Slashdot Mirror


Up To 90 Percent of US Money Has Traces of Cocaine

mmmscience writes "Scientists have found that up to 90% of US paper money has some cocaine contamination, up from the 67% mark measured two years ago. Looking at bills from 17 cities, it's no surprise that the city with the highest level was Washington DC, where up to 95% of bills gathered there tested positive. From a global standpoint, both Canada and Brazil tested rather high (85% and 80%, respectively), but China and Japan were well behind the curve at 20% and 12%. The researchers hope that studies such as these will be of help to law enforcement agencies that are attempting to understand the growth and flow of drug use in communities."

441 comments

  1. In all fairness by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apples and oranges. Japan doesn't have Lindsey Lohan as a citizen.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, but at some point in time, I'm sure Keith Richards passed through...

    2. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Snopes article is informative.

      So why is this on Slashdot and not in my junk email?

    3. Re:In all fairness by natehoy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ummm... the article isn't introducing this as a new issue. Even the article summary makes that clear. The article is about the increases in contamination.

      The point of the article is that the rate of contamination is increasing. The Snopes article makes mention of 1985 being 33 to 50% contamination rates. The article summary refers to a 2-year-old study that puts contamination closer to 67%, and now the most recent study puts it at around 90%. So the point is that the contamination has increased.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    4. Re:In all fairness by 2names · · Score: 1

      Well, thanks a lot. After reading your informative post I have nothing left to gripe about. Fun hater. ~

      --
      "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
    5. Re:In all fairness by Vectronic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So the point is that the contamination has increased.

      Perhaps, but that may not mean that the cocaine industry is increasing, if it was say 40% in 1985, pretend that same 40% is still in circulation, the now 90% contamination may simply be from newer/more bills touching the original 40%... how old is your wallet? When is the last time you bothered to wash it? (especially since most are leather) I bet quite a few people have wallets/purses/etc that are 10 years old, all with "traces" of cocaine in them spreading to new bills put in them.

      What about other factors like ATM and cash registers, the bags the money is put in by banks for travel/dispersal, when is the last time they were washed, most of those are (the machines as well) are probably a decade old or more.

    6. Re:In all fairness by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What part of the Iran-Contra business did you fail to fully understand, 30 years ago? It's only worse, today.

      ALL USD is tainted by Cocaine.

      And by child slavery, forced prostitution and slaughter of innocents. Viva Roma!

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    7. Re:In all fairness by bennomatic · · Score: 0

      OK, I haven't R'd TFA, but is it possible that some of that increase is due to better manufacturing techniques of paper bills? Maybe those bills are in circulation longer, and so they are more likely to cross the path of a coke-head.

      OK, I guess I'll go RTFA.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    8. Re:In all fairness by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Funny
      "Yes, but at some point in time, I'm sure Keith Richards passed through..."

      If that's the case, they should also test for traces of his dad on the money too.

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    9. Re:In all fairness by Mandi+Walls · · Score: 3, Funny

      Everyone in Japan has Hello Kitty coke spoons.

    10. Re:In all fairness by 31415926535897 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apples and oranges.

      Why yes, how did you know my apples and oranges have traces of cocaine as well?

    11. Re:In all fairness by natehoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, that's quite possible. I'm also sure that their measurement floor of .006 micrograms has a lot to do with it - I'm relatively certain that such amounts were all but undetectable in the 1980s for example.

      And, for the record, I'm not (as the article is) suggesting that "contamination" = "use". The article is making a ridiculous assumption, on that we certainly agree.

      I think the explanation is far simpler. Population increases (money changing hands faster), increases in detection equipment so we can detect increasingly tiny contamination, more machines handling money so the machines can get contaminated and spread the contamination further, etc etc etc.

      Douglas Adams was right. Eliminating phone sanitizers is a really bad idea. Recall the "B" Ark!

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    12. Re:In all fairness by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Sorry. I hope I'm not contributing to increasing percentages of currency contamination with all the /. fun I'm killing. :)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    13. Re:In all fairness by tkohler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You guys are all missing the obvious... What do you think the press-operators at the U.S. Mint do on their breaks in the paper storage room?

    14. Re:In all fairness by natehoy · · Score: 3, Funny

      That certainly explains why the machines are able to run so fast...

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    15. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I highly doubt the singles and fives in circulation are anywhere near as tainted as the tens, twenties, fifties, and hundreds.

    16. Re:In all fairness by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except, the average lifespan of a paper note is about 18 months depending on the denomination. Very few 1985 bills remain in circulation today.

      (which, btw, is the argument for using coinage instead. Coins last *much* longer than paper money, and usually have a fraction of their face value in metals content (which provides some pressure against inflation, for obvious reasons) but that's an argument for another day, dollar coin refusers.)

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    17. Re:In all fairness by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

      Actually it just means coccaine users in Japan and China are broke.

      --

      War as we knew it was obsolete
      Nothing could beat complete denial
      - Emily Haines
    18. Re:In all fairness by JordanL · · Score: 1

      Why in the world is this story tagged "republicans"?

    19. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is very nearly an absolute zero percent chance of that 40% to be in circulation today. The bill with the longest average lifespan, the $100, only averages 8 years in circulation, which has given it three times its lifespan to be used legitimately and subsequently replaced.

    20. Re:In all fairness by dumbunny · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lindsay Lohan was born in 1986 when the contamination rate was 33 to 50%. In 2007, she was in rehab, and the contamination rate was 67%. Now that she's out, it's 90%. I think we have established both a geographic and longitudinal correlation.

    21. Re:In all fairness by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Funny

      All true, but slipping a dollar coin in a g-string is a non-starter. What were we talking about again?

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    22. Re:In all fairness by RegularFry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except, the average lifespan of a paper note is about 18 months depending on the denomination. Very few 1985 bills remain in circulation today.

      Ah, but - with the levels they're measuring, contact contamination between notes *must* be an issue. While the notes themselves won't be in circulation, that doesn't necessarily mean that the contamination half-life isn't longer than a given bill's circulation life.

      --
      Reality is the ultimate Rorschach.
    23. Re:In all fairness by sorak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Another possible factor is that direct deposits, online banking, debit, and credit cards, have made it so that many people do not need to carry cash. I'm curious what percent of the actual paper bills in wallets are there because that is the smartest way to pay for illegal drugs.

    24. Re:In all fairness by fooslacker · · Score: 1

      Yes, but at some point in time, I'm sure Keith Richards passed through...

      Which is why 12% tested positive. I figure he probably touched 2% of Japan's money for buying hookers and booze and the other 10% was just contaminated by the coke cloud that follows him around. ;)

    25. Re:In all fairness by fooslacker · · Score: 1

      I highly doubt the singles and fives in circulation are anywhere near as tainted as the tens, twenties, fifties, and hundreds.

      I don't know....I would thing there was an above average use of both singles and cocaine among strippers.

    26. Re:In all fairness by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 5, Funny

      You have to put the coins in the proper coin slot. The really talented strippers can even dispense change for you.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    27. Re:In all fairness by michaelhood · · Score: 0

      The article summary refers to a 2-year-old study that puts contamination closer to 67%, and now the most recent study puts it at around 90%. So the point is that the contamination has increased.

      Wait- the longer money is in circulation, the more people (and cocaine, apparently) it comes in contact with? Unpossible!

    28. Re:In all fairness by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      If you've ever run across a police while carrying a decent amount of cash you know they consider that prima facie evidence of involvement in the drug trade.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    29. Re:In all fairness by Wansu · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ones, Fives and Tens have average circulation life of less than 2 years. Twenties have average circulation life of approximately 2 years. Fifties have average circulation life of a little more than 4 and 1/2 years and one hundred dollar bills have average circulation life of about 7 and 1/2 years.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Note

      So it's unlikely that any 24 year old bills would be contaminating new bills. But there still may be some old-new contamination going on nonetheless.

      --
      Wansu, th' chinese sailor
    30. Re:In all fairness by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know, the correlation between contamination and use in the original article is unfounded. Agreed.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    31. Re:In all fairness by northernboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hate to burst anyone's bubble, but way back in the late '80s, the Feds were confiscating money in Dade County, FL if they found traces of cocaine on it, based on a theory that only money related to active drug dealing would be contaminated. For reasons I never understood, the task of calling them on this idiocy fell to the Coroner's office. They collected money of all denominations from cities around the US and a few foreign locations (I recall one was London). Their criterion for identifying cocaine was GC/MS analysis. Their summary result was that all US paper currency tested except "SOME" brand new bills fresh from banks were contaminated with identifiable cocaine. I read that as well over 90%. I was finally able to Google a legitimate reference to this information.

      Please focus on the last two paragraphs.

      From a Los Angeles Times article dated 1994 (http://articles.latimes.com/1994-11-13/local/me-62172_1_drug-money?pg=1):

      "In its decision, the appeals court relied on uncontradicted evidence that more than three of every four bills circulating in Los Angeles were tainted with drug residue.

      That evidence was provided by Ojai-based forensic toxicologist Jay B. Williams, who said he had done numerous studies since 1982 that turned up drugs on samples of $1, $2, $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 bills taken from throughout the West--from banks, casinos, stores and restaurants.

      Williams, who has specialized in drug and alcohol tests for 27 years, said last week that the percentage of contaminated bills ranged from 15% in Bozeman, Mont., to a little more than 75% in Los Angeles and Las Vegas.

      The bills he tested contained quantities of cocaine as small as a nanogram, meaning one-billionth of a gram, to as much as a milligram, one-thousandth of a gram.

      Williams' tests are consistent with other research nationwide. In one study, Florida researchers analyzed 135 bills gathered randomly from cities around the United States; all but four tested positive for cocaine.

      One of those researchers, Lee Hearn, now the chief toxicologist for the medical examiner's office in Dade County, Fla., said: "The only bills that didn't have contamination were crisp new ones that had limited circulation, if any at all."
      "

    32. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, to me the obvious is this: create a media campaign about how being able to detect drugs on money enables the feds to catch the criminals. Then wait for abnormally clean money to start showing up, and trace it back to our coke dealing friends. Those who fear getting caught can easily be persuaded into revealing their guilt through stupidity.

    33. Re:In all fairness by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 1

      Actually it would have been 100% contamination except for those lazy college students that keep leaving their wallets in their pants on laundry days.

    34. Re:In all fairness by severoon · · Score: 1

      I think they are out of ideas if this is a way they're studying the flow of drugs.

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    35. Re:In all fairness by Unordained · · Score: 1

      Among younsters, perhaps. I hardly ever carry more than a couple bucks with me -- enough for a soda. But it feels like everyone over sixty goes around with twenties or hundreds on them, either so they can easily spoil the grandkids, or go to the casino after dinner. Maybe they use it as a crude form of budgeting. Or maybe grandma's a druggie.

    36. Re:In all fairness by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      >So the point is that the contamination has increased.

      I'm here to attest that I heard the 90% figure several years ago. Snopes uses an 80% figure as the basis of its article, and mentions one study where 131 of 135 samples were contaminated (97%).

      I see too many different numbers to chart a trend.

    37. Re:In all fairness by skine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People have an average lifespan of less than 80 years. So it's unlikely that a communicable disease would last for more than a couple centuries, right?

    38. Re:In all fairness by j-pimp · · Score: 3, Funny

      People have an average lifespan of less than 80 years. So it's unlikely that a communicable disease would last for more than a couple centuries, right?

      Except cocaine particles do eat money fibers and reproduce.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    39. Re:In all fairness by Apro+im · · Score: 2, Informative

      Obligatory telephone sanitizer link.

    40. Re:In all fairness by adolf · · Score: 1

      I try to keep at least a few hundred bucks on me whenever I can. No particular reason for it, except that it's handy to have, and it spends everywhere.

    41. Re:In all fairness by ewieling · · Score: 1

      How do Canadians deal with issue? I can't imagine them putting the lowest Canadian note in a stripper's G-String. What is the lowest note? CA$5?

      --
      I really shouldn't have used someone else's email address for this account.
    42. Re:In all fairness by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      You have to put the coins in the proper coin slot. The really talented strippers can even dispense change for you.

      o.o

      I need to go wash out my brain now...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    43. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure?

      24 year old bills touched 22 year old bills, 20 year old bills touched 8 year old bills, etc.

      Of course, the higher denomination 24 year old bills could have come in contact with 16 year old bills, etc.

      Add in cocaine use over the past twenty years, and you could very well reach saturation.

      However, one would need to know the percentage of cocaine transferred bill to bill to see how plausible it is that old cocaine is resulting in these higher numbers.

    44. Re:In all fairness by http · · Score: 2, Funny

      Here in Canada, we value strippers more.

      --
      If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
      3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
    45. Re:In all fairness by voisine · · Score: 1

      The primary concern here, as least for me, is what level can a drug sniffing dog indicate on. The DEA frequently "confiscates" money that has been involved in a crime without charging the owner. Since you haven't been charged, you have no opportunity to defend yourself against the theft. It's flat out armed robbery, often conducted on the highway.

    46. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money doesn't have traces of coke because it's handled by coke dealers. Money has coke in it because people roll up the bills, stuff em up their nose, and start snorting. Jesus, you need to get outside even more than I do.

    47. Re:In all fairness by toddestan · · Score: 1

      By large amounts of cash, you're generally talking like $2000 or more. The cops generally don't care if they find you're carrying $300 on you, as $300 really isn't that much money.

    48. Re:In all fairness by dryeo · · Score: 1

      I've never seen anyone put money in a stripper's G-String, at that it would all fall out when she took the G-String off.
      And yes the lowest note now is $5

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    49. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I snort my cocaine with $2 bills, you insensitive clod.

    50. Re:In all fairness by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Coins are also heavier. Carry around 100 bucks in a $20 denomination of coins and of bills. Granted, it's not a huge amount of weight for your average person, but what would drug dealers do when they deal with full suitcases of money?

    51. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've actually seen this! There are shows in Japan where strippers sit on a stack of coins, then stand up and "spit" out the coins one by one. They can also do this with bananas, ehm. :P

    52. Re:In all fairness by RockoTDF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pretty narrow minded statement there. In reality, it is a good way to compare which countries are using cocaine, and possibly even how often. I would be willing to bet that you find it more on higher valued bills, and finding it on lower valued bills is probably an indicator that the less affluent are also using it. Those are just examples I thought up right now (didn't read article because I've read about this before) and I'm sure someone who actually does this for a living could be even more creative.

      --
      There is more to science than physics!

      www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
    53. Re:In all fairness by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if this is universal but the Coroner's Office is generally a check on law enforcement. For example, only the Coroner can arrest the Sheriff. I imagine they had the leeway to stop the police from idiocy at least until a legal judgement could be made.

