Terahertz Scanners See Inside Sealed Packages

opticsorg writes "Japanese scientists have demonstrated a system that detects the presence of illicit drugs that are concealed within an envelope. Tests to date have shown that the imaging system can successfully detect and identify a range of substances including ecstasy (MDMA) and methamphetamine. The researchers are now working with companies to develop a mail screening system that could suit use in post offices and airports."

Comments

Re:Stupidity or Insanity?

[corebreech]

Sorry, tobacco is more addictive than heroin, at least according to the National Institute of Drug Abuse.

Here, see for yourself.

And as for deadly, heroin doesn't even come close to tobacco.

In fact, most of the time when heroin kills, it isn't really the heroin itself, but the fact that it is illegal. This happens because the drug is adulterated, or because the correct dosage is unknown. Or because of the use of some other drug--usually alcohol--at the same time, an event that could be prevented under legalization through labelling.

BTW, this is why alcohol killed during prohibition.

Marijuana Does Not Cause Reckless Driving

[bleaked]

Marijuana Does Not Cause Reckless Driving
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:04:40 -0700
Subject: Marijuana Does Not Cause Reckless Driving
Pubdate: Fri, 26 Sep 2003
Source: DrugSense Weekly
Section: Feature Article
Website: http://www.drugsense.org/current.htm
Author: Mitch Earleywine, Ph.D.
Note: Mitch Earleywine, Ph.D., is an associate professor of psychology at the University of Southern California and author of "Understanding Marijuana" (Oxford University Press, 2002).

MARIJUANA DOES NOT CAUSE RECKLESS DRIVING

The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and certain Wisconsin legislators have launched a new crusade against "drugged driving," with a heavy emphasis on marijuana. This crusade is largely based on scientific misinformation, and it could lead to the enactment of bad laws.

ONDCP has several slick television commercials on the subject. One shows dramatic auto accidents and two crash test dummies passing a joint while a serious voice says, "In a recent study, one in three reckless drivers tested positive for marijuana." Note the careful phrasing. The idea is to make viewers think that marijuana caused the reckless driving, without really saying that it did.

Why would ONDCP be so coy? The answer lies in the actual data regarding marijuana's effects on driving,

I study the effects of drugs and teach classes in the science of illicit substances, so I know this field. The plain fact is that marijuana does not cause reckless driving. Large studies of accidents show that drivers who test positive for marijuana (and ONLY marijuana -- i.e., people who haven't also been drinking or taking other intoxicating drugs) cause fewer crashes than people who haven't had any drugs at all.

That's right, people "high" on marijuana cause fewer crashes than those who are completely sober. The findings seemed impossible to explain. It was a puzzle that made no sense.

A bright and talented researcher in the Netherlands named Robbe recently solved that puzzle. He got experienced marijuana users stoned and had them drive around the streets of Holland. But these guys were no dummies. They drove slower, increased the distance between their cars and the cars in front of them, and never tried to pass other cars. Folks who smoked a placebo (a non-intoxicating substance made to look and smell like marijuana) drove as they usually did. Alcohol, alone or in combination with marijuana, wrecked driving completely.

Robbe's results helped explain the accident studies. People who used marijuana and only marijuana were compensating for the drug's effects by driving more carefully. Nobody should drive high, but we can all take a lesson from these people who did: slow down, leave space between your car and the next, and don't try to pass. Unlike alcohol, which makes people behave recklessly, marijuana users tend to be aware that they are impaired and compensate with some success.

But what about the ONDCP's claim that one in three reckless drivers tested positive for marijuana?

It's not quite a lie, but it's deliberately misleading. The Drug Czar's no dummy. He wants to scare people, and he knows the complete facts won't do it. Instead he throws out scary but incomplete and misleading statistics - -- and hopes people won't question them. Yes, one in three reckless drivers tested positive for marijuana in a urine screen, but we don't know how many of them had alcohol, antihistamines, cocaine, or any number of other drugs in their systems.

Legislators need to ask for the complete facts behind the scare stories before they start passing new laws based on misinformation.

There are cheaper, easier ways to get impaired drivers off the road. Roadside sobriety tests are reliable, inexpensive, and valid indicators of impaired driving. Law-enforcement officers can learn to administer these tests quickly and easily. Unlike expensive blood tests, which can only identify a few drugs, roadside sobriety tests can detect any kind of drug im

It IS being developed to diagnose cancer

[Anonymous Coward]

Teraview, a UK spinoff of Toshiba, is developing terahertz imaging technology to diagnose cancer, among other medical applications.

Ooo! mdma AND methamphetamine!?

[sbma44]

very impressive, until you consider that the two example substances quoted in the article are nearly identical from a chemical standpoint. MDMA = methylene dioxy methamphetamine. You just add a little methylene branch and stick an oxygen in the carbon ring and you've gone from speed to X.

If I remember my chem 101 correctly, the reason this tech works is because different types of chemical bonds are susceptible to different frequencies of radiation, depending on their strength, which depends on the type of bond, types of atoms involved and their surrounding atomic environment. You shoot a bunch of wavelengths at a molecule and some will be absorbed, and in varying ratios, producing a relatively unique signature. Congratulations, you've just reinvented spectrography.

From dyerlabs.com/chemistry:

Atoms and molecules have only certain distinct (discrete) amounts of energy (energy levels). Relatively small amount of energy are involved in rotation of molecules, and those measurements are done with far infrared and microwave spectrometry. More energy in involved in vibrations between atoms or groups of atoms (infrared). Still more energy is involved in changes of the electronic structure (visible, ultraviolet, X-ray) and nuclear structure (gamma ray).

Terahertz may be a good candidate from a privacy standpoint, but it's in between the not-so-useful microwave and okay-for-identifying-things infrared. So basically this is just a crippled, privacy-compliant form of IR spectrography, and they've discovered that the amphetamine-based molecules can be identified with it. This doesn't mean that other organics can be properly identified by it.

Frankly, this seems kind of lame.