3 days
Tricyclic antidepressants(TCA's)
7 to 10 days[14]
Undetectable[15]
Detectable but dose relationship not established[16]
LSD
2–24 hours
up to 4 days[citation needed]
2 to 4 days
Methadone
7 to 10 days
up to 90 days
24 hours
Steroids
3 to 30 days


PCP
3 to 7 days for single use; up to 30 days in chronic users[17]
up to 90 days
1 to 3 days[17]
Types[edit]

Urine drug screen[edit]
Main article: Urinalysis
Urine analysis is primarily used because of its low cost. Urine drug testing is one of the most common testing methods used. The enzyme-multiplied immune test is the most frequently used urinalysis. Complaints have been made about the relatively high rates of false positives using this test.[18]

Urine drug tests screen the urine for the presence of a parent drug or its metabolites. The level of drug or its metabolites is not predictive of when the drug was taken or how much the patient used. Rather, it is simply a confirmatory report indicating the presence of the parent drug or its metabolites.[19]

Urine drug testing is an immunoassay based on the principle of competitive binding. Drugs which may be present in the urine specimen compete against their respective drug conjugate for binding sites on their specific antibody. During testing, a urine specimen migrates upward by capillary action. A drug, if present in the urine specimen below its cut-off concentration, will not saturate the binding sites of its specific antibody. The antibody will then react with the drug-protein conjugate and a visible colored line will show up in the test line region of the specific drug strip [20]

When an employer requests a drug test from an employee, or a physician requests a drug test from a patient, the employee or patient is typically instructed to go to a collection site or their home. The urine sample goes through a specified 'chain of custody' to ensure that it is not tampered with or invalidated through lab or employee error. The patient or employee’s urine is collected at a remote location in a specially designed secure cup, sealed with tamper-resistant tape, and sent to a testing laboratory to be screened for drugs (typically the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 5 panel). The first step at the testing site is to split the urine into two aliquots. One aliquot is first screened for drugs using an analyzer that performs immunoassay as the initial screen. To ensure the specimen integrity and detecting possible adulterant, some other parameters such as, urine creatinine, pH, and specific gravity are tested along in this initial test. If the urine screen is positive then another aliquot of the sample is used to confirm the findings by gas chromatography—mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or liquid chromatography - mass spectrometry methodology. If requested by the physician or employer, certain drugs are screened for individually; these are generally drugs part of a chemical class that are, for one of many reasons, considered more abuse-prone or of concern. For instance, oxycodone and diamorphine may be tested, both sedative analgesics. If such a test is not requested specifically, the more general test (in the preceding case, the test for opiates) will detect the drugs, but the employer or physician will not have the benefit of the identity of the drug.

Employment-related test results are relayed to a medical review office (MRO) where a medical physician reviews the results. If the result of the screen is negative, the MRO informs the employer that the employee has no detectable drug in the urine, typically within 24 hours. However, if the test result of the immunoassay and GC-MS are non-negative and show a concentration level of parent drug or metabolite above the established limit, the MRO contacts the employee to determine if there is any legitimate reason—such as a medical treatment or prescription.[21][22]

On-site instant drug testing is a more cost-efficient method of effectively detecting drug abuse amongst employees, as well as in rehabilitation programs to monitor patient progress.[citation needed] These instant tests can be used for both urine and saliva testing. Although the accuracy of such tests varies with the manufacturer, some kits boast extremely high rates of accuracy, correlating closely with laboratory test results.[23]
Breath test[edit]

Main article: Breathalyzer

Breath test being used on a volunteer.

Breath test is a widespread method for quickly determining alcohol intoxication. A breath test measures the alcohol concentration in the body by a deep-lung breath. There are different instruments used for measuring the alcohol content of an individual though their breath. Breathalyzer is a widely known instrument which was developed in 1954 and contained chemicals unlike other breath-testing instruments.[24]More modernly used instruments are the infrared light-absorption devices and fuel cell detectors, these two testers are microprocessor controlled meaning the operator only has to press the start button.

To get accurate readings on a breath-testing device the individual must blow for approximately 6 seconds and need to contain roughly 1.1 to 1.5 liters of breath. For a breath-test to result accurately and truly an operator must take steps such as avoiding measuring “mouth alcohol” which is a result from regurgitation, belching, or recent intake of an alcoholic beverage.[25] To avoid measuring “mouth alcohol” the operator must not allow the individual that’s taking the test to consume any materials for at least fifteen minutes before the breath test. When pulled over for a driving violation if an individual in the United States refuses to take a breath test that individual's driver's license can be suspend for a 6 to 12 months time period.

Hair testing[edit]
Main article: Hair analysis
Hair analysis to detect drugs of abuse has been used by court systems in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and other countries worldwide. In the United States, hair testing has been accepted in court cases as forensic evidence following the Frye Rule, the Federal Rules of Evidence, and the Daubert Rule. As such, hair testing results are legally and scientifically recognized as admissible evidence.[citation needed]
Although some lower courts may have accepted hair test evidence, there is no controlling judicial ruling in either the federal or any state system declaring any type of hair test as reliable.

Hair testing is now recognized in both the UK and US judicial systems. There are guidelines for hair testing that have been published by the Society of Hair Testing (a private company in France) that specify the markers to be tested for and the cutoff concentrations that need to be tested. Drugs of abuse that can be detected include Cannabis, Cocaine, Amphetamines and drugs new to the UK such as Mephedrone.

Alcohol[edit]
In contrast to other drugs consumed, alcohol is deposited directly in the hair. For this reason the investigation procedure looks for direct products of ethanol metabolism. The main part of alcohol is oxidized in the human body. This means it is released as water and carbon dioxide. One part of the alcohol reacts with fatty acids to produce esters. The sum of the concentrations of four of these fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEEs: ethyl myristate, ethyl palmitate, ethyl oleate and ethyl stearate) are used as indicators of the alcohol consumption. The amounts found in hair are measured in nanograms (one nanogram equals only one billionth of a gram), however with the benefit of modern technology, it is possible to detect such small amounts. In the detection of ethyl glucuronide, or EtG, testing can detect amounts in picograms (one picogram equals 0.001 nanograms).

However, there is one major difference between most drugs and alcohol metabolites in the way in which they enter into the hair: on the one hand like other drugs FAEEs enter into the hair via the keratinocytes, the cells responsible for hair growth. These cells form the hair in the root and then grow through the skin surface taking any substances with them. On the other hand, the sebaceous glands produce FAEEs in the scalp and these migrate together with the sebum along the hair shaft (Auwärter et al., 2001, Pragst et al., 2004). So these glands lubricate not only the part of the hair that is just growing at 0.3 mm per day on the skin surface, but also the more mature hair growth, providing it with a protective layer of fat.

FAEEs (nanogram = one billionth of a gram) appear in hair in almost one order of magnitude lower than (the relevant order of magnitude of) EtG (picogram = one trillionth of a gram). It has been technically possible to measure FAEEs since 1993, and the first study reporting the detection of EtG in hair was done by Sachs in 1993.[26]

In practice, most hair which is sent for analysis has been cosmetically treated in some way (bleached, permed etc.). It has been proven that FAEEs are not significantly affected by such treatments (Hartwig et al., 2003a). FAEE concentrations in hair from other body sites can be interpreted in a similar fashion as scalp hair (Hartwig et al., 2003b).

Presumptive substance testing[edit]
Presumptive substance tests identify a suspicious substance, material or surface where traces of drugs are thought to be, instead of testing individuals through biological methods such as urine or hair testing. The test involves mixing the suspicious material with a chemical in order to trigger a color change to indicate if a drug is present. Most are now available over-the-counter, and do not require a lab to read results.

Duquenois reagent

Benefits to this method include that the person who is suspected of drug use does not need to be confronted or aware of testing. Only a very small amount of material is needed to obtain results, and can be used to test powder, pills, capsules, crystals, or organic material. There is also the ability to detect illicit material when mixed with other non-illicit materials. The tests are used for general screening purposes, offering a generic result for the presence of a wide range of drugs, including Heroin, Cocaine, Methamphetamine, Amphetamine, Ecstasy/MDMA, Methadone, Ketamine, PCP, PMA, DMT, MDPV, and may detect rapidly evolving synthetic designer drugs. Separate tests for Marijuana/Hashish are also available.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_test#cite_note-27][27]

There are five primary color-tests reagents used for general screening purposes. The Marquis reagent turns into a variety of colors when in the presence of different substances. Dille-Koppanyi reagent uses two chemical solutions which turns a violet-blue color in the presence of barbiturates. Duquenois-Levine reagent is a series of chemical solutions that turn to the color of purple when the vegetation of marijuana is added. Van Urk reagent turns blue-purple when in the presence of LSD. Scott Test's chemical solution shows up as a faint blue for cocaine base.[28]

Saliva drug screen / Oral fluid-based drug screen[edit]
Saliva / oral fluid-based drug tests can generally detect use during the previous few days. Is better at detecting very recent use of a substance. THC may only be detectable for 2–24 hours in most cases. On site drug tests are allowed per the Department of Labor.[citation needed]

Detection in saliva tests begins almost immediately upon use of the following substances, and lasts for approximately the following times:

• Alcohol: 6-12 h[29]
  
• Marijuana: 1-24h
  

A disadvantage of saliva based drug testing is that it is not approved by FDA or SAMHSA for use with DOT / Federal Mandated Drug Testing.
Oral fluid is not considered a bio-hazard unless there is visible blood; however, it should be treated with care.

Sweat drug screen[edit]
Sweat patches are attached to the skin to collect sweat over a long period of time (up to 14 days).[30] These are used by child protective services, parole departments, and other government institutions concerned with drug use over long periods, when urine testing is not practical.[31] There are also surface drug tests that test for the metabolite of parent drug groups in the residue of drugs left in sweat.

Blood[edit]
Drug-testing a blood sample measures whether or not a drug or a metabolite is in the body at a particular time. These types of tests are considered to be the most accurate way of telling if a person is intoxicated. Blood drug tests are not used very often because they need specialized equipment and medically trained administrators.

Depending on how much marijuana was consumed, it can usually be detected in blood tests within six hours of consumption. After six hours has passed, the concentration of marijuana in the blood decreases significantly. It generally disappears completely within 30 days.

Anabolic steroids[edit]
Anabolic steroids are used to enhance performance in sports and as they are prohibited in most high-level competitions drug testing is used extensively in order to enforce this prohibition. This is particularly so in individual (rather than team) sports such as athletics and cycling.

Random drug testing[edit]
Can occur at any time, usually when the investigator has reason to believe that a substance is possibly being abused by the subject by behavior or immediately after an employee-related incident occurs during work hours. Testing protocol typically conforms to the national medical standard, candidates are given up to 120 minutes to reasonably produce a urine sample from the time of commencement (in some instances this time frame may be extended at the examiners discretion).

Diagnostic screening[edit]
In the case of life-threatening symptoms, unconsciousness, or bizarre behavior in an emergency situation, screening for common drugs and toxins may help find the cause, called a toxicology test or tox screen to denote the broader area of possible substances beyond just self-administered drugs. These tests can also be done post-mortem during an autopsy in cases where a death was not expected. The test is usually done within 96 hours (4 days) after the desire for the test is realized. Both a urine sample and a blood sample may be tested.[32] A blood sample is routinely used to detect ethanol/methanol and ASA/paracetamol intoxication. Various panels are used for screening urine samples for common substances, e.g. triage 8 that detects amphetamines, benzodiazepines, cocaine, methadone, opiates, cannabis, barbiturates and tricyclic antidepressants.[33] Results are given in 10–15 min.

Similar screenings may be used to evaluate the possible use of date rape drugs. This is usually done on a urine sample.[32]
Methodologies[edit]

Before testing samples, the tamper-evident seal is checked for integrity. If it appears to have been tampered with or damaged, the laboratory rejects the sample and does not test it.

Next, the sample must be made testable. Urine and oral fluid can be used "as is" for some tests, but other tests require the drugs to be extracted from urine. Strands of hair, patches, and blood must be prepared before testing. Hair is washed in order to eliminate second-hand sources of drugs on the surface of the hair, then the keratin is broken down using enzymes. Blood plasma may need to be separated by centrifuge from blood cells prior to testing. Sweat patches are opened and the sweat collection component is removed and soaked in a solvent to dissolve any drugs present.

Laboratory-based drug testing is done in two steps. The first step is the screening test, which is an immunoassay based test applied to all samples. The second step, known as the confirmation test, is usually undertaken by a laboratory using highly specific chromatographic techniques and only applied to samples that test positive during the screening test.[34] Screening tests are usually done by immunoassay (EMIT, ELISA, and RIA are the most common). A "dipstick" drug testing method which could provide screening test capabilities to field investigators has been developed at the University of Illinois.[35]

After a suspected positive sample is detected during screening, the sample is tested using a confirmation test. Samples that are negative on the screening test are discarded and reported as negative. The confirmation test in most laboratories (and all SAMHSA certified labs) is performed using mass spectrometry, and is precise but expensive. False positive samples from the screening test will almost always be negative on the confirmation test. Samples testing positive during both screening and confirmation tests are reported as positive to the entity that ordered the test. Most laboratories save positive samples for some period of months or years in the event of a disputed result or lawsuit. For workplace drug testing, a positive result is generally not confirmed without a review by a Medical Review Officer who will normally interview the subject of the drug test.

Urine drug testing[edit]
Urine drug test kits are available as on-site tests, or laboratory analysis. Urinalysis is the most common test type and used by federally mandated drug testing programs and is considered the Gold Standard of drug testing. Urine based tests have been upheld in most courts for more than 30 years. However, urinalysis conducted by the Department of Defense has been challenged for reliability of testing the metabolite of cocaine. There are two associated metabolites of cocaine, benzoylecgonine (BZ) and ecgonine methyl ester (EME), the first (BZ) is created by the presence of cocaine in an aqeous solution with a pH greater than 7.0, while the second (EME) results from the actual human metabolic process. The presence of EME confirms actual ingestion of cocaine by a human being, while the presence of BZ is indicative only. BZ without EME is evidence of sample contamination, however, the US Department of Defense has chosen not to test for EME in its urinalysis program.[36][relevant? – discuss]

A number of different analyses (defined as the unknown substance being tested for) are available on Urine Drug Screens.

Spray drug testing[edit]
Spray (sweat) drug test kits are non-invasive. It is a simple process to collect the required specimen, no bathroom is needed, no laboratory is required for analysis, and the tests themselves are difficult to manipulate and relatively tamper-resistant. The detection window is long and can detect recent drug use within several hours.

There are also some disadvantages to spray or sweat testing. There is not much variety in these drug tests, only a limited number of drugs can be detected, prices tend to be higher, and inconclusive results can be produced by variations in sweat production rates in donors. They also have a relatively long specimen collection period and are more vulnerable to contamination than other common forms of testing.[30]

Hair drug testing[edit]
Hair drug testing is a method that can detect drug use over a much longer period of time,[37] and is often used for highly safety-critical positions where there is zero tolerance of illegal drug use.[38] Standard hair follicle screen covers a period of 30 to 90 days. The growth of hair is usually at the rate of 0.5 inches per month. The hair sample is cut close to the scalp and 80 to 120 strands of hair are needed for the test. In the absence of hair on the head, body hair can be used as an acceptable substitute.[37] This includes facial hair, the underarms, arms, and legs or even pubic hair. Because body hair grows at a different rate than head hair, the timeframe changes, with scientists estimating that drug use can be detected in body hair for up to 12 months. Currently, most entities that use hair testing have prescribed consequences for individuals removing hair to avoid a hair drug test.

The claim that a hair test cannot be tampered with has been shown to be debatable. One study has shown that THC does not readily deposit inside epithelial cells so it is possible for cosmetic and other forms of adulteration to reduce the amount of testable cannabinoids within a hair sample.[26]

Legality, ethics and politics[edit]
The results of federally mandating drug testing were similar to the effects of simply extending to the trucking industry the right to perform drug tests, and it has been argued that the latter approach would have been as effective at lower cost.[39]

Psychologist Tony Buon has criticized the use of workplace drug testing on a number of grounds, including:

1. Flawed Technology: The real world performance of testing is much lower than that claimed by its promoters. Buon suggest that tests are probably adequate for rehabilitation and treatment situations, possibly adequate for pre-employment situations, but not for dismissing employees.
   
2. Ethical Issues: Because of the fairly simple ways that an employee can invalidate the test, drug testing must be strictly monitored. This means that the specimen must be observed leaving the body. Many legal objections currently being raised in the courts about drug testing are pointing to legal requirements of prior notice, consent, due process, and cause.[40][41]
   
3. Wrong focus: As has been shown with Employee Assistance Programs, the focus of management concern should be on work performance decline. Buon suggests effective management practices are an infinitely better approach to managing workplace alcohol and other drug issues.[42]
   

Tony Buon has also reported by the CIPD as stating that "drug testing captures the stupid—experienced drug users know how to beat the tests".[43]

United Kingdom[edit]
A study in 2004 by the Independent Inquiry into Drug Testing at Work found that attempts by employers to force employees to take drug tests could potentially be challenged as a violation of privacy under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.[44] However, this does not apply to industries where drug testing is a matter of personal and public safety or security rather than productivity.

United States[edit]
In consultation with Dr. Carlton Turner, President Ronald Reagan issued Executive Order 12564. In doing so, he instituted mandatory drug-testing for all safety-sensitive executive-level and civil-service Federal employees. This was challenged in the courts by the National Treasury Employees Union. In 1988, this challenge was considered by the US Supreme Court.[45] A similar challenge resulted in the Court extending the drug-free workplace concept to the private sector.[46] These decisions were then incorporated into the White House Drug Control Strategy directive issued by President George H.W. Bush in 1989.[47] All defendants serving on federal probation or federal supervised release are required to submit to at least three drug tests. Failing a drug test can be construed as possession of a controlled substance, resulting in mandatory revocation and imprisonment.[48]

There have been inconsistent evaluation results as to whether continued pretrial drug testing has beneficial effects.[49]

Testing positive can lead to bail not being granted, or if bail has already been granted, to bail revocation or other sanctions. Arizona also adopted a law in 1987 authorizing mandatory drug testing of felony arrestees for the purpose of informing the pretrial release decision, and the District of Columbia has had a similar law since the 1970s. It has been argued that one of the problems with such testing is that there is often not enough time between the arrest and the bail decision to confirm positive results using GC/MS technology. It has also been argued that such testing potentially implicates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, the right to due process (including the prohibition against gathering evidence in a manner that shocks the conscience or constitutes outrageous government conduct), and the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures contained in the Fourth Amendment.[50]

According to Henriksson, the anti-drug appeals of the Reagan administration "created an environment in which many employers felt compelled to implement drug testing programs because failure to do so might be perceived as condoning drug use. This fear was easily exploited by aggressive marketing and sales forces, who often overstated the value of testing and painted a bleak picture of the consequences of failing to use the drug testing product or service being offered."[51] On March 10, 1986, the Commission on Organized Crime asked all U.S. companies to test employees for drug use. By 1987, nearly 25% of the Fortune 500 companies used drug tests.[52]

According to an uncontrolled self-report study done by DATIA and Society for Human Resource Management in 2012 (sample of 6,000 randomly selected human resource professionals), human resource professionals reported the following results after implementing a drug testing program: 19% of companies reported a subjective increase in employee productivity, 16% reported a decrease in employee turnover (8% reported an increase), and unspecified percentages reported decreases in absenteeism and improvement of workers' compensation incidence rates.[53]

According to US Chamber of Commerce 70% of all illicit drug users are employed.[54] Some industries have high rates of employee drug use such as construction (12.8%), repair (11.1%), and hospitality (7.9-16.3%).[55]

Australia[edit]
A person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU—the new term that includes employers) has duties under the work health and safety (WHS) legislation to ensure a worker affected by alcohol or other drugs does not place themselves or other persons at risk of injury while at work. Workplace policies and prevention programs can help change the norms and culture around substance abuse.

All organisations—large and small—can benefit from an agreed policy on alcohol and drug misuse that applies to all workers. Such a policy should form part of an organisations overall health and safety management system. PCBUs are encouraged to establish a policy and procedure, in consultation with workers, to constructively manage alcohol and other drug related hazards in their workplace. A comprehensive workplace alcohol and other drug policy should apply to everyone in the workplace and include prevention, education, counselling and rehabilitation arrangements. In addition, the roles and responsibilities of managers and supervisors should be clearly outlined.[20]

All Australian workplace drug testing must comply with Australian standard AS/NZS4308:2008.[citation needed]

In Victoria, roadside saliva tests detect drugs that contain:[56]

• THC (Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol), the active component in cannabis
  
• methamphetamine, which is found in drugs such as "speed", "base", "ice", and "crystal meth"
  
• MDMA (Methylenedioxymethamphetamine), which is known as ecstasy
  

In February 2016 a New South Wales magistrate "acquitted a man who tested positive for cannabis". He had been arrested and charged after testing positive during a roadside drug test, despite not having smoked for nine days. He was relying on advice previously given to him by police.[57]

Refusal[edit]
In the United States federal criminal system, refusing to take a drug test triggers an automatic revocation of probation or supervised release.[58][59]

In Victoria, Australia the driver of the car has the option to refuse the drug test. Refusing to undergo a drug test or refusing to undergo a secondary drug test after the first one, triggers an automatic suspension and disqualification for a period of 2 years and a fine of AUD$1000.

The second refusal triggers an automatic suspension and disqualification for a period of 4 years and an even larger fine.

Historical cases[edit]

• In 1993 Meritorious Marine Sergeant Steve Steinmetz refused to submit to further drug screening on the grounds that it violated his 4th and 5th Amendment Rights against unwarranted search and self-incrimination. He was court-martialed and given a Bad Conduct Discharge from the United States Marine Corps in 1994 for refusing to obey a "lawful order". He was threatened with forced medical procedures to obtain a sample if he was imprisoned. Said Marine stated, "That won't happen". He was discharged without being imprisoned.[citation needed]
  
• In 2000, an Australian Mining Company South Blackwater Coal Ltd with 400 employees, imposed drug-testing procedures, and the trade unions advised their members to refuse to take the tests, partly because a positive result does not necessarily indicate present impairment; the workers were stood-down by the company without pay for a week.[60]
  
• In 2003, sixteen members of the Chicago White Sox considered refusing to take a drug test, in hopes of making steroid testing mandatory.[61]
  
• In 2006, Levy County, Florida volunteer librarians resigned en masse rather than take drug tests.[62]
  
• In 2010, Iranian super heavyweight class weightlifters refused to submit to a drug test authorized by the Iran Weightlifting League.[63]
  

See also[edit]

• Cannabis drug tests
  
• Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988
  
• Equine drug testing
  
• Forensic toxicology
  
• Lacing (drugs)
  
• Presumptive and confirmatory tests
  
• School district drug policies
  
• Urinalysis
  

Please for give the last part wast a mess.. I had to edit the references listed because they did not fit



Next








A little out of order but a great edition

Hair Analysis

Quote:Hair analysis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_analysis#p-search]
This article is about scientific uses of hair analysis. For pseudoscienfic health practice, see Hair analysis (alternative medicine).

Hair analysis
Medical diagnostics

Schema depicting how human hair appears in a scanning electron microscope
HCPCS-L2
P2031

[edit on Wikidata]

Hair analysis may refer to the chemical analysis of a hair sample, but can also refer to microscopic analysis or comparison. Chemical hair analysis may be considered for retrospective purposes when blood and urine are no longer expected to contain a particular contaminant, typically three months or less.

Its most widely accepted use is in the fields of forensic toxicology and, increasingly, environmental toxicology.[1][2] Several alternative medicine fields also use various hair analyses for environmental toxicology, but these uses are controversial, evolving, and not standardized.
Microscopic hair analysis has traditionally been used in forensics as well. Analysts examine a number of different characteristics of hairs under a microscope, usually comparing hair taken from a crime scene and hair taken from a suspect. It is still acknowledged as a useful technique for confirming that hairs do not match. But, DNA testing of evidence has overturned many convictions that relied on hair analysis. Since 2012, the Department of Justice has conducted a study of cases in which hair analysis testimony was given by its agents, and found that a high proportion of testimony could not be supported by the state of science of hair analysis.

Contents
  [hide] 

• 1In forensic toxicology
  
• 2Microscopic hair analysis in forensics
  
• 3In environmental toxicology
  • 3.1Detection of long-term elemental effects
    
  • 3.2Occupational, environmental and alternative medicine
    
  
  
• 4Literature
  
• 5References
  
• 6Bibliography
  
• 7External links
  

In forensic toxicology[edit]
Hair analysis is used for the detection of many therapeutic drugs and recreational drugs, including cocaine, heroin, benzodiazepines and amphetamines.[3][4] Hair analysis is less invasive than a blood test, if not quite as universally applicable. In this context, it has been reliably used to determine compliance with therapeutic drug regimes or to check the accuracy of a witness statement that an illicit drug has not been taken. Hair testing is an increasingly common method of assessment in substance misuse, particularly in legal proceedings, or in any situation where a subject may have decided not to tell the entire truth about his or her substance-using history. It is also used by private employers who test their employees. Hair analysis has the virtue of showing a 'history' of drug use due to hair's slow growth. Urine analysis might detect drugs taken in the past three days; hair analysis can sometimes detect use as far as a month, although certain cosmetic treatments (e.g. dyeing hair) can interfere with this.[5] Hair analysis has the ability to measure a large number of potentially interacting elements, although that trait is shared with many other drug tests.

The judicial admissibility of the test in the United States is guided by the Daubert standard. A notable court case was United States v. Medina, 749 F.Supp. 59 (E.D.N.Y.1990).[6][7]

Microscopic hair analysis in forensics[edit]
Microscopic hair analysis is the science of comparing several strands of hair under a microscope and attempting to deduce if the strands 'match'. It was accepted as a forensic science by the 1950s.[8] Researchers often monitored more than a dozen attributes, including pigment distribution and scale patterns. This technique has been used in criminal investigations to try to tie hair found at a crime scene, or other location of note, and confirm if the hair matches that of a suspect. While a simple hair color match might be consistent with a certain suspect having been at the scene – black hair at the scene when the suspect has black hair – microscopic hair analysis began to claim a stronger standard by the 1970s. Rather than merely "narrow the field" of possibilities, hair analysts claimed to be able to match a specific person, such that the hair could be 'proof' of a specific suspect's presence. While the typed reports often hedged the certainty of microscopic hair analysis, witnesses in court would not always be as modest. The manager of the Montana state crime lab testified there was a "1 in 10,000 chance" that hairs found at a crime scene did not come from the suspect in one case, for example.[9]

Microscopic hair analysis has a long tradition of being used in crime fiction as well; it was originally popularized in the Sherlock Holmes series before being widely used by the police.[8] Fictional TV programs involving police procedurals and detectives have continued to use it since, including Columbo, Quincy, ME, Dexter, and CSI.[9]

Skepticism about the stronger claims used by witnesses in the 1970s and 1980s existed at the time. Researchers said in 1974 that the whole process was inherently subjective, and the FBI wrote in 1984 that hair analysis cannot positively match one single person.[8] In the 1990s, DNA profiling was introduced as a key new technique into forensics investigations; it introduced a new level of certainty about matching suspects to evidence. DNA analysis of old cases from the 1970s and 80s, however, contradicted conclusions about a number of earlier matches on the basis of hair analysis.

In 1994, the Justice Department created a task force which would eventually review 6,000 cases by 2004, focusing on the work of one particularly zealous examiner, Michael Malone.[8] These reviews came after reports that sloppy work by examiners at the FBI lab was producing unreliable forensic evidence in court trials. At first, these investigations were largely kept quiet; The Washington Post reported that "Instead of releasing those findings, they made them available only to the prosecutors in the affected cases."[8] A study of FBI Laboratory hair analysis cases between 1996 and 2000 was released in 2002 by Max M. Houck and Bruce Budowle.[10] The study showed that 11% of hair analysis "matches" were contradicted by DNA analysis. As the set of cases analyzed was one which would be expected to favor matches strongly in any case – only hair of individuals the police already believed to be potential suspects was sent in – this error rate was considered to be extremely high.[8]

Kirk L. Odom was convicted of rape in Washington, DC in 1982 by no physical evidence except microscopic hair analysis performed by the FBI Crime Laboratory.[8] Combined with a witness's identification in a line-up (another technique which modern research has shown to be much less reliable than previously thought), Odom was sentenced to twenty or more years in jail. DNA analysis, however, proved that Odom was entirely innocent.[9] While Odom had been released from prison in 2003, he was officially exonerated in 2012 and was paid a large settlement by the city.[11]

In a similar case, Santae Tribble was convicted in 1979 at the age of 17 in Washington, DC of murder due to FBI testimony in a hair analysis match of hair found at the scene. But he had three witnesses who gave him an alibi for the time when the crime was committed. The prosecutor overstated the reliability of hair analysis in identifying a single person, saying in his closing statement that "There is one chance, perhaps for all we know, in 10 million that it could [be] someone else's hair."[8] DNA testing in January 2012, however, showed that the prosecution's key piece of evidence, the hair, did not in fact match the defendant. Tribble was fully exonerated in December 2012, having served 28 years in prison that resulted in severe health problems.[12]

The outcry from defense attorneys about the unreliability of hair analysis and overstatement by FBI experts has resulted in the FBI conducting a review of disputed hair analysis matches since 2012. Due to what it found, in July 2013 the Justice department began an "unprecedented" review of older cases involving hair analysis, examining more than 21,000 cases referred to the FBI Lab's hair unit from 1982 through 1999.

By 2015, these cases included as many as 32 death penalty convictions, in which FBI experts may have exaggerated the reliability of hair analysis in their testimony and affected the verdict. Of these, 14 persons have been executed or died in prison.[13][14] In 2015, DOJ released findings on 268 trials examined so far in which hair analysis was used (the review was still in progress). The review concluded that in 257 of these 268 trials (95 percent), the analysts gave flawed testimony in court that overstated the accuracy of the findings in favor of the prosecution. About 1200 cases remain to be examined. The Department emphasized its commitment to following up on these cases to correct any wrongs, saying that they "are committed to ensuring that affected defendants are notified of past errors and that justice is done in every instance. The department and the FBI are also committed to ensuring the accuracy of future hair analysis, as well as the application of all disciplines of forensic science."[13]

In 2017, new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, appointed by President Donald Trump, announced that this investigation would be suspended, at the same time that he announced the end of a forensic science commission that had been working to establish standards on several tests and to improve accuracy; it was a "partnership with independent scientists to raise forensic science standards".[15] Independent scientists, prosecutors, defense counsel and judges criticized ending the commission, saying that the criminal justice system needed to rely on the best science.

In environmental toxicology[edit]
Analysis of hair samples has many advantages as a preliminary screening method for the presence of toxic substances deleterious to health after exposures in air, dust, sediment, soil and water, food and toxins in the environment. The advantages of hair analysis include the non-invasiveness, low cost, and the ability to measure a large number of, potentially interacting, toxic and biologically essential elements. Hence, head hair analysis is increasingly being used as a preliminary test to see whether individuals have absorbed poisons linked to behavioral or health problems.[1]

Detection of long-term elemental effects[edit]
The use of hair analysis appears to be valid for the measurement of lifelong, or long-term heavy metal burden, if not the measurement of general elemental analysis. Several studies, including the analysis of Ludwig van Beethoven's hair, have been conducted in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.[citation needed]

In a 1999 study on hair concentrations of calcium, iron, and zinc in pregnant women and effects of supplementation, it was concluded that "From the analyses, it was clear that hair concentrations of Ca, Fe, and Zn could reflect the effects of supplementation... Finally, it could be concluded that mineral element deficiencies might be convalesced by adequate compensations of mineral element nutrients."[16]

Occupational, environmental and alternative medicine[edit]
Main article: Hair analysis (alternative medicine)

Hair analysis has been used in occupational,[17] environmental and some branches of alternative medicine as a method of investigation to assist screening and/or diagnosis. The hair is sampled, processed and analyzed, studying the levels of mineral and metals in the hair sample. Using the results, as part of a proper examination or test protocol,[18]practitioners screen for toxic exposure and heavy metal poisoning. Some advocates claim that they can also diagnose mineral deficiencies and that people with autism have unusual hair mineral contents.[19] These uses are often controversial, and the American Medical Association states, "The AMA opposes chemical analysis of the hair as a determinant of the need for medical therapy and supports informing the American public and appropriate governmental agencies of this unproven practice and its potential for health care fraud."[20] A recent review of scientific literature by Dr Kempson highlighted analysis of metals/minerals in hair can be applied in large population studies for researching epidemiology and groups of chronically exposed populations, however any attempt to provide a diagnosis based on hair for an individual is not possible.[21] An exception to this can be in advanced analyses for acute poisoning.[22]

Literature[edit]

• Pragst F., Balikova M.A.: State of the art in hair analysis for detection of drugs and alcohol abuse; Clinica Chimic Acta 370 2006 17-49.
  
  
• Auwärter V.: Fettsäureethylester als Marker exzessiven Alkoholkonsums – Analytische Bestimmung im Haar und in Hautoberflächenlipiden mittels Headspace-Festphasenmikroextraktion und Gaschromatographie-Massenspektrometrie. Dissertation Humboldt-Universität Berlin 2006.
  
  
• Pragst F.; Auwärter V.; Kiessling B.; Dyes C. (2004). "Wipe-test and patch-test ror alcohol misuse based on the concentration ratio of fatty acid ethyl esters and squalen CFAEE/CSQ in skin surface lipids". Forensic Sci Int. 143: 77–86. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.02.041.
  
  

This is important to the conversation over the analysis of the material



Like in Remote viewing the interesting failures occur at one point

interpretation of data

The idea is right the tech works..

the experts misinterpret

please note it repeats at one point

Thread moved to more appropriate forum.

kindest regards,
G

The procedures used were standard at the time

The difference over the contamination is is that this lab and perosn tested it multiple times

also mention were a second set of corpses from a later period but pre columbus
same result

Even with the errors in the testing that are known


The other labratories that tested the samples for the Dr. are not blasting the papers or findings.. 

Leaves me with this

The Dr. Mentioned was not removed or fired over procedures

So this leaves a simple point 

Tabacco and Cocaine are present

Da Lazy's scholars work just piled up on him

So we can with a resonable safety margin go to the next point

We must follow the chain of evidence..

We got lucky it appears..



19:20

the cemetary secondary testing
found the results in other mummies


We can leave out the chain of evidence on the one mummy safely

Unless you want to go dig into the mummy trade and frauds
they were mention

Simply put, fraud led to easy profit
note detractors have not left vast articles of this common fraud with references

Do you want me to cover rich and powerful people ?

Access leads to excess
Pleasure pursuits are status


I am moving onto the next part

We have to look at a singular question

An extinct plant

Unfortunately this detour is required

We have Cocaine and Tabacco in Egypt
apperently for years

Having to put my tin foil hat to good use to increase reception for this

Da Lazy Scholar's last thread was over the sea peoples and the bronze age collapse

That time table of about 10,000 to 12,000 bc for the BAC

You sea (lol) keep this in mind
Ramses mention in both

A sea Power attacking

Nicotine and Cocaine
Pre-Columbus trade routes

How do these tie in

Well lets look at this
Sahara Desert Was Once Lush and Populated

Quote:At the end of the last Ice Age, the Sahara Desert was just as dry and uninviting as it is today. But sandwiched between two periods of extreme dryness were a few millennia of plentiful rainfall and lush vegetation.


During these few thousand years, prehistoric humans left the congested Nile Valley and established settlements around rain pools, green valleys, and rivers.

The ancient climate shift and its effects are detailed in the July 21 issue of the journal Science.





 










00:54

















When the rains came
Some 12,000 years ago, the only place to live along the eastern Sahara Desert was the Nile Valley. Being so crowded, prime real estate in the Nile Valley was difficult to come by. Disputes over land were often settled with the fist, as evidenced by the cemetery of Jebel Sahaba where many of the buried individuals had died a violent death.

But around 10,500 years ago, a sudden burst of monsoon rains over the vast desert transformed the region into habitable land.

This opened the door for humans to move into the area, as evidenced by the researcher's 500 new radiocarbon dates of human and animal remains from more than 150 excavation sites.

"The climate change at [10,500 years ago] which turned most of the [3.8 million square mile] large Sahara into a savannah-type environment happened within a few hundred years only, certainly within less than 500 years," said study team member Stefan Kroepelin of the University of Cologne in Germany.

Frolicking in pools
In the Egyptian Sahara, semi-arid conditions allowed for grasses and shrubs to grow, with some trees sprouting in valleys and near groundwater sources. The vegetation and small, episodic rain pools enticed animals well adapted to dry conditions, such as giraffes, to enter the area as well.

Humans also frolicked in the rain pools, as depicted in rock art from Southwest Egypt.

In the more southern Sudanese Sahara, lush vegetation, hearty trees, and permanent freshwater lakes persisted over millennia. There were even large rivers, such as the Wadi Howar, once the largest tributary to the Nile from the Sahara.
"Wildlife included very demanding species such as elephants, rhinos, hippos, crocodiles, and more than 30 species of fish up to 2 meters (6 feet) big," Kroepelin told LiveScience.

A timeline of Sahara occupation [See Map]:

• 22,000 to 10,500 years ago: The Sahara was devoid of any human occupation outside the Nile Valley and extended 250 miles further south than it does today.
  

• 10,500 to 9,000 years ago: Monsoon rains begin sweeping into the Sahara, transforming the region into a habitable area swiftly settled by Nile Valley dwellers.
  

• 9,000 to 7,300 years ago: Continued rains, vegetation growth, and animal migrations lead to well established human settlements, including the introduction of domesticated livestock such as sheep and goats.
  

• 7,300 to 5,500 years ago: Retreating monsoonal rains initiate desiccation in the Egyptian Sahara, prompting humans to move to remaining habitable niches in Sudanese Sahara. The end of the rains and return of desert conditions throughout the Sahara after 5,500 coincides with population return to the Nile Valley and the beginning of pharaonic society.
  
  

This is very funny to me

You see with a green Egypt
We have plants and other materials growing

We have the fertile ground

What is missing from all this
The D@#$ origin testing of the Cocaine and tobacco 
It is easy to do


TBC