    54. Re:In all fairness by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      "So the point is that the contamination has increased."

      *STILL* Lindsay Lohan. Never underestimate her.

    55. Re:In all fairness by Rehnberg · · Score: 1

      While I agree that is possible, but fairly unlikely that solely that 40% is still in circulation. On your second point, I would have to agree that that may well be a factor. An interesting experiment would be to wash/replace all of them, then see where the levels went. Of course, that's not going to happen, but we can speculate.

    56. Re:In all fairness by ekhben · · Score: 2, Funny

      I prefer to just swipe my card.

    57. Re:In all fairness by Convector · · Score: 1

      I don't think it much matters, since the U.S. mint only produces our coins. You want the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.

    58. Re:In all fairness by Creepy · · Score: 1

      Well, there is a US Mint in Washington DC, as I recall. Perhaps all the politicians visit on their breaks and borrow a few bucks so they can get high on the taxpayer's dollar. Still doesn't account for all the other US Mints.

      There is a correlation, I think - I worked as a jogger at a press mill and I'd say about half the people I knew working there were snorting coke or smoking pot or both on their breaks - definitely not a drug free workplace. I certainly didn't complain - I worked with a guy high on coke most of the time and he could work all four press lines and let me take my legally required breaks and not lose ground - when I ran four for him I'd have fairly large stacks by the time he got back (we're talking 1 stack of paper to move every 10 seconds, and with 4 lines that means 1 stack every 2.5 seconds - and that doesn't include moving the pallets when they got full).

    59. Re:In all fairness by lena_10326 · · Score: 1

      Re: author of the blog post you pasted. That author reeked of pomposity and arrogance by assuming only those Americans wouldn't understand the phrase or that it's obvious to anyone but an American.

      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    60. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My grandpa always told me money under the mattress is safer than money in the bank.

      Now I know why. It has less chance of cocaine on it.

    61. Re:In all fairness by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      20 year old bills touched 8 year old bills

      Wow, we've sunk low enough to have discussions of monetary pedophilia! When will the debauchery end???

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    62. Re:In all fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      also, the humour of the iced looney for the 6$ slip.

  2. Given the Cost of the Substance ... by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Funny

    Looking at bills from 17 cities, it's no surprise that the city with the highest level was Washington DC, where up to 95% of bills gathered there tested positive. From a global standpoint, both Canada and Brazil tested rather high (85% and 80%, respectively), But China and Japan were well behind the curve at 20% and 12%. The researchers hope that studies such as these will be of help to law enforcement agencies that are attempting to understand the growth and flow of drug use in communities.

    Nope, sorry, has nothing to do with growth and flow. Merely that China and Japan are better at properly labeling and storing their valuable narcotics and opiates. Given the cost of the substance, you would think the American & Canadian coke heads would be better at keeping it separate from other things. But when you need to carry only coke and money with you ... the cost of that second briefcase probably outweighs the amount of coke you lose just shoving money and coke into one briefcase. Being able to do it in a frenzied haphazard manner isn't just how it's done in Martin Scorsese films, it's a necessary skill of coke users and traffickers. I wonder what "essence of G-string" levels respective countries have on their smallest denominational bills?

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you misunderstand. It's not the carrying of cocaine in your wallet/pocket/purse that contaminates the dosh, it's the snorting of it through a rolled up note.

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    2. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by kick6 · · Score: 1

      Errrmmm.....the coke gets on the money, mostly, from the money buying used as a straw to snort with.....

    3. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Which means that if there suddenly is a law that invalidates all money contaminated with cocaine things would get interesting.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    4. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would imagine that its both that AND then having that money rub up against other money as it goes into you wallet and then to the bank, and then through mechanical counting machines. How sensitive is the test? How many bills could one "nose straw" collect?

      This is, btw, nothing new. I read this same statistic in an article on civil property seizure 10 years ago. Its been known for years.... the police can confiscate any cash you have, at any time. If even one bill tests positive for cocaine, its all suspect.

      But its civil court, so no need to worry. They have to show a "preponderance of evidence" that it was used for something illegal. ALl you have to do is prove that it wasn't. Your not going to let essentially being guilty until proven innocent deter you are you? No worries though, its not criminal.... so all you lose is your cash.

      Sounds fair doesn't it?

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    5. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      ... for the banks or vendors or anywhere else with automated machines that spread dust from one bill all over their equipment and any subsequent bills ever processed.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    6. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Weird. How do they snort their cocaine if not with a rolled up bill? If they aren't doing cocaine how can they have stock brokers or film actors? If they are doing heroin instead, where is the surge in jazz musician population that we should expect?

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    7. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Reece400 · · Score: 2, Funny

      With how some bill counting machines flap the bills around, it's suprising there isn't a nice layer of cocaine dust over half of the bank.

    8. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "With how some bill counting machines flap the bills around, it's suprising there isn't a nice layer of cocaine dust over half of the bank."

      Hmm...well, that would go a LONG way in explaining our current financial/banking situation.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    9. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by lorenlal · · Score: 1

      Or maybe that's why the banks needed a bailout.

      The tellers were all going through withdrawal, and they needed more cash to flow through to keep the buzz going?

    10. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "This is, btw, nothing new. I read this same statistic in an article on civil property seizure 10 years ago. Its been known for years.... the police can confiscate any cash you have, at any time. If even one bill tests positive for cocaine, its all suspect.

      But its civil court, so no need to worry. They have to show a "preponderance of evidence" that it was used for something illegal. ALl you have to do is prove that it wasn't. Your not going to let essentially being guilty until proven innocent deter you are you? No worries though, its not criminal.... so all you lose is your cash."

      Actually...I thought there was an actual court case awhile back, where this stat, about most of the US currency showing traces of coke, that they won the case against the state. I can't remember if the case was for dealing or confiscation of $$.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by relguj9 · · Score: 1

      This is why I use check cards.

      All the po po be takin' my moneh!

    12. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Ascagnel · · Score: 1

      ... and that would have explained so much about the current global banking crisis.

      --
      "It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine."
    13. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the cost of the substance, you would think the American & Canadian coke heads would be better at keeping it separate from other things.

      Posting anon for obvs reasons...

      Cocaine, while a powder, is generally 'pressed' into what appears to be a brick or rock of cocaine (Not to be confused with the crystalline form of a crack rock.)
      Even when purchased in small amounts, the end user generally gets it in this form.

      So to prepare it for use, one needs to break that small pressed block apart back into powder.
      The easiest way to do this is put it on a table, put a dollar bill over it, and run a lighter or other object over the bill to break apart what is under it.

      While not pressed extremely hard, like a pill would be. You can also use that method to break a pill down into powder, for a separation process (IE separating the drug you want from the filler), or just to snort it directly (ick, but to each their own.)
      The drug can take 30+ minutes to enter your system when digested, but will typically be fully in your system and in effect in under 5 minutes when snorted.

      Additionally, carrying a straw around with you is not a wise idea, however rolling up a dollar bill to use as a straw for snorting purposes is equally as easy.

      Due to both of these practices, and the convenience of having the perfect shape and textured paper in your pocket already (read: money), you will end up with bills with cocaine ground into it from the breaking up process, and soaked into the edges of the bill from rolling the bill up to use as a straw.

      Then these randomly chosen at the time bills are simply spent, thus sending it on its way back into the general population.

      There was a trial in the past where a man was being accused of cocaine possession, simply because one of the $20 bills in his wallet at the time had cocaine ground into it.
      As it turns out, almost 70% (or according to the article, now 90%) of all bills have this trace in them, so it was ruled this can not be used as evidence of possession. The ones in your wallet too assuming you carry cash.

    14. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by crrkrieger · · Score: 3, Informative

      The most common test for the seizure of currency is a dog sniff. It is little know that cocaine is, in fact, odorless. Drug dogs do not detect cocaine. They detect a biproduct of the production of cocaine called methyl benzoate. Methyl benzoate is a volitile organic compound that dissapates quickly. If a dog hits on it, it is a clear sign not only that the money has been in close contact with cocaine, but that it was RECENTLY so.

      Take a look at this case United States v. $30,670 in U.S. Funds, 403 F.3d 448 (7th Cir. 2005). There the court does a good analysis of the available facts. You would need at least 50,000 innocently tainted bills (not dollars, but bills!) for the dog to hit on it.

      Of course, this is Slashdot, so I don't know why I would expect someone to know what they are talking about . . .

    15. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I don't know. I remember reading about some of the "drug highways" where drugs move north and south and how some little shit counties have monopolized by placing extra patrols on those rodes to try and get as much of that drug cash for themseleves. (everybody wants their cut).

      Maybe its the end of the same story, but I remember reading about a guy who grabbed his whole life savings (10k or so) and jumped in his car to go live with his sick mother. Unfortunately for him he traveled on one of these roads too, and ended up having his cash confiscated even though he had no drugs.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    16. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imperical Testing Anyone?

      "243 bills from 17 cities" doesn't concern me in the least. I've run into more than 243 bills in the past few months just living dialy life. Visit an ATM, there's a few bills. Spend some money and get change back? There's some more.

      If they had said something like "243 thousand bills from each of 17 cities", then I may take them seriously.

    17. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually in China there's a much larger social stigma attached to drugs including cocaine (RE: Opium Wars and the "disaster" that followed). There's also much stricter laws about possession compared to the US, such as death sentences for coke heads. It's not so much about having better labels as keeping people afraid to use it.

    18. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by russotto · · Score: 2, Informative

      Methyl benzoate isn't specific to cocaine, and it is not just a byproduct of manufacture of cocaine, but is produced by cocaine hydrochloride (powder cocaine) exposed to humid air. So if there's cocaine on the bills, and the air is humid, there will be methyl benzoate as well. Further, if the bills were exposed to methyl benzoate from some other source, a dog trained to alert on it would detect it.

    19. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by sleigher · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but what will be very interesting is when the police start testing your money at a routine traffic stop, and all the sudden 90% of the US population is in prison for possession. I really hope CCA doesn't read /.

      --
      All points of time and space are connected.
    20. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by BotnetZombie · · Score: 1

      all you lose is your cash

      This is great news for the US government if it plays its cards right:
      1. Hand out contaminated cash
      2. Confiscate
      3. ???
      4. Profit!

    21. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by the_mushroom_king · · Score: 0

      I'm stuck with the lesser of two evils problem myself:

      Do I support one criminal cartel (banks) to avoid being associated with another (drug runners)?

    22. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      No, you are misunderstanding. Saying a bill is "positive" for cocaine residue does not mean it was actively used to snort cocaine. The particles are so fine that if say you have one bill in your wallet that was used for snorting cocaine that the particles could transfer to the rest of your bills. Same for the counting machines at banks. Once one bill with residue on it passes through the machine, it can affect all the other bills that are counted on the same machine after it. The study I read about it indicated that most of the bills marked as "positive" was due to the testing equipment itself having micro fine particles of residue on the testing equipment itself.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    23. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure that possession of .0001 of a gram of cocaine is really not a offense that law enforcement is going waste their time/money/efforts on. Do you really think every police car is going to have a $100,000 laboratory in it?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    24. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      SO what you are saying is, that if someone went out and bought a bunch of methyl benzoate and started spreading the love anywhere that people were likely to encounter drug dogs, it could create some absolutely hillarious chaos....chaos rightly deserved by an organization that touts freedom out one face, while telling people what they can do from the other?

      Good to know.

      Incidentally, any idea what they key on for pot?

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    25. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by sleigher · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure I wasn't serious. My fault for lack of proper tag.

      --
      All points of time and space are connected.
    26. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by griffjon · · Score: 1

      Are apostrophes also a controlled substance?

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    27. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Duradin · · Score: 1

      If .0001 gram of cocaine would be enough for them to seize your property every cop car will be kitted out well enough to make CSI look like outdated and quaint.

    28. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's much much worse. In many cases, they sue THE MONEY ITSELF, leaving you no standing to even appear in court except as an observer, much less offer a rebuttal to the police claims.

      It's nothing short of legalized theft in lieu of taxation. It's turned more than one police department into exactly the sort of highwaymen they are supposed to protect people from.

    29. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      In many places, the law is worded in terms of "detectable amount". Every cop car doesn't need to have a lab - they can drive you where the motorhome lab is parked.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    30. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, any idea what they key on for pot?

      -Steve

      Yeah, it's called pot.

    31. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Considering the rest of the dumb shit.... Yes?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    32. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Bzzt wrong. Actually, I have looked this up before. I never found what it is exactly, but there is some product thats used to train dogs to sniff for pot. Its some substance that smells similar in some way.

      You need to select a scent that you will have your dog detect. This could be interesting. I suppose in the early days, people were forced to use illegal substances to work with their dogs. But now, there are these interesting things, called "pseudo chemicals," which simulate the scent of the REAL drug or explosive, so that trainers don't get in trouble with the law by using the real thing.

      (from http://www.dogscouts.org/Dog_Activ-_Scent_Discrim.html )

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    33. Re:Given the Cost of the Substance ... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      As you and I probably know...but in case anyone else is reading this.... from wikipedia:

      A form of asset forfeiture is roadside forfeiture during a vehicle stop. Usually enforcing State policies by Highway police, local law enforcement have built up seized funds and spent them with oversight only from local judges who sometimes benefit from the expenditures of such expenditures. The presumption is that travelers hiding large amounts of cash are transporting drug money. Often, the vehicle occupants are required to simply sign a waiver that they will leave the State and not return, thus also not attempt to retrieve their funds. Some complain that this is law enforcement action requires more oversight in order to minimize the impact on travelers who are not involved in drug money but who simply wish to avoid further involvement with law enforcement agents and sign the waiver anyway. Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee is investigating the Tenaha, Texas Police seizures scandal.

      (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_forfeiture)

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  3. So... by SigILL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't get caught with US dollars on you in Dubai.

    --
    Error: password can't contain reverse spelling of ancient Chinese emperor
    1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It really really pisses me off at the Canadian border.... I cross it frequently and have been stopped several times for the "bonus interrogation". Every single time they run my money through their machine and, of course, it comes up positive for cocaine. Then they try to intimidate me about it.

      And every single time, I say "good luck with that in court -- I'll have my lawyer test the judge's wallet and your wallet. ALL the money is contaminated because the drug war is an utter failure. Are we done yet?"

      Now in Dubai... hell, any other country, I'd probably throw away my wallet, put all money in electronics, and arrive naked any more. Stupid, stupid world....

    2. Re:So... by johannesg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't get caught with US dollars on you in Dubai.

      That's a damn good point, actually... So why isn't there a constant stream of arrests in that country, given that they are able to detect absolutely minute traces of drugs on a person? There must be plenty of people travelling through there carrying dollar bills.

    3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just guessing, but probably because they aren't quite as draconian in their enforcement as you assume, and actually only care about larger amounts...in which case they'll totally overreact.

    4. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't get caught with US dollars on you in Dubai.

      I am currently working in Dubai. This place is full of dollars. No one will bother you with them. The people who get arrested usually are trying to smuggle some quantities of drugs. And if you are a famous enough you will most likely get away with it.

    5. Re:So... by alexborges · · Score: 1

      People get caught, then they disapear. You think there is the same media in dubai as in the states?

      --
      NO SIG
    6. Re:So... by jimicus · · Score: 3, Informative

      There have been a certain number of arrests in circumstances that would be considered absurd in any other country:

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-512815/Briton-jailed-years-Dubai-customs-cannabis-weighing-grain-sugar-shoe.html

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/4200952.stm

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Dubai#Zero_tolerance_drug_policy

      I've been through Dubai and I did think it seemed quite strict, security-wise. They didn't do much more than X-ray most people but I wouldn't be at all surprised if you were to find some silly percentage in the 80-90s were "carrying drugs" if you use machinery as sensitive as they do.

    7. Re:So... by oasisbob · · Score: 1

      It really really pisses me off at the Canadian border.... I cross it frequently and have been stopped several times for the "bonus interrogation". Every single time they run my money through their machine and, of course, it comes up positive for cocaine. Then they try to intimidate me about it.

      I live 15min away from the Blaine, WA/BC crossing, and cross the border on a regular basis. While I've never seen money tested for cocaine residue, testing ID cards (eg your driver's license) is quite commonplace. People have been denied entry because they used their ID to cut a line, and it turned up positive for residue at the border.

    8. Re:So... by johannesg · · Score: 0, Troll

      Just... Wow. And that's why I will never visit Dubai - not because I'm a drug smuggler or user, but because I might step on a grain of heroine or something while in the airport and lose years of my life to those idiots.

      They pretend to be a normal civilized nation, but in the end they are nothing better than the medieval goatfuckers from which they descended.

    9. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's incorrect use of the phrase "any more."

  4. I understand that in London by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

    100% of folding money has traces of Cocaine.

    Beat that.....

    --
    If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    1. Re:I understand that in London by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 5, Funny

      Plus every flat surface in any bar or nightclub restroom will test positive for either Cocaine or WD40 & Vaseline :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    2. Re:I understand that in London by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      WD40 & Vaseline

      Maybe I'm missing something... but why would the barhoppers and clubgoers lather homemade napalm on flat surfaces in restrooms?

      Bathroom pyrotechnics are great and all, but I'm not sure I'd like to see some in a crowded club.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:I understand that in London by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that crowded club is in the centre of London, there's nothing to be lost by it going up in flames.
      Cocaine - otherwise known as Instant Twat in a Powder.

    4. Re:I understand that in London by RegularFry · · Score: 1

      They don't. The bar-owners do. Snorting coke off a surface coated with WD-40 allegedly gives you an instant nose-bleed, which is a pretty obvious marker for the bar staff to know who to kick out.

      --
      Reality is the ultimate Rorschach.
    5. Re:I understand that in London by 32771 · · Score: 1

      Restroom, WD40, WhaT For?

      --
      Je me souviens.
    6. Re:I understand that in London by dow · · Score: 1

      I assume WD40 and Vaseline are put on the flat surfaces by the management in order to stop people using it to snort cocaine from. These people aren't exaggerating about cocaine in the UK, it is rife in almost every pub. Some pubs put 45degree shelves over their flat surfaces to stop people doing it too.

    7. Re:I understand that in London by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      WD40? Eww.... That would be the chrerry on top of the cake of unhealthiness. Or are you thinking of something different than I am?

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    8. Re:I understand that in London by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The powder sticks to the surface covered in WD40.

      To get arround this, we used to bring in ash trays until the smoking ban.

      Then we used cigarette packets and finally coke-bullets.

      I got so bored of sniffing in the end. Most of us got older, had kids and got bored of it.

    9. Re:I understand that in London by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of you got younger?

    10. Re:I understand that in London by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Some of you got younger?"

      It is possible to not get any older without reversing the aging process. Given the amount of cocaine he claims to have snorted with his friends, it seems entirely possible that some of his friends indeed did NOT get any older.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    11. Re:I understand that in London by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Ok, so I wasn't the only person who thought "Vaseline and WD-40? WTF are they using that for lube?"

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    12. Re:I understand that in London by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Is that why loads of places in London have the guy to squirt soap on your hands after you've used the toilet? I don't like them (they look as if they want a tip, but they're not getting one from me, sorry) but presumably it would stop drug users. Unless the tip is big enough.

    13. Re:I understand that in London by xaxa · · Score: 1

      I thought that deserved a citation. I found one: http://cocaine.org/cokemoney/drugmoney.html
      "More than £15 million worth of banknotes are being destroyed each year because they are so heavily contaminated with cocaine, heroin or ecstasy that they cannot be put back into circulation." "in several recent cases the levels of contamination have been so high the money has been considered a health hazard." "According to forensic experts, around 80 per cent of all banknotes in circulation are contaminated with drugs, a figure that rises to 99 per cent in the London area."

      "In a bank counting machine, one banknote can easily contaminate half a million others."

      It's tempting to try it. Cocaine is really cheap in London, and I know plenty of people that have tried it, but... well, it doesn't seem worth the risk. Ecstasy seems less of a risk, and it's cheaper than a pint of beer. But still... somehow it feels like I'd be cheating myself "my body needs help to be happy now".

    14. Re:I understand that in London by FauxReal · · Score: 5, Informative

      If anyone is wondering about the WD40 & Vaseline, it's cause some nightclubs will put a thin layer on the toilet tank to discourage cocaine use. (It's hard to tell it's there at a glance and if you're gonna do coke, you've probably been drinking too.) If you try to scrape out lines on a coat of Vaseline, you'll end up with a greasy paste.

    15. Re:I understand that in London by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a figure of speech, you muppets.

    16. Re:I understand that in London by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      WTF? How much is a beer there, anyway? A gram of X costs as much as a basic dinner out for one person in Bulgaria, and that gram can get no more than two people high.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    17. Re:I understand that in London by xaxa · · Score: 1

      A beer in London is roughly £3 (for 568mL, a UK pint). In some places (e.g. nice nightclub in central London) it can be a lot more. It won't often be less.

      Outside London it's cheaper the further north you go, but I don't really know prices.

      Ecstasy in London is about £2 a tablet.

      A basic dinner out will be £7-12 in London.

    18. Re:I understand that in London by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      OK, lets say that an ecstasy tablet is the equivalent of half gram powder round here (tablets aren't usual, in my experience). So, that's 10 leva. With that money you buy 8 liters of beer. So, all in all, you guys have crazy cheap XTC, and frigen expensive beer. With all that surveillance fuss, Britain still seems interesting. :P

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  5. Well, that explains something. by InfinityWpi · · Score: 4, Funny

    This has to be why people love the smell of their money. Just hold it up to your nose and sniff... and you get a minor contact high from the drugs.

    1. Re:Well, that explains something. by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      What if I only run plastics and coins?

      It's hard to snort credit cards and coins!

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:Well, that explains something. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Credit cards(along with drivers licenses) are often used to chop up the coke lines. It's common for cokeheads to lick the card after they're done snorting the rails.

      BTW, the best beer to drink with a coke high is Budweiser.

      -- Ethanol-fueled

    3. Re:Well, that explains something. by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Credit cards(along with drivers licenses) are often used to chop up the coke lines. It's common for cokeheads to lick the card after they're done snorting the rails.

      But they're unlikely to then pass that credit card on to someone else's wallet.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  6. Hmm... so this is why i'm addicted... by Rooked_One · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... to money

    1. Re:Hmm... so this is why i'm addicted... by FragHARD · · Score: 1

      Finally, the dollar is worth more than the paper it is printed on!!!!!

      --
      FragHARD or don't frag at all
  7. I think maybe the Fed got the wrong idea... by lobiusmoop · · Score: 5, Funny

    when Bush recommended an 'economic stimulus'.

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
  8. So the government should ... by neonprimetime · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... be using where's george to plan their next drug busts?

  9. Hrmm by acehole · · Score: 5, Funny

    I roll up 100 dollar bills to snort up other 100 dollar bills. Its a vicious circle.

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:Hrmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, that's the cure for AIDS!

    2. Re:Hrmm by genner · · Score: 4, Funny

      I roll up 100 dollar bills to snort up other 100 dollar bills. Its a vicious circle.

      How do you snort your last 100 dollar bill?

    3. Re:Hrmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately you will need over 1,000,000 dollars to get anywhere near high
      fortunately you get to keep the money (not normal in the drug trade)
      Unfortunately, the high was actually just hyerventalation - to much sniffing
      fortunately - you won't get addicted

      Ah, swings and roundabouts - the world is made of them

      Also, the tag - OLD NEWS - is so right - surely cmdrtaco could have found something better, or at least more recent...

    4. Re:Hrmm by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 4, Funny

      Through a tube made out of coca leaves.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    5. Re:Hrmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I roll up 100 dollar bills to snort up other 100 dollar bills. Its a vicious circle.

      George Lucas, is that you?

    6. Re:Hrmm by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      A circle is two dimensional. When you roll up dollar bills to snort drugs you actually have a vicious tube, or a vicious cylinder without end-caps.

    7. Re:Hrmm by steelfood · · Score: 1

      There is no last bill. It's a closed system. The bills get snorted in one end and come back out the other one, only to get snorted back in again at a later date.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    8. Re:Hrmm by operagost · · Score: 1

      Ass Bennies?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    9. Re:Hrmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you make a box that contains your own universe?

  10. Cross Contamination anyone? by bagboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please, could it not simply be that when the money is bundled together it is cross-contaminated?

    1. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by mcgrew · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Also, money goes through a lot of hands. The suggestion is that 90% of Americans are cocaine users, which is patently false.

    2. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, could it not simply be that when the money is bundled together it is cross-contaminated?

      It is exactly that. And also when it gets run through counting machines. It would be interesting to see the results of gas chromatograph testing of swabs taken from counting machines. I bet they'd be overwhelmingly positive for contamination with residual cocaine traces.

    3. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by the_humeister · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, the suggestion is that most of the paper money in America has been in contact with cocaine users.

    4. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Probably a money counting machine encounters 1 bill that's been sniffed through, and that contaminates all the bills that go through that counting machine for the next few weeks.

    5. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, it's suggesting that there's a 90% chance any single bill has gone through a cocaine user's hands at least once in its lifetime.

      If an average bill had changed hands, say, 10 times, then it comes to about 20% rather than 90%. (80% of non-contamination ^ 10 people = 10.7% chance it's still not contaminated. Thus about 90% of bills would be contaminated in this case.)

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    6. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Where is that suggested?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by onion2k · · Score: 1

      That's not the suggestion at all. It's implying that, at some point in time, 90% of the notes in circulation has been used to take cocaine. That could be by 1 very prolific addict for all we know. The article doesn't give any indication.

    8. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would explain why 90% of them are dumb as hell and drive like idiots.

    9. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by SydShamino · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which is also very likely false. Money just doesn't flow in that way. On the other hand, it seems likely that most automated money processing machines have been in contact with contaminated bills. And I expect that those machines aren't regularly thoroughly cleaned and contaminate all subsequent bills, which in turn contaminate subsequent machines.

      "Traces" has no definition above one molecule (or could be even less if you're into holistic medicine /grin). One bill handled with coke-covered hands or used to snort could contaminate tens of thousands of other bills with "traces" of coke.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    10. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by fermion · · Score: 2, Funny

      If it true that 20% of the people control 80% of the money, then it is clear that the those 20% are cocaine users, while the rest of us use crack, which is mostly filler ingredients. And, since we don't have the money, this explains why crack is so prosecuted. No defense money means that the public prosecutors don't have to work very hard to get a conviction.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    11. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The cross-contamination comes from high-speed counting devices in banks becoming contaminated. They then spread the cocaine to other bills as they're counted. This isn't anything new. I think I first heard about this at least 15 years ago.

      The article is about the contamination rate going up. The implication is drug use is up. The other possibility is the spreading mechanism is more efficient for whatever reason. (Different machines, less machines? Stickier cocaine?). Assuming drug usage is up without knowing if anything else has changed in this uncontrolled experiment is potentially very misleading.

      --
      AccountKiller
    12. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Which is also very likely false. Money just doesn't flow in that way.

      That's true. I'd imagine that the typical money flow for a coke-head looks like one of the following:

      1) Rich coke addict receives money from daddy for "school". Money is turned over to dealer in exchange for some blow. Dealer spends the money on bling.
      2) Poor coke addict receives welfare check from the government. Check is cashed at local check cashing place for the perfectly reasonable fee of 20%. Money is turned over to dealer in exchange for some blow. Dealer spends the money on bling.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    13. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But 90% of your prostitute friends are coke-heads. Right, buddy?

    14. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by GigG · · Score: 1

      No, the suggestion is that 90% of the money has been in contact with money that has been in contact with cocaine. RTFA

      --
      Is buying a Harley Davidson as your first motorcycle since you were 16 at age 49 a midlife crisis issue?
    15. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by maharb · · Score: 1

      Wrong. See the thousand other posts in this vicinity that say it merely means 90% of bills have contacted cocaine. No conclusions about how many people are users or how many bills have been touch by users could ever be determined from this. One person could get coke on all the bills, does that mean all people are cocaine users? Or, and more likely, contaminated bills contaminate other bills in any situation where multiple bills touch.

      Theoretically a handful of users could contaminate the whole system.

    16. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      No, the FACT is that much (not 90%) of paper money has been in the hands of cocaine users and trafficers. The suggestion is that drug use is higher than it is.

    17. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by cenc · · Score: 1

      I think they fail to appreciate the free flow of U.S. currency in to and out of Latin America. Cocain is very common, and so is the use of the U.S. currency in most of Latin America.

    18. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by RenderSeven · · Score: 1

      Also there is no mention in TFA as to what the comparative contamination *level* is only the *rate*; TFA mentions they detect to .006 micrograms. "Zuo utilized a modified form of a gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer which allowed him to study bills more accurately" and I would bet that the sensitivity is much higher than equipment used in the 80's and I wonder if the sensitivity and level of contamination is taken into account. If the rate is up but level is down, that would point to cross-contamination.

    19. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my scenario was an over-simplification (hey, I was in mathematician mode... what can I say). Cue spherical cows and what-have-you.

      One person could get coke on all the bills, does that mean all people are cocaine users?

      Sure, certain people handling lots of money would skew the statistic. Not that drastically, I suspect. If you assume that your average coke user isn't handling that much more cash than your average non-user, this probably isn't significant.

      Or, and more likely, contaminated bills contaminate other bills in any situation where multiple bills touch.

      Likely. Also, the counting machines (as others have mentioned). This caveat would probably skew the numbers more than the first one... counting machines handle a lot of bills (far more than your average coke user, I'd assume).

      Still, it was an example of how mcgrew's argument missed the point. Your caveats would simply push the percentage even lower.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    20. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Well, would money in other places NOT be cross-contaminated?

      OTOH, perhaps there are other (cultural) differences. Some ideas:
      People in other places use more coins
      Coke is handled different by users
      People in other countries keep coke more separated from their money

      Or it could be that Americans use more coke compared to the rest of the world (and the rest of the world is just too drunk to use coke)

      There is just not enough information. For all I know, the people that press the money are all cokeheads and it is really surprising that 10% DOESN'T have coke on it.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    21. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Traces" has no definition above one molecule (or could be even less if you're into holistic medicine /grin). One bill handled with coke-covered hands or used to snort could contaminate tens of thousands of other bills with "traces" of coke.

      And in the case of the latter contamination route it would also contaminate thousands of other bills with traces of boogers. Then there is the small matter of people who don't wash their hands after taking a dump. Remember, thousands of bills contaminated, It only takes one slob ...

    22. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Or simply that the tests can detect lesser concentrations than older ones. It's similar to how people freak out because all sorts of bad things are found in food/water/air, even though the concentrations are insanely minimal. I can understand a homeopath freaking out, but anyone else should come to his senses on seeing how low the concentrations are.

    23. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a poor assumption. Not all of that money is circulating in cash.

    24. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember reading that something about the molecular structure of cocaine hydrochloride
      bonding to the paper used for currency. That and cocaine dealers probably have traces on
      their hands, which count large amounts of twenties, fifties, and hundreds. A lot of that cashed
      gets spent or laundered pretty quick. So it just means that a lot of cash in circulation has been
      handled by a dealer or user, not surprising.

    25. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by IMightB · · Score: 1

      You forgot about the part where Rich Coke Addict gets elected as President and totally F's this country.

      But it's OK 'cause he was Born Again and has One-On-Ones with God now.

    26. Re:Cross Contamination anyone? by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      You forgot about the part where Rich Coke Addict gets elected as President and totally F's this country.

      But it's OK 'cause he was Born Again and has One-On-Ones with God now.

      When did Obama claim to be born again? ;)

      Oh, wait, n/m, you were talking about the last hypocritical President that admitted to using coke yet remains in favor of drug prohibition. Sorry, I thought you were talking about the current one.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  11. I'm more worried by urdak · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know about you, but the cocaine isn't the thing that worries me - I'm more worried about the fact that 90% of the bills I use have been up someone's nose!

    1. Re:I'm more worried by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      asspennies!

    2. Re:I'm more worried by businessnerd · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Bills in someone's nose is nothing. I'm more concerned about where all of the pennies have been

      --
      "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
    3. Re:I'm more worried by FragHARD · · Score: 1

      don't you mean up their a$$ with a baggie ;)

      --
      FragHARD or don't frag at all
    4. Re:I'm more worried by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Wait till you hear where all your pennies have been :(

  12. So guys... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see Plan Columbia has been a smashing success, just like all the other attempts at Prohibition 2.0: This Time Without Constitutional Justification.

    1. Re:So guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that drug prohibition pulls billions of dollars per year through the business of government, I'd say that drug prohibition most certainly is a smashing success.

      You're not sitting at the top of the power pyramid, are you?

    2. Re:So guys... by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Funny

      I see Plan Columbia has been a smashing success, just like all the other attempts at Prohibition 2.0: This Time Without Constitutional Justification.

      That's not true. If I'm growing pot in my backyard for my own consumption it's clearly going to affect interstate commerce and is therefore subject to regulation by the Federal Government.

      I mean, think about it. If I'm growing it myself then I'm not buying it from someone else who got it across state lines. We also shouldn't forget the impact on interstate commerce that comes from the munchies. It's a safe assumption the ingredients in those Doritos and Big Macs had to cross one or more state lines at some point during production.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:So guys... by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Hmm, given that we're supposed to want renewable energy so that we don't have to send oil money to foreign countries, shouldn't the gov't be supporting local (US) drug operations so all that drug money doesn't leave the country?

    4. Re:So guys... by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      shouldn't the gov't be supporting local (US) drug operations so all that drug money doesn't leave the country?

      No, because it's much better that the money goes to violent Mexican cartels and the Taliban than to see it go to American farmers and industry.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:So guys... by BarefootClown · · Score: 1

      And the scary part is that the government used exactly this reasoning to justify itself.

      --

      "Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
      --Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca

    6. Re:So guys... by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      I got my inspiration for that joke from Wickard v. Filburn if you are curious. Evidently you can't even grow your own food without it impacting "interstate commerce". Under that precedent (which is still in force if I'm not mistaken) it would be perfectly Constitutional for Congress to outlaw the backyard garden. After all, if you didn't grow those strawberries you would have had to buy them on the open market.

      Something is seriously wrong with this picture.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    7. Re:So guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I'm growing pot in my backyard for my own consumption it's clearly going to affect interstate commerce and is therefore subject to regulation by the Federal Government.

      I mean, think about it. If I'm growing it myself then I'm not buying it from someone else who got it across state lines.

      Speak for yourself - I'm quite happy to help support the Appalachian counties in my state by consuming their high-quality products...

    8. Re:So guys... by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      How about the US stops paying farmers to not grow anything, and start growing weed? Maybe even export it. Who needs oil, when you've got dirt cheap weed? You can make diesel fuel from it, as well...
      *dreaming*

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  13. .006 micrograms? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These types of studies come out pretty often, usually with the same hysterical tone. When you start talking about stuff in such tiny amounts then just about any substance can be found. There's cocaine in the air in many places if you go as low as parts per billion. There's uranium in the water. There's the ash of dead people in your air. There's fly eggs in your soup. There's pesticides in your baby's bottle.

    If anything, this is more interesting in our ability to detect small amounts of things than a social statement.

    1. Re:.006 micrograms? by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

      And if you were in the elevator with me this morning, you got more than trace amounts of late night taco bell.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:.006 micrograms? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If anything, this is more interesting in our ability to detect small amounts of things than a social statement.

      Oh well I wouldn't be too sure that there aren't any social statements to be made. After all, they didn't detect cocaine in most Japanese money, so it's not like its the effect of some world-wide minuscule cocaine miasma, or at least its one that varies by location and thus presumably by quantity in the country.

      So what this tells me about our societies is that Japan is an untapped market! Oh man! I'm on the next flight to Tokyo via L.A. Though I guess I'll have to practice my balloon-swallowing first.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    3. Re:.006 micrograms? by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      So what this tells me about our societies is that Japan is an untapped market!

      Shit. Yet another growth industry that Asia is going to beat us out on :(

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:.006 micrograms? by jeremywc · · Score: 1

      There's that and the fact that only 234 bills were tested. All from major cities? That's a horrible sample size. Based on that, the numbers appear to be grossly inflated to me.

    5. Re:.006 micrograms? by fprintf · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this article is why they tell you never to put money in your mouth. Not only do you get lots of germs ingested, but you all get trace amounts of coke. Suck on 1000 quarters to get a little high.

      --
      This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
    6. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is my understanding that rather than cocaine, amphetamines are the illicit stimulants of choice in Japan. Goes well with their work ethics, I would imagine.

    7. Re:.006 micrograms? by joib · · Score: 1

      IIRC at least here in Europe heroin or various derivatives thereof are more popular than cocaine, and from what I understand the reverse is true in the US. Supposedly mostly due to where it's produced; heroin - Afghanistan, cocaine - South America.

    8. Re:.006 micrograms? by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      IIRC at least here in Europe heroin or various derivatives thereof are more popular than cocaine

      I also understand that in Europe it's more common to smoke cannabis by cutting it with tobacco. Why anybody would do this is beyond me -- is it more expensive over there and you want to conserve it or did it just become trendy for some other reason?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:.006 micrograms? by relguj9 · · Score: 1

      Haha, only trace amounts?

    10. Re:.006 micrograms? by relguj9 · · Score: 1

      misread, fail.

    11. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your local statistician here, to point out your BS. You give you reason why 234 is a "horrible sample size". Sample size is a function of what kind of statistical power you want to be able to detect differences among strata, along with how wide your confidence intervals will be. With binomial random variables where the probability of success is far from .5 (e.g., this case, with p-hat = .95 in some cities), you don't need a very large sample size at all to accurately hone in on the true value. This is all contingent on a random sampling method, and that's where I'd be suspect. However, the results seem fairly consistent across time and place.

      I'm just trying to point that sometimes 30 is enough of a sample size, sometimes you need 1000, sometimes, 10,000, sometimes 1,000,000. IT IS COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON WHAT EFFECT YOU ARE TRYING TO MEASURE, AND HOW MUCH VARIANCE THERE IS AMONG EXPERIMENTAL UNITS. Blindly chiming SMALL SAMPLE SIZE will be very convincing to actual statisticians or scientists!

    12. Re:.006 micrograms? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      It's because they're smoking hashish, not leaf cannabis. You get a lot more THC for a given volume of hashish (thus making it easier to transport) and shaving slices off a block of it into tobacco, then rolling the mix into a cigarette, gives you about the same strength as a joint.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    13. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having sampled the fare in Europe and Canada, I can attest to the fact that they all tend to cut it with tobacco over there. Just rolling a pure pot joint gets you some odd looks most of the time. I know quite a few people from various countries and they were all the same way. Over here in Canada, it's pretty much unheard of, probably because of the stronger anti-smoking sentiment. In Europe it seems everybody smokes cigarettes, and over here, it seems quite the opposite. I'm a non-smoker (of tobacco) and personally don't enjoy a joint cut with tobacco. Inhaling any smoke is bad for you, but tobacco smoke with its tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide, has no business entering my lungs. Cannabis is not as bad and the trade off (getting high) is much better IMHO. Smoking just gives you a bit of a nicotine buzz which wears off rather quickly.

      As for price, I don't know what the going rates are in the Dutch coffee shops anymore, but a few years ago it wasn't much more than here for usually far better stuff. They had different prices for different grades too, like "Super Skunk" was cheaper than "White Widow" for instance. A couple years ago here in Canada, it was $25 for an 1/8th or $10/g of dubious quality pot from the dial-a-dealers. I don't know if that's changed or not as I haven't bought any for about 2 years.

      Myself, when I roll, I usually put a pinch of tobacco (no more than 1/4" at the very most) at the very end of the joint so no pot gets wasted. Once you hit the tobacco, you toss it. No fingers get burnt, no stinky roaches to keep, clean and simple. I usually leave the very last few puffs for my smoker friends who can handle the heat and don't mind the bit of tobacco at the end.

    14. Re:.006 micrograms? by russotto · · Score: 1

      I also understand that in Europe it's more common to smoke cannabis by cutting it with tobacco. Why anybody would do this is beyond me -- is it more expensive over there and you want to conserve it or did it just become trendy for some other reason?

      From what I was told (by someone in Amsterdam) it's because the pot is so strong you get too fucked up smoking it straight.

    15. Re:.006 micrograms? by zippthorne · · Score: 4, Funny

      It could just be that the Japanese are just more meticulous than Americans when laundering their money.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    16. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried that. it doesn't work.

    17. Re:.006 micrograms? by Ziwcam · · Score: 1

      They detected cocaine in 2 bills out of 16... I don't know that that's statistically significant. (But I'm no math guy...)

    18. Re:.006 micrograms? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      It is my understanding that rather than cocaine, amphetamines are the illicit stimulants of choice in Japan. Goes well with their work ethics, I would imagine.

      Doesn't sound like anything a good marketing plan can't fix.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    19. Re:.006 micrograms? by SlashGordon · · Score: 1

      Does this mean that US dollars are no longer allowed in Germany? Several German states banned Red Bull because it had 0.13 micrograms of cocaine per can. http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/05/25/2021226/Cocaine-Test-Prompts-Red-Bull-Removal-In-Germany or http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1900849,00.html

    20. Re:.006 micrograms? by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      if you really like thc you can never get too fucked

      That depends on what you are looking for, doesn't it? If you are just looking to take the edge off for a few hours you probably don't want to get baked to the point that you have to concentrate really hard to remember your name.....

      I've been at both points and have found that the "take the edge off" stage is generally more enjoyable than the "can't remember my own name" stage. Of course if I'm ever lucky enough to get to go to Amsterdam I suspect I'll wind up in the "can't remember his name" stage ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    21. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what this tells me about our societies is that Japan is an untapped market!

      The market in Tokyo is for Shabu (meth-amphetamines) which is smoked, not snorted.

    22. Re:.006 micrograms? by schmiddy · · Score: 1

      "I can't believe what a bunch of nerds we are. We're looking up "money laundering" in a dictionary". - Peter Gibbons

      --
      http://cltracker.net -- powerful craigslist multi-city search
    23. Re:.006 micrograms? by sjames · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's not IN ITSELF that big a deal that there's a detectable amount of cocaine on most of the money.

      The problem is that that amount is sufficient to get a drug dog's attention and that in turn is deemed 'sufficient' cause to confiscate the cash. Once they do that, it's difficult and expensive to ever actually get it back. Most are forced to just let it go.

      Lets just say I wouldn't ever want to be in any airport or anywhere in Louisiana or Texas (amongst others) with more than pocket change in my wallet.

      Perhaps with enough studies like this the courts will be forced to finally admit that trace amounts of cocaine on money proves nothing.

    24. Re:.006 micrograms? by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      Speaking of Japan, I have a little personal anecdote to tell....

      I work at a company that is a subsidiary of a Japanese company. For that reason, we always have a handful of Japanese Workers that rotate through the office. Earlier this year I was outside during break. Two of the men from Japan were standing out there too. They are both very intelligent individuals and are pretty savvy when it comes to American culture. One of them looked down and found a $10 Bill rolled up into a perfect snorting straw. The guy that picked up the money said to the other one something like "Wow, why would someone keep their money like this instead of folded? It seems like it would be easy to lose." The other Japanese man was talking about ways that the bill could have accidently ended up like that...

      The other American workers standing around were pretty darn quite about the bill, knowing full well why it was rolled up as such. As the Japanese men have quite a bit of power, nobody really talked about it until they were out of earshot. Now, in my experience some of the workers from Japan are incredibly clever and it is possible that they were trying to bait someone somehow or just try to play dumb for other reasons....but I know these guys fairly well and their mannerisms and tone seemed to indicate that they were truly puzzled.

      I guess my point is that perhaps snorting coke from rolled up money is not as common in Japan as it is here. Perhaps they don't have as many people that use cocaine, perhaps the people that do use cocaine tend to use straws/other similar device, shoot their cocaine, or smoke their cocaine.

    25. Re:.006 micrograms? by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      Can someone explain why anyone cares that a common, stable, substance microscopically contaminates money? Why does anyone care? What does this supposed to mean? Is anyone actually freaking out?

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    26. Re:.006 micrograms? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I guess my point is that perhaps snorting coke from rolled up money is not as common in Japan as it is here. Perhaps they don't have as many people that use cocaine, perhaps the people that do use cocaine tend to use straws/other similar device, shoot their cocaine, or smoke their cocaine.

      Hehe. I'm imaging that in your story the puzzled Japanese men walk away, and that's when you notice they all have one long pinky nail. :)

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    27. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we're all missing the important part here. If "contaminated":

      1. Are my bills more valuable?

      2. Can I get high with them?

        If not, then this is a useless research.

    28. Re:.006 micrograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all cash is constructed the same way. The United States uses cloth, Australia uses some kind of plastic (polypropylene polymer). I don't know what Japan uses.

    29. Re:.006 micrograms? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      That's certainly true, but maybe not for the reason you think. Drugs mostly give an inner cue, that you interpret according to your experience and situation. There was a classic experiment where people were given nicotin acid (that's probably not the proper English word for it, sorry), which causes flushing and rapid heartbeat. Then they got to see a movie. If it was a horror movie, they reported being more afraid, if it was a porn movie they reported getting more excited ... OK, so that was probably not exactly how the experiment went, I don't remember :-)

      But the core of it is, our physical reactions are heavily subject to interpretation based on context. Back on topic, if you found some way of giving addicts cocaine or amphetamine blindly, I'm not sure they could even discern them better than wine experts distinguish wines (poorly) or people who claim to distinguish M&M colours (not at all).

      What a drug "makes you do" varies greatly over time and locations. One of the original arguments for banning marijuana in the US was that it made its Mexican immigrant users so violent - and it's not impossible that it did, at the time.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    30. Re:.006 micrograms? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Back on topic, if you found some way of giving addicts cocaine or amphetamine blindly, I'm not sure they could even discern them better than wine experts distinguish wines (poorly) or people who claim to distinguish M&M colours (not at all).

      You probably could, if you were familiar with how long the effects of those two drugs last. When your hyped-up state went away and you crashed if you didn't get a 'bump' in a few hours, versus lasting for 24 hours or more, the difference would be pretty clear.

      Other than that, yes, the effects of the two stimulants are very similar.

      What a drug "makes you do" varies greatly over time and locations. One of the original arguments for banning marijuana in the US was that it made its Mexican immigrant users so violent - and it's not impossible that it did, at the time.

      To an extent, sure, but no it doesn't fundamentally alter what the drug does. A rapid heartbeat being interpreted in different ways depending on what a rapid heartbeat means in the context makes sense. THC making someone violent makes no sense in any context. It's just not something the drug does. It's like saying that it's "not impossible" that in certain contexts crack soaked in formaldehyde makes you smart. No, it doesn't.

      Back when they were saying Marijuanna made minorities violent -- blacks were targeted at least as much as Mexicans, particularly in the New England region -- nobody knew what the hell marijuanna was. It was a made-up propaganda word for the grass that everyone was smoking. But because nobody had heard of "Marijuana" before, "the black people smoke up on the Marijuana and run out to rape and kill white women" seemed plausible. If they'd known that the paper was talking about weed, they never would have believed it.

      So... "not impossible"? I guess. Remotely likely? Supported by any evidence? No.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    31. Re:.006 micrograms? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      "THC making someone violent makes no sense in any context. It's just not something the drug does."

      True enough. But then, neither does alcohol. People are capable of interpreting their internal cues pretty far out.

      I've read some of the things that local authorities near the mexican border, prison wardens etc. wrote. It may have become propaganda later, but at the time, they really believed it themselves. When politicians found out, they asked for professional opinions, and the medical authorities agreed after observing the new phenomenon (without any particular condemning tone) that yes, this "Indian hemp" stuff seems to work much like alcohol.

      They also knew very well that it was hemp. They concluded it must be something different, since the observed effects were so dissimilar. This is a classic mistake people do when observing drug use in different cultures, concluding that there must be something different with the drug. It's probably what has given rise to the myths about different effects from tequila, vodka, absinthe, etc.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    32. Re:.006 micrograms? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      True enough. But then, neither does alcohol. People are capable of interpreting their internal cues pretty far out.

      No, you don't seem to understand, I mean it's not something the drug does. Alcohol does make some people violent who weren't already. THC doesn't. Essentially nobody becomes violent after taking it any more than they do after taking Valium. You can't just "interpret" your way out of the fundamental pharmacological effect of a drug.

      I've read some of the things that local authorities near the mexican border, prison wardens etc. wrote. It may have become propaganda later, but at the time, they really believed it themselves.

      Yeah professionals also believed that the WWI Army intelligence test proved that the Irish and Italians were inherently less intelligent. But because some professionals from the 1920s really believed that "Indian Hemp" made Mexicans violent, that's supposed to support the idea that drugs can have essentially arbitrary effects on people, and that this effect is largely determined by culture. No, it doesn't work that way.

      What does work that way is racism, cultural ignorance, and selection bias. Mexicans in prison or caught by border patrol are believed to be violent, and this is blamed on a combination of the drug and them being dirty violent Mexicans, ignoring that you've already picked the subset of them that are likely to be violent. There was a lot of "science" of this nature back then.

      This is a classic mistake people do when observing drug use in different cultures, concluding that there must be something different with the drug. It's probably what has given rise to the myths about different effects from tequila, vodka, absinthe, etc.

      Except that difference doesn't even exist culturally. When you actually look at it, Mexicans doing tequila shots don't actually respond differently than Russians doing Vodka shots. They all show the same distribution of individual reactions. Those are just cultural stereotypes and biases with little basis in reality, and they have retro-actively informed myths involving alcohol.

      The only actual differences in how people of different cultures react to alcohol is actually genetic, and involves genes for alcohol processing and genes for alcoholism. This is why Native Americans are actually more susceptible to alcohol, because they lack certain genes that Old Worlders do. However even then it doesn't radically change the kinds of effect alcohol has, it only changes the degree. And the only impact culture has is in how those alcohol genes were/weren't selected for.

      THC will never affect someone like alcohol, or like PCP, or like Meth, or LSD, and the same is true for all other comparisons between those drugs. That's not how drugs work.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    33. Re:.006 micrograms? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      The only actual differences in how people of different cultures react to alcohol is actually genetic, and involves genes for alcohol processing and genes for alcoholism.

      There ARE huge differences in culture how people react to alcohol. The most well-known one is that people in the "wine countries" will not get boisterous or uninhibited to nearly the same degree as, say, Scandinavians. This is because they culturally used it as a nutrient, not a drug. (Since that is not true any longer, this is changing, and young people in the wine countries usually follow "international" drinking patterns and behaviours. If you have been partying with young Russians, Mexicans or even Italians, you have probably observed just one drinking culture.)

      There are even cultures where the traditional alcoholic beverage "makes" people drowsy and peaceful, but imported beverages behaves as you expect alcohol to do. I'd like to see genes explain that.

      Fwiw, you appear to misunderstand something. The people in the twenties who thought pot made you violent did NOT believe drug effects were culturally determined. They knew about smoked hemp. They didn't observe it's supposed effects in Mexicans, indeed they thought they saw something completely different - they may well have been racists and poor scientific observers, quite true, but you'd think they'd be able to recognize something they were familiar with.

      But they didn't. They reached a wrong conclusion, namely that it was a different kind of hemp. Later on they might have favoured the "genetic differences between cultures" explanation you propose, but that has been soundly rejected as well.

      So to repeat:
      Alcohol does make some people violent who weren't already.

      No, it doesn't, strictly speaking. Alcohol lets some people be violent who would like to be violent, because they have an excuse in being drunk. When both you and everyone else thinks alcohol makes you violent, it's a pretty effective excuse, too.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  14. tested high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    From a global standpoint, both Canada and Brazil tested rather high...

    Hah!

    1. Re:tested high by Reece400 · · Score: 1

      It's because of the bloody American tourists! Keep the canadian bills separate from your dirty American ones, please!

  15. what denominations? by greywire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am curious what the break down is on the types of bills being used. Is there a preference for $20 or $100 bills? I always preferred the $100, partly for show, but also because they tended to be crisper..

    --
    -- Senior Software Engineer, Attorney appearance services, locallawyerapp.com.
    1. Re:what denominations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      We use straws for the same reason.

    2. Re:what denominations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You prefer snorting with $100's? You know how many twenties I've lost doing that?

  16. Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Informative

    Bill's can get cocaine on them without ever having been directly in contact with cocaine. The most common way this occurs is if a bill has cocaine on it and then it goes in or out of some sort of feeder machine (such as that on an ATM), it can leave small amounts of coke residue that then rub off on other bills. Given that, part of the disparity may be due to different types of ATMs and similar technology. Similarly, it isn't implausible that the increase in the percentage of bills with cocaine on them (as reported in TFA) might be due to some set of subtle technological changes that make it easier for cocaine to spread from bill to bill.

  17. USA - try harder by yossarianuk · · Score: 2, Funny

    Come on - we want 100% from you.

  18. Well, that answers this question by istartedi · · Score: 1

    Well, that helps answer the question Where's George.

    Apparently, he's been some pretty nasty places.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  19. Obviously. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's obvious that this is the case. Cocaine on the money gets on surfaces in banks, hands, other money that it's sitting in cash registers with. These aren't huge amounts of cocaine on the bills, these are tiny trace amounts. However, even the cross contamination helps you know how and where the money is getting contaminated, just as a water sample downstream can tell you how far a pollutant has traveled.

    Nobody seriously believes that 90% of money has gone through drug trafficker's hands and pockets.

    1. Re:Obviously. by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nobody seriously believes that 90% of money has gone through drug trafficker's hands and pockets.

      except your local 'law & order' politician looking to score votes in the upcoming election. And here in the States, there's always an upcoming election...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  20. Stop trolling with numbers by noundi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Scientists have found that up to 90% of US paper money has some cocaine contamination, up from the 67% mark measured two years ago.

    The contamination "spreading" is solely due to clean bills getting in contact with contaminated bills. 90% of the US dollars have not been used to sniff cocaine. If 67% were contaminated two years ago it is only logical that in time the rest would be bound to become contaminated as well, even if cocaine had seized to exist completely.

    --
    I am the lawn!
    1. Re:Stop trolling with numbers by ColonelPanic · · Score: 1

      Did you really just spell "ceased" like that?

      --
      "Skill shows through where genius wears thin." -Wittgenstein || Religion: uniting aviation and architecture.
    2. Re:Stop trolling with numbers by noundi · · Score: 1

      I did and it was retarded. However in my defense English isn't my native language and I speak 4 other languages as well. Shit is bound to get mixed up at occasions. I would have reviewed the post but I was in a hurry to leave work. It was two minutes past six already. True story. ;-)

      --
      I am the lawn!
    3. Re:Stop trolling with numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      money goes in and out of circulation, so of the 67% contaminated years ago an unknown amount of those have been retired and replaced with newer bills.

      So without knowing exactly how many bills were contaminated and how many of those were replaced with fresh currency, you cannot make any mathematical predictions of anything.

  21. Corrected headline by Minwee · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Up to 90% of Scientists Studying Money Also Do Cocaine."

    1. Re:Corrected headline by swilde23 · · Score: 1

      or perhaps
      Up to 90% of money seized during drug raids has traces of drugs

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand this sig, and those that beat up people who do.
  22. Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by pz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are so many sources of cocaine and like substances in our society that it's no wonder it can be found everywhere (looking at currency is more sexy than say, doorknobs, and I'd imagine the same level of contamination), legal and otherwise. Benzocaine, for example, is a common numbing agent for oral use that is in the same chemical family. So is novacaine. They just don't have the popular cachet, but I'd be pleasantly surprised if the testing used could distinguished between them. I imagine if you tested currency for benzodiazepines (valium and the like) or SSRIs (Prozac and the like) or beta blockers or digitalis or any commonly prescribed drug, you'd find near 100% contamination as well. BFD. People use cocaine and other drugs both medically and recreationally. News at 11.

    I'd be much, much more interested to know how much of the currency showed evidence of, say, uranium or plutonium. Those are supposed to be scarce, really, really scarce.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by drewzhrodague · · Score: 1

      ...or beta blockers or digitalis or any commonly prescribed drug...

      Boy do I wish they gave out digitalis as a commonly prescribed drug. And cyanide.

      --
      Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
    2. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by pz · · Score: 1

      Boy do I wish they gave out digitalis as a commonly prescribed drug. And cyanide.

      It is a commonly prescribed drug, albeit one with some serious potential side-effects:

      http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4537

      http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=118

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    3. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by __aagctu1952 · · Score: 1

      I'd be much, much more interested to know how much of the currency showed evidence of, say, uranium or plutonium. Those are supposed to be scarce, really, really scarce.

      Plutonium, yes, uranium, no. Uranium is actually fairly abundant - about 4 ppm average in the Earth's crust, or the 48th most abundant element in natural crustal rock. Plutonium OTOH is entirely man-made. It is present in nature due to atmospheric nuclear weapons testing back in the '40s, '50s and '60s, but the levels should be below detectability in currency, I believe.

      In any case, you would be perfectly safe, unless you were using the bills to snort the plutonium. Most common uranium and plutonium isotopes are almost pure alpha, with inhalation being the major danger. You'd have to have really bad luck to get any detectable health effects even if you inadvertently handled directly contaminated bills.

    4. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I imagine if you tested currency for benzodiazepines (valium and the like) or SSRIs (Prozac and the like) or beta blockers or digitalis or any commonly prescribed drug, you'd find near 100% contamination as well.

      Why? Is Prozac routinely crushed up and snorted?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    5. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      I immediately thought of http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084171/

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    6. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      For what its worth, Benzocaine's structure is far different from that of Cocaine, where Novocaine (Procaine) is a derivative of Cocaine. I'm way past my Biochemistry days but I would think that it would be fairly easy to tell the difference between Benzocaine and Cocaine. As far as Novocaine...while almost anyone who has visited a dentist has probably had Novocaine injections, I'm thinking that far fewer people have ever touched solid Novocaine compared to people who have touched solid Cocaine. At least in the states, you cannot purchase Novocaine through normal means and there is hardly a hot black market for it.

    7. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by Ironica · · Score: 1

      There are so many sources of cocaine and like substances in our society that it's no wonder it can be found everywhere (looking at currency is more sexy than say, doorknobs, and I'd imagine the same level of contamination), legal and otherwise. Benzocaine, for example, is a common numbing agent for oral use that is in the same chemical family. So is novacaine. They just don't have the popular cachet, but I'd be pleasantly surprised if the testing used could distinguished between them. I imagine if you tested currency for benzodiazepines (valium and the like) or SSRIs (Prozac and the like) or beta blockers or digitalis or any commonly prescribed drug, you'd find near 100% contamination as well. BFD. People use cocaine and other drugs both medically and recreationally. News at 11.

      But they don't typically snort other drugs through a rolled-up bill. Hence, I'd be surprised to find the SSRI content of folding money to be as high as the cocaine content.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    8. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by pz · · Score: 1

      But they don't typically snort other drugs through a rolled-up bill. Hence, I'd be surprised to find the SSRI content of folding money to be as high as the cocaine content.

      Seriously, other than in the movies how many people really snort coke through a rolled-up bill? In a previous life, I witnessed a fair bit of cocaine ingestion and only rarely was a bill used. The ick factor alone was difficult to overcome unless the bills were very, very fresh. A gutted Bic pen was the instrument of choice back in the day.

      But you don't need to snort coke through a rolled-up bill to contaminate all of the money in the immediate vicinity of a cutting surface laden with cocaine when you're talking about nanograms. All it takes is a tiny little bit on your fingers when you next touch the money in your wallet. And that tiny little bit will come from contact with your nose, if not wiping the chopping surface or blade or bindle. The snorting mythology is overblown, I think.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    9. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by pz · · Score: 1

      I imagine if you tested currency for benzodiazepines (valium and the like) or SSRIs (Prozac and the like) or beta blockers or digitalis or any commonly prescribed drug, you'd find near 100% contamination as well.

      Why? Is Prozac routinely crushed up and snorted?

      No, but effectively everything you ingest is detectable in your excreta, including sweat, and, therefore, should be present on nearly everything you touch.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    10. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      No, but effectively everything you ingest is detectable in your excreta, including sweat, and, therefore, should be present on nearly everything you touch.

      I'd imagine there's a huge quantitative difference between sweating out picograms of one substance and dipping a rolled-up bill into a pile of another.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    11. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by Ironica · · Score: 1

      The snorting mythology is overblown, I think.

      Haha, I see what you did there. ;-)

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    12. Re:Cocaine, ho-hum, what about radiologicals? by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Sounds an interesting way to get high, because that extra intracellular calcium may be firing up endocannabinoid retro-transmition, hence the psychedelic visuals, if only its peripheral action could be subdued.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  23. Snopes says... by sidb · · Score: 4, Informative

    Snopes says... true. Wow, that almost never happens--I had always assumed this was a myth. The Snopes article, BTW, is much more informative and detailed than the one linked in the Slashdot post.

    1. Re:Snopes says... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I'd HOPE the Snopes article would be more informative and detailed.

      Snopes = exhaustively researched articles done by people who take the time to get it right as much as they possibly can, with no need to be "first to post" to get credit.

      Slashdot = geeks finding interesting articles and rushing to get them posted so they don't get deleted as duplicates. If a /. user waits until they find a good-quality well-researched article, it'll get smacked down as a duplicate because 500 slashdotters would have posted the crappy "breaking news" version hoping to be first. :)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:Snopes says... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Snopes = exhaustively researched articles done by people who take the time to get it right as much as they possibly can, with no need to be "first to post" to get credit.

      BS. Snopes = getting ad money to sound authoritative, no more, no less.

      I've sent two corrections to Snopes. The first was in a myth about taking caffeine and aspirin. They had reported that there was nothing about the combination that would be stronger than both taken individually. I sent links to published studies demonstrating the synergistic effect of the combo, and links to common products (eg Excedrin) that pair them. Snopes updated the article to reflect the new information.

      The second was regarding Marilyn Monroe having six toes. Now, I see no reason to believe that she did. However, some of their supporting "evidence" was that Monroe would've had a long recovery and a lasting limp. My wife, a podiatric surgeon, told them that this was completely untrue, and that she's amputated many toes over the years without long-term adverse affects to the patients. Snopes replied that she was wrong and that I was crazy for thinking Marilyn had 6 toes.

      So I personally know of one article that presents completely, 100% wrong evidence as proof, and another that had completely ignored evidence that would have weakened their claim. How many other corrections have been ignored or rejected?

      Snopes is not exhaustively researched, not by a long shot. Read the site for entertainment or as a starting point for further research, but don't take their word for anything.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    3. Re:Snopes says... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      OK, mea culpa. Would it help if I added "compared to your average Slashdot article"? :)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    4. Re:Snopes says... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      That would be utterly redundant.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    5. Re:Snopes says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the "Al Gore claims to have created the Internet". They mark it as false, when actually it should be marked with yellow which is their site's way of saying 'there is some truth to this but it isn't 100% true as stated'. The claim is simply simplified, but I've heard the audio of what Al Gore really said--he lied. And Snopes lies when they say the claim is false.

      They ignore the correction because accuracy matters less than politics to them, or perhaps, money and they figure telling the truth might cost them.

      This being slashdot, please, bring on the irrelevancies.

    6. Re:Snopes says... by Landshark17 · · Score: 1

      Obligatory: http://xkcd.com/250/

      --
      This sig is false.
  24. wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like some of my bills from the mid 80's made it here.

  25. Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by vertinox · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure sure we should look at those nations as a way to improve law enforcement.

    I say this because the reason it is low in Japan is the high quality of life and import restriction. (Its an island and everything goes through customs)

    And China... Well China is China.

    Not only is the fact drugs are taboo over there (remember the Opium wars) it is just that there system of law enforcement is quite different from ours.

    And that perhaps no one has ever though to use a Yuan to snort coke through? Maybe they all smoke it over there? Inject it?

    Or perhaps they use coins at the commonest level of transactions. Who knows... But for whatever reason you cannot simply say that law enforcement needs to look at those nations to why drugs on paper money is lower.

    Either way, I doubt prohibition is going to resolve the US's drug problem. Black markets will always exist so perhaps it should be regulated and taxed.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    1. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps they use coins at the commonest level of transactions. Who knows...

      No. 100 RMB is the highest denomination note, and it's too small relative to the price of things.
      You end up carrying large wads of 100s with you everywhere you go.

    2. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

      Drug use in Japan isn't low simply because of high quality of life. First of all, their heavy drinkers and secondly, many of them find other obsessions to satiate their desires. As for China, one big barrier is how harshly they deal with drug dealers and traffickers. Basically, you're risking the death penalty. And it's not just China, I know Taiwan has the death penalty for drug trafficking.

      And this has nothing to do with the opium wars, most people couldn't care less about that and probably don't even know it ever happened. It's simply that as a culture they're a lot less tolerant of drug use. And people simply don't feel the need to do drugs, even recreationally. That said, drug use certainly exists, and it's on the rise.

      I'm in support of legalizing drugs with certain conditions, of course. However, I have to say that I believe that Americans have gotten far too comfortable with drug use be it illicit or legal, prescription drugs. Frankly, I think there are a lot of weak-willed people out there who'd rather just not have to deal with their problems. But hey, if you want to do drugs, more power to you. Just don't expect me to cover your medical costs.

      One important thing about American money is that it's heavily circulated, even internationally, so it's probably inevitable that it's going to get tainted more than a lot of foreign currencies. Although, I'd like to know the contamination rate of money from countries like Columbia.

    3. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Opiates & Cocaine are not the choice of drugs in Japan. However other drugs such as pot, hash, LSD, and MDMA are. High standard of life? Meh. If you consider working yourself into the ground, day in, day out, and attempting to stay ahead of the grind a high standard sure.

      Seriously, there's a reason why Japan has one of the highest suicide rates(properly calculated) in the world. And Japan is very good at 'recalculating' their rates to show less in their true crime figures.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great Britain is an island, and we are the coke heads of europe and pot heads of the world.

    5. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i suspect it's because the punishment is probably execution or life in prison or at a labor camp in china

    6. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      One important thing about American money is that it's heavily circulated, even internationally

      Um no. It is extremely rare that you can use US currency in foreign countries. You need to exchange it first.

      Electronic money of the sort you are referring to is unlikely to have encountered cocaine.

    7. Re:Reasons why China and Japan are so low. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      When you currency has a 1000%+ inflation rate paper dollars look like a good place to keep your life savings.

      Especially when the same government that runs the currency runs the banks.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  26. The only surprising thing... by MiniMike · · Score: 1

    The only thing that surprises me about this is that it implies that 10% of US money doesn't have traces of cocaine...

  27. Effect On Inflation by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4, Funny

    The extra street value of cocaine being added to the dollar should make it stronger against other currencies.

    1. Re:Effect On Inflation by benthurston27 · · Score: 1

      That's what I was thinking too, but then there are people like me trying to devise a way to extract the cocaine from all the 1 dollar bills I come across. Seriously, even if there's only a nanogram on the bill that's still only a thousand bills for a gram of coke.

  28. Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Candid88 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I just can't understand how this story can be tagged "legalize it" at all.

    Whilst I 100% agree that soft drugs like Cannabis should be legalized and can't understand how a substance far less dangerous than alcohol & tobacco can be banned, the same is simply not true for Cocaine.

    Cocaine is NOT a harmless drug, it kills people and robs them of a liveliehood at a far greater rate than almost any other drug. It is insanely addictive and knowing a couple of friends who have struggled with it I can only hope for your own sake you never try it.

    Yes it will make you feel the best you've ever felt before - for about 10 minutes (followed by hours of feeling downbeat) - but in the process it will taint your enjoyment of everything else in life.

    1. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by tekrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cocaine is NOT a harmless drug, it kills people and robs them of a liveliehood at a far greater rate than almost any other drug. It is insanely addictive and knowing a couple of friends who have struggled with it I can only hope for your own sake you never try it.

      Sorry, but I could say the exact same thing about liquor. Ever been to an AA meeting? Alcohol ruins more lives than any other drug in the USA. And yet it's legal.

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    2. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by swordgeek · · Score: 1

      Cocaine (the old stuff) is...pretty harmful. I'll certainly grant you that.

      However, it's also orders of magnitude less harmful than heroin or crystal meth, and for that matter, less addictive than crack. (Essentially the same stuff in a different delivery vehicle.)

      More to the point, regardless of how dangerous these drugs are, the 'legalize it' attitude generally comes from the desire to _lower_ street drug use. If crack addicts could get safe drugs and access to treatment, rather than drano-laced rocks and the threat of years in jail for trying to get clean, we might actually reduce the problem. (Also, this doesn't even touch on the effect of cutting into organized crime's biggest industry.)

      I don't think anyone is encouraging coke (or crack, or speed, or horse, or...) use, but more people are coming to believe that it can be more effectively (and safely) controlled within the law, rather than without.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    3. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dude, drug prohibition is bad no matter which drug you choose. Even heroin, as bad as it is, isn't ha;f as bad as the prohibition that tries to ban it.

      It all based on the idea that if you make people desperate enough, they will quit. Not entirely incorrect, some recent research shows that people quit drugs almost entirely for practical reasons.

      What they ignore is the problems caused by making people desperate are worst than the original addiction. Swiss studies have shown that simply providing heroin at a price similar to what it would be on the open market decreased the amount of income that the study subjects took in through other illegal activities by 90%, in a few weeks.

      Its been found they can hold down jobs (much like many alcoholics do), they can afford their habbit, afford food, etc.

      Simply put, prohibition is a broken model from the very start. Cannabis is simply the largest (more cannabis smokers in the US than all other illegal drug users combined), and the one with the most ridiculous lies spread about it.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    4. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      I just can't understand how this story can be tagged "legalize it" at all.

      Because it's not the job of the Government to protect people from themselves? Having just described everything that you did, would you try cocaine just because it was legal?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way to win the war on drugs is for the government to subsidize production of addictive drugs and give them away for the asking.

      Addicts will do *absolutely anything* to find and use drugs. Instead of expending resources stopping people from doing what they desperately want to do, regardless of any possible consequences, we might as well get selfish about it. Let's give addicts every opportunity to kill themselves as quickly as possible with the least amount of pain and expense for the rest of us.

      And, let their horrible deaths serve as a warning to any who would voluntarily jump into that trap.

    6. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by joib · · Score: 1

      According to this picture ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_(mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence).svg , from an article published in The Lancet), while cocaine is more harmful than alcohol & tobacco, it's only marginally more addictive than tobacco. So it's not like you do coke once, and then spend the rest of your life craving the next hit.

      Fundamentally, the so-called "War on drugs" is a world-wide 100 year old failure that rolls on with the weight of a dogmatic belief in its own righteousness and moral panicking. Nobody is saying that being a drug addict is good, but it should be treated like a medical problem, just like alcohol or tobacco addiction. For the long story, see e.g. http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13237193

    7. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by 42Penguins · · Score: 1

      Just going by number of people, a legal drug will probably always be a greater ruin of lives nationally simply because of much wider availability - alcohol and tobacco in the USA.
      However, as grandparent suggested, cocaine is probably a lot higher than alcohol on the rate of "users who ruined their lives with it vs total users".

    8. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People all over the world chew coca leaves. It's similar to drinking a cup of coffee or whatever with about the same amount of harmful effects.

      Irresponsible people will be irresponsible no matter what kind of restrictions you try to place on them.

    9. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm going to post AC for my own reasons.

      For what it's worth, and this is entirely my own experience, of course, I kicked my coke habit for a myriad of reasons. First, I was running out of money. Second, I was making more stupid decisions in other areas of my life. Third, and finally, it was seriously affecting my health, and I knew it was going to kill me.

      Furthermore, particularly speaking with that drug, if it were to be "more affordable," holding down a job and being addicted to that stuff is, in my opinion, impossible. The only thing being high promotes from a user's point of view, the only desire you really have, is either maintaining or increasing that high for the pleasure it provides. And the energy the drug provides creates a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy... you can literally use it until it kills you, and it honestly seems like a good idea.

    10. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Mishotaki · · Score: 1

      some recent research shows that people quit drugs almost entirely for practical reasons.

      Yeah i stopped heroin cuz it didn't come in ready-to-use gallons...

    11. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Oewyn · · Score: 1

      Swiss studies have shown that simply providing heroin at a price similar to what it would be on the open market decreased the amount of income that the study subjects took in through other illegal activities by 90%, in a few weeks.

      And what pray-tell would be "took in through other illegal activities?" Does selling the drug they bought legally which they otherwise would have bought illegally count in that reduction?

      Citation please.

    12. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alcohol ruins more lives than any other drug in the USA. And yet it's legal.

      Agreed, But maybe it ruins more lives because it is legal...

    13. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      http://www.drugpolicy.org/library/tlcnr.cfm

      Thats the best writeup I have found at the moment. Interestingly, while it mentions crime participation as one of the questions that the study was looking to answer, it doesn't address the findings on that point.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    14. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a person who has been directly affected by the destruction by heroin of a friend's life, I wonder if you know what you are talking about. My friend had no practical problems getting heroin, and many people don't. If you are arguing that everyone can be a functional heroin addict, you need to get off whatever you're taking (sanctimoniousness? ignorance?).

      Prohibition may not be the best strategy for making the world a better place, but it beats generalizing about the dangers of opiates in order to make a misguided point.

    15. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're saying we should legalize it, because in most states possession of any amount of cocaine is a felony, and it appears that 90% of us who carry cash are guilty of it, even knowingly guilty of it, since we now know that there is a 90% chance that each bill in our wallet is tainted.

      --
      What?
    16. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      You don't understand. Prohibition is an industry in and of itself. In some places, the entire law enforcement infrastructure would collapse for lack of funds. I would guess that a full 20% of the world's economy is off the books because of contraband, including hookers and blackjack. The racial issue of marijuana in particular should be obvious to anybody remotely interested in the subject. And its legalization will not generate the very optimistic expected tax revenues, as its value will decrease dramatically(drastically?). Those who benefit from prohibition will tell you it's far from broken. The last thing a smuggler wants is legalization.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    17. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a fiend. Yet I'm not addicted.

      I'm sorry at the lack of willpower displayed by your friends.

    18. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I understand where you are coming from. However for the purposes of public policy, some amount of generalization is needed. You say your friend had no trouble getting heroin... but is that true?

      How much better off would he be if it was cheap enough that it didn't make him make hard decisions? How much better off would he be if he could buy it at a known purity, knowing there were no unsafe impurities?

      A regulated, open market is cheaper, safer, lowers the risk of overdose, lowers exposure to dangerous chemicals like benzene. etc.

      Opiate addiction sucks, I wouldn't wish it on anyone or their friends. I don't mean to make it sound better than it is, however, I reject a policy that aims to do nothing more than make these sick people's lives worst.

      I simply reject the policy of destroying the village to save it.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    19. Re:Legalize Cannabis, not Cocaine! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      It does have that effect on some people (which is one thing that many people forget, every drug affects different people differently. I have smoked tobacco a number of times, but never developed a habbit. To this day I smoke maybe three or four times a year) I know people who say cocaine does little for them. Of course, they tend not to become users of it.

      I highly disagree that the ONLY thing an addicts wants is to get high. You yourself mentioned several things that become more important, so you stopped. Most people have other things they care about, addict or not. However, drugs are well... if your talking about the amount of money a person really NEEDS to live, the amount you need to take from them to actually bottom them out and bring their choices to the point where they have to choose life or drugs.... well.... drugs are cheap compared to that (for a while). Worst, drugs have a markup that makes dealing to support your habbit look very attractive.

      In the end it just doesn't work.

      Now... lets take another view. What if it wasn't illegal? What if importers didn't need to hide their imports? So they had no real reason to extract the coke and sell it in a mostly pure powder form?

      Look at columbia where it litterally grows on trees. People there chew the leaves for a little pick up much like coffee. It could be sold in a gum for or in some other way... less exposure to benzene. No abrasive powders up the nose, lower doses leading to less tolerance.

      Same for heroin. Why sell it in pure form? Why inject it? Only because of the price/benefit ratio. If the price of the drug comes down, we can expect to see people adding it to a smoking mix, or ingesting it orally.

      Simply put, the harm can be reduced in many ways. None of those ways are available under the Prohibitionist Harm Amplification policies.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  29. Drugs by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Drugs are a CASH business. It is one of the last CASH ONLY businesses out there. Most other people are taking Checks, Visa, and Debit Cards as primary sources of transactions, leaving Cash a fourth level barely used.

    I would not suprise me to see this trend go upwards, and eventually some idiot politician will suggest that we get rid of cash. Which will be followed up by some Christian suggesting that is the Mark of the Beast ....

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      some Christian suggesting that is the Mark of the Beast ....

      Yeah, one of these days it'll be trendy to walk around with a $6.66 bill pasted to your forehead...

    2. Re:Drugs by bmajik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My household has largely reverted back to cash-only for our commerce. It is easier to stick to a reasonable budget, the terms of a cash transaction are perfectly clear -- there are no double-jeopardy fee problems ["they stopped the check, then you were overdrawn. You lose"], and with the recent tightening on credit card companies, some of those companies are going to go after customers like me -- who _never_ carried a balance -- with annual fees or shorter repayment periods or day-0 interest assessment or other silly tricks. Not interested.

      But the #1 reason to revert to cash is that it is relatively anonymous -- or rather, it is moreso than any other face to face currency exchange we can easily perform. I think it will become increasingly important that Americans can conduct basic commerce in a way that is difficult to tie back to individuals. The cost to gather, store, and analyze data will approach zero, as will the public's ability to prevent the government from doing so and doing so for questionable reasons. Thus, not contributing data is the most workable mitigation.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    3. Re:Drugs by querist · · Score: 1

      > Which will be followed up by some Christian suggesting that is the Mark of the Beast ....

      Actually, most of the Fundamentalist-type Christians I know (and I know quite a few since I live in South Carolina) would, if anything, oppose the elimination of cash. Credit cards, etc. all allow tracking and centralized control at a much greater level than cash. Cash is supposed to be accepted no matter what. (Granted, there are limitations on how much you can pay in coins, but other than that, cash is legal tender for all transactions, both public and private.)

      Cash is negotiable without any form of identification. As long as you can be fairly sure that the bank notes are ligitimate, there is no reason to refuse cash. No ID needed. Checks and credit cards usually require additional ID, and can be linked directly back to the user.

      There are even some who would suggest that a credit-only system would require "the Mark of the Beast".

    4. Re:Drugs by DarkOx · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I am a Christan, but not the superstitious type. I hit the gas station one morning and my total came to $6.66 (no fuel just some motor oil and a coffee or something). The girl at the counter actually asked, Are you sure you don't want something else? I said why? She said, well your total is $6.66 that can't be good. I said, that is silly what could possibly happen?

      Well let me tell you I had the worst luck the entire rest of the day. I don't think one thing went right, it was crazy. I will never never spend exactly $6.66 again anywhere. Its worth investing in a pack of gum or something I don't really want just not to take the chance.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are even some who would suggest that a credit-only system would require "the Mark of the Beast".

      That... is exactly what the parent poster you are disagreeing with just said.

    6. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is precisely what I was thinking when I read the article. How many bills/person are in circulation now versus 1985? I would wager that there are less now, given the prevalence of debit and/or credit cards.

      And while I would tend to agree with the notion that someone will try and get rid of cash, I do not think it will ever happen. No matter what, cash is king.

    7. Re:Drugs by zipherx · · Score: 1

      You are on track of something here.. i only use cash to buy marijuana, anything else - credit card.

    8. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a Christan, but not the superstitious type.

      There is no other type.

      The rest of your post certainly doesn't help your assertion.

    9. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would not suprise me to see this trend go upwards, and eventually some idiot politician will suggest that we get rid of cash. Which will be followed up by some Christian suggesting that is the Mark of the Beast ....

      Why would he be an idiot for suggesting that? In a sufficiently advanced society, currency seems really backwards to me.

    10. Re:Drugs by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "cash is legal tender for all transactions, both public and private."

      That's not exactly true: Cash is legal tender for all debts, public and private. that means that is you owe someone money, they can't refuse cash, UNLESS payment by other means was negotiated prior to the transaction. It's subtle, but there are 2 substantial instances where the difference means something:

      1) You cannot compel someone to take cash when performing a purchase. That's because there is no "debt" involved - you pay the money before you leave with the goods. CC only? No problem - you don't have to buy there.

      2) Watch out for small signs that say "cash not accepted" - they count as "notification". When the DC Metro discovered that their parking lot attendants were pilfering over 50% of the parking revenue (and no, I'm not making this up), their solution was to...wait for it...ban cash and get rid of the parking attendants. There's still 1 there for problems, etc. What they forgot to do was put up a sign before you get into the parking lot that says "No Cash Accepted". A friend of mine, just to be a PITA, will drive up and hold out $4.25 in cash, and point out to them that he has incurred a debt by parking there and he is tendering an offer to satisfy that debt. If they refuse the tendered offer, he can consider the debt discharged, so open the gate, please.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    11. Re:Drugs by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Obviously if you aren't a drug-user, you are a terrorist. Thank you for telling us about the cost of information gathering because we were considering RFID tags on cash as an "anti-counterfeiting" measure, but maybe now we can just scan serial numbers, and of course we'll arrest you to begin with because "structuring" financial transactions violates money-laundering laws.

    12. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried to live my life via cash transactions only starting back in my freshman year of high school.

      The end result is I always come up with "insufficient credit history" when applying for any type of financing/credit card and thus end up being denied. Also, cell phone companies want $400-$500 deposits for service.

      I'm 34 years old now, don't have any debts on my credit report, have a healthy income and it's very annoying.

    13. Re:Drugs by bmajik · · Score: 1

      I use a prepaid cell phone. I bought the SIM and the phone off ebay. The number isn't even in my local area code, and as far as I know, "my" cell operator has no idea who I am.

      This also is extremely cheap if you are an infrequent cell user and don't require a data plan.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    14. Re:Drugs by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      I second the cash-only thing for local transactions. I myself found that swiping a card through a machine to pay for goods seemed much less "real" and made me tend to spend more money. Seeing the bills in my wallet dwindle has a much more potent psychological effect on me than checking my account balance online.

      Oh, and T-Bone down the street doesn't take credit cards or checks so it is just more handy for me to have cash on me for those late night cravings.

    15. Re:Drugs by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Most other people are taking Checks, Visa, and Debit Cards as primary sources of transactions, leaving Cash a fourth level barely used.
      Maybe this varies by location but here in the UK for small transactions (like say buying some food in a takeaway or conviniance store) cash is by far the dominant form of payment. Some such places will grudgingly take cheques or cards but they really would rather not due to the fees (and often they set minimum transaction ammounts for card use). It is also more time consuming to take cards than cash afaict.

      At the supermarket most people seem to use either cash or cards, not really sure which is more common. Some supermarkets have even started refusing to take cheques.

      Cheques only seem to be used for large transactions with small buisnesses (e.g. paying a plumber) and as a way for buisnesses to pay off thier invoices from each other.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  30. Politicians by Kjella · · Score: 2, Funny

    it's no surprise that the city with the highest level was Washington DC, where up to 95% of bills gathered there tested positive.

    I always suspected the politicians were on crack, I guess now we have proof...

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Politicians by Snarkalicious · · Score: 1

      Marion Barry. QED, mwahfuka.

  31. The interesting thing with it by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    is that it really shows how much the dollar circulates vs. other moneys. Yuan and yen are spread all over the world (though China is pushing for it to be) which would explain why these are at the bottom.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  32. ha ha ha by grub · · Score: 1


    Imagine how high the percentage would be if the War on Drugs wasn't so successful!

    .

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  33. strange by ArsonSmith · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You'd think with Bush out of office that DC would test lower than it did 2 years ago.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    1. Re:strange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nope, he had to tip his movers,

      And Obama had an admitted cocaine problem if i remember correctly. Remember kids, nobody important ever used drugs, except our last 3 presidents...

    2. Re:strange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The DC stats were skewed because they got the bill samples from Marion Barry's wallet.

  34. Go back to gold and silver coins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dollar Bills have concaine traces from being used as straws to sniff the coke.

    Credit cards were probably used to cut the lines.

    Gold and Silver bullion coins, a hedge against inflation and another tool in the war on drugs.

  35. Mod parent up by Shandalar · · Score: 1

    Yes. The reporter is stupid and annoying when claiming that the cause of coke on the cash is "well understood" and then proceeds to claim it's from (a) everyone rolling up dollar bills and snorting it, and (b) money changes hands during a drug transaction, "of course". Problems are, (a) dollar bills are probably filthier than coke and everyone knows it; and (b) what, is the coke not in plastic bags? Is the money transported along with loose cocaine rather than being exchanged for cocaine?

  36. Ass Pennies by hduff · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dude! Dont' sniff it! Don't forget "ass pennies". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ass_pennies#Ass_Pennies "I've been sticking $30 in pennies up my ass for the past 11 years! That's 3,000 pennies a day; 21,000 pennies a week; 1,092,000 pennies a year! To date that's 12,012,000 pennies, 8 times the population of Nebraska. Those pennies were in my ass! You think you're better than me? Oh, you're not better than me. You handle my ass pennies every day. You pick up my ass pennies for good luck. You throw my ass pennies in fountains and make wishes on them. You give my ass pennies to your little daughter to buy gumballs with. You handle my ass pennies every day! All of you! You all handle my ass pennies! Oh, I laugh at you before you can laugh at me. Because your pennies have been in my ass. You hear me? Your pennies have been in my ass!"

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  37. Measurement variation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could this simply be a side effect of improvement in detection technology?

  38. Contaminated US Currency Shows Cocaine Use on Rise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scientific American reports that an analysis by chemist Yuegang Zuo of the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth of 234 banknotes from 18 US cities has found cocaine on 90 percent of the bills tested, not surprising given that the US Office of National Drug Control Policy reports that more than 2 million Americans used cocaine in 2007 and for cocaine users, a rolled up bill is said to be the most convenient tool for snorting the powder form of the drug. What might be more surprising is the fact that the percentage of contaminated bills seems to be rising; just two years ago, Zuo did a similar study that found cocaine on only 67 percent of banknotes in Massachusetts. "It is too early to draw a conclusion about why," Zuo says. "The economic downturn may partly contribute to the jump." Zuo also tested banknotes from Brazil, Canada, China and Japan, and found that Asians appear to use the drug less - only 20 percent of the 112 Chinese renminbi notes tested had traces, and only 12 percent of 16 Japanese yen notes tested bore the drug. Washington DC. ranked highest in the survey - 95 percent of the sampled bills there bore cocaine contamination - along with Baltimore, Boston and Detroit while Salt Lake City had the lowest average levels of contamination. "The examination of cocaine contamination on paper money can provide objective and timely epidemiological information about cocaine abuse in individual communities," adds Zuo.

  39. Simply Not True! by ComputerGeek01 · · Score: 1

    I did this test on the bills in my pocket and let me tell you the percentage was MUCH higher the 90%! Oh wait... No I remember why...

  40. In other news .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... Up To 90 Percent of used condoms Have Traces of Sperm

  41. Re:Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill's can get cocaine

    Is this some new site by the icanhascheezburger people?

  42. Value of foreign stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm going to take the China and Japan stats with a grain of salt given that I believe the US dollar to be THE official currency of the coke business.

    If you take that into account, and factor in unavoidable cross contamination there's really no value in this study.

  43. that's why i... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    launder my money.

    first i spray on a pre-treater and then i toss my bills in the washer on hot cycle... works like a charm. fabric softener makes my bills smell springtime fresh...and soooo soft! but absolutely no bleach, tried that once...that cost me. XD

  44. I want to write a wheresgeorge.com joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but nothing comes to me.

  45. + Addicts = + Atrocities in LatinAmerica by ronaldmigahil · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thanks to the money of millons of addicts, LatinAmerica is a BIG WAR ZONE, where thousands of innocent people die, get wounded, forced to migrate, hunger, etc . When a addict buys their drugs are they aware of the atrocities that their money is creating in LatinAmerica?

  46. Good thing we had that "War on Drugs" by eagee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd just like to say that the "War on Drugs" has been a great use of our taxpayer dollars. Very effective. Good thing we're spending so much money keeping people in prison instead of paying for medical care. Yay us.

  47. Re:I think maybe the Fed got the wrong idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAHA

  48. Sewage Studies are More Interesting by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    Scientists are studying drug usage by examining the contents of sewage. This would appear to be a very excellent means of measuring the volume and type of drug usage in a community.

    Money wouldn't be good for this purpose because money is much more mobile than sewage, and because you couldn't derive good quantitative data from the amount of drugs detected.

    Remember. In most states, "knowing" possession of drugs need not be proven to establish a unlawful possession of a controlled substance! Any amount of drugs possessed can be a crime. Please return your dollars to the U.S. Treasury immediately and receive "clean" money now!

    1. Re:Sewage Studies are More Interesting by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they find "good shit" on the job.

      BTW North Korea counterfeits now harder to spot.

      --

      The score : Death down, taxes up, botheration and bull unchanged in heavy trading.

    2. Re:Sewage Studies are More Interesting by alexborges · · Score: 1

      I remember the figure of this study for the river in NY was that 11 metric tons of pure coke was consumed by the city each year.

      Cool, huh?

      Makes you wonder what would happen if you pull coke out of NYSE stock traders.

      --
      NO SIG
  49. Sniffer dogs... by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    I just hope I never meet up with a sniffer dog with an over-active nose while in an airport and carrying a wad of cash.

    That chuckle aside, I wonder how long it will be before someone challenges a sniffer dog alerting on them by claiming it was due to cocaine contamination on the cash. If that argument were accepted, any subsequent search could be thrown out as fruit of the forbidden tree.

    BTW, IANALNDIPOOTV [...nor do I play one on TV.]

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    1. Re:Sniffer dogs... by Reziac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The threshold for dogs to identify a scent can be as low as a few molecules. (I forget what it is for cocaine, but it's a very small number.) You gotta wonder how much "drug money" was just some poor slob carrying his life's savings, either through distrust of the banks (which is still common with foreigners) or being on his way to purchase something with cash.

      Example: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/12/1296.asp

      Given that large cash transactions are now considered "probable cause", add in the positive from the drug-sniffing dog, and it may not matter how innocent you are.

      Related thought: people who handle money all day long, like cashiers, may be exposed to enough cocaine that they could conceiveably test positive, or at least dog-sniff positive.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  50. It'd be nice to get more data by swordgeek · · Score: 1

    So the study found contamination at levels of 0.006 - 1240 mcg. The first question I'd ask is if this is the same threshold they used in the previous study. (I would certainly hope/assume so, but it always pays to ask.) It also seems to me that a few millionths of the coke on the heavily contaminated bills could rub off onto their neighbors, so even if there was no increase in coke usage, constant movement through the system could redistribute it.

    Alas, it's been many years since my membership to the ACS lapsed, so I won't have access to the original proceedings.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  51. Now I know why! by Martian_Kyo · · Score: 1

    I always liked the smell of money, now i know why.

  52. Blame to laws by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Once money laundering became illegal it started to get contaminated with all kind of substances.

  53. Re:Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill's what can get cocaine on them? If you means bills as in plural, there's no apostrophe.

  54. Re:+ Addicts = + Atrocities in LatinAmerica by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

    Without prohibition that would not happen. Don't blame the user, blame our government.

  55. So how much longer by ZankerH · · Score: 1

    Until we can forego dealers and just snort the stuff from our banknotes?

  56. The insanity of US Drug laws. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    Being that so much money contains traces of cocaine, think about this. The US Drug laws are such that if someone dilutes a illegal drug the entire quantity of the drug and the medium in which it was diluted are considered when determining quantity. So if you were to plunge a handful of bills into an olympic sized swimming pool, technically you've just created enough cocaine to lock you up for life.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  57. Re:+ Addicts = + Atrocities in LatinAmerica by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Some of those addicts are even somewhat aware of the atrocities that drugs do to them and the people close to them, and still can't quit. Problems in Latin America, in that case, are a low priority. And the rest aren't aware of a lot of self-evident things anyway.

  58. Missing factors by jonnyj · · Score: 1

    Two factors that need to be taken into account in country comparisons are the average circulation life of a note and the highest value coin in common circulation; both factors have a major effect on the number of times each note will be handled. My experience of travelling to the US is that elderly, scruffy notes are much more common than here in the UK, probably because we have only three values of note in wide circulation, two of which are distributed by all cash dispensers. Worn out currency is therefore quickly replaced. Also, our largest coin - £2 or $3.20 - is big enough to ensure that a huge number of day-to-day transactions (newspapers, sandwiches, public transport fares, etc) are made entirely with coins. Once a transaction is big enough to need paper money, it's often large enough for a credit card to be preferred. Our notes are therefore handled by far fewer people than dollar bills.

  59. Re:I think maybe the Fed got the wrong idea... by isa-kuruption · · Score: 0, Troll

    I think this was actually Obama's Stimulus Plan... how else did he plan to spend $878 Billion so fast?

  60. not surprising by z-j-y · · Score: 0, Troll

    Jesus Obama is a known coke head, and now he has his hands on trillions of dollars.

  61. There is an even worse side to this story! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It means that %90 of U.S. currency has been up someone's nose. Yuk!

  62. Same as cigarettes, then? by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    So basically the same as nicotine, then? Because that's how nicotine addiction works: it makes you feel a little happier when you get your hit, but the body compensates by moving the baseline, so it's followed by feeling worse when the effect goes away. Soon you're getting your regular nicotine hits just to get back to where you'd be if you hadn't smoked in the first place.

    And more dangerous than alcohol? Alcohol withdrawal can and does _kill_ people.

    As a nicotine addict, I say take _that_ Coke-heads. My drug has a lower LD50 (for nicotine it's only 3 times that of strichnine and about 8 times that of sodium cyanide), is instantly addictive, it has a withdrawal so nasty it's been actually used as a mild torture, it's so addictive it even occasionally makes people betray their friends and country for a smoke (no, seriously, it's been used to make prisoners break down and start talking), via vasoconstriction it causes strokes and gangrene and amputated limbs, it weakens the bones, it causes lung cancer... and it's not just legal, it's advertised everywhere.

    (And yes, you've read that right. The LD50 for nicotine is actually lower. Which means you'd need a lot less of it to end up dead.)

    Also... insanely addictive? Have you looked at some of the antidepressants and concentration aides and stuff that pharma is pushing on kids these days? Some of them make you happy for a while, but then move the baseline more than if you took cocaine and nicotine combined. The withdrawal won't just make you unhappier, it will make you _miserable_. Or the withdrawal for Valium/Diazepam is pretty much the same as _alcohol_ withdrawal, see above.

    We're not just talking the popular meaning of "addiction" as generally anything you like to do again. That shit they're pushing is causing _physiological_ addiction. Actual long term changes to brain chemistry.

    And again, it's perfectly legal.

    So, really, I kinda feel sympathy for coke. Compared to this stuff that I smoke every day, or which millions of children are prescribed daily, Coke is the wimp on the block. It's like the kid that everyone else mugs out of his lunch money. Heck, the kind of kid that nerds mug out of his lunch money. And when it comes to the law, guess who is painted as the great monster? Right. You have to feel a bit of pity there ;)

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Same as cigarettes, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >So basically the same as nicotine, then?

      Yes, I have campaigned for Schedule I prohibition of nicotine.

  63. Carrying cash = illegal by Elwar123 · · Score: 1

    Up to 90% of US paper money has traces of cocaine.

    Title 21, Chapter 13, Subchapter 1, Part D, Section 844.

    "It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to
    possess a controlled substance unless such substance was obtained
    directly, or pursuant to a valid prescription or order, from a
    practitioner, while acting in the course of his professional
    practice, or except as otherwise authorized by this subchapter or
    subchapter II of this chapter. "

    Carry cash? Go to jail.

    1. Re:Carrying cash = illegal by Torodung · · Score: 1

      Only terrorists carry cash anyway. ;^)

      --
      Toro

  64. Re:I think maybe the Fed got the wrong idea... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    You'd be better off forcing coke up the bankers' noses at gunpoint. Or maybe suffocating them in vast silos of coke on national TV.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  65. Bailouts and Bonuses by gethoht · · Score: 1

    Now we know where all of that wall street bailout money went!

    --
    All things are subject to interpretation, whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and n
  66. who benefits? by bugi · · Score: 1

    Who benefits from people being scared of unknowingly breaking the law by carrying paper money?

    Anybody who wants to track a person's expenditure via credit card usage. Unfortunately, the list is too large to draw any conclusion.

  67. You must not get CSPAN... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or listen to any current politician try to justify their actions.

  68. OMG that's so old it was on an NCIS episode by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    And God I love Abby. ;-)

  69. Inference of Drugs are Legal by realsilly · · Score: 1

    Just being silly here....

    If 90% all US paper currency has traces of coccaine,
    Govt. accepts US paper currency,

    would that not lead to acceptance of coccaine?

    I guess it would be acceptable, since we have to be high to keep accepting being taxed on every little thing in this country these days....

    Damn, I'm gonna get troll Mod'ed.

    --
    Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
  70. Re:In all fairness - methodology by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1

    Previous studies on cocaine in banknotes, however, had several drawbacks. They often were based on sampling only a small number of banknotes, for instance. Some tests destroyed the currency.

    In the new study, Zuo and colleagues describe use of a modified form of a standard laboratory instrument termed a gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer. It allows a faster, simpler and more accurate measurement of cocaine contamination than other methods, without destroying the currency. The researchers used the method to analyze banknotes of several different denominations from the five countries surveyed.

    It's not clear, but it sounds like this study was more sensitive than the others.

  71. Re:Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

    Bill's can get cocaine on them without ever having been directly in contact with cocaine.

    Bill's what can get cocaine on who?!? And Bill's thing can do this without "them" coming into contact with cocaine? That's freaking amazing! So does the cocaine get on "them" by some magical form transportation that does not involve physical contact with particles of cocaine?! This would be truly amazing!!

    --
    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
  72. Re:+ Addicts = + Atrocities in LatinAmerica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    In other words, drugs are illegal, and atrocities occur, thus making drugs legal would prevent the atrocities.

    inb4 "correlation is not causation"...

  73. MOD PARENT UP by inject_hotmail.com · · Score: 1

    I'd agree with all those points...it could be anything...it's all speculation at this point. Could it be that money changes hands more frequently now? Could it be that there is the same amount of drug use, but because money constantly circulates (I presume that only when a bill is damaged will it be removed from circulation) all circulated bills will eventually be contaminated?

    Statistics are all fine and good, but they have to have context and meaning. There's no way to properly infer cocaine usage just by the fact that a specific percentage of a given currency has trace amounts. Maybe a lot of people put very small amounts on their bills. Maybe a few people put very large amounts on their bills. How could that be measured properly? Context in TFA's case can only mean that cocaine users also use currency. That is all.

  74. NOT indication of growing drug abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People use paper money less and less for money transactions, instead they use plastic and electronic payments.

    Except in criminal money transactions.

    The increase of cocain traces has probably a strong correlation with decreased use of paper money. (With the obvious exception of Washington D.C. ;)

    My guess is that paper money is still in more use in most of those countries that have low levels of contamination.

    This is a rather obvious false correlation. People above a certain level of stupid shouldn't be allowed to call themselves "scientists".

  75. China does that much cocaine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would have never thought.

  76. Re:+ Addicts = + Atrocities in LatinAmerica by Gizzmonic · · Score: 1

    When a addict buys their drugs are they aware of the job opportunities that their money is creating in LatinAmerica?

    FTFY.

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
  77. Politics and Government Service Produce Cocaine? by GeekZilla · · Score: 1

    "...it's no surprise that the city with the highest level was Washington DC,..."

    That's a surprise to me, but perhaps I live a sheltered life. Is the implication that being involved in politics makes you more likely to indulge in cocaine use or that being involved in politics causes you to exude cocaine through the pores in your skin? Neither of these thoughts are pleasant.

    --
    Veritas patesco per quaestio questio. Truth is revealed through questions.
  78. Small samples. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    90% 67% 20%

    Umm... how many bills are they analyzing? Those are conveniently even ratios. Perhaps the increase is sample error.

  79. Sample Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From TFA: "234 US bills from 17 cities were investigated"

    Anyone care about sample sizes any more?

  80. Re:Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bill's != bills

  81. Bad luck my friend. by AnAdventurer · · Score: 1
    Which crossing do you use?

    I have been "searched" many times, but never to that degree.

    I take the Washington hwy 539 or Vermont, North Troy on RR 243 crossing for exactly that reason. Avoid big crossings. I knew a place in Vermont west of N Jay rd above Jay, VT where there was a trail (big enough for a suv) that you could cross. It was Dr. Bull's property (a weapons testing facility crossing the border), but there was a time between when the Mossad killed him in Turkey in 1991 or 92 and 9/11/2001 that you could dive right across the boarder unnoticed (now it's blocked by cement blocks and a boarder post is within sight, plus the whole boarder line has been cleared as far as you can see).

    --
    6.8SPC TR of 550, l xwind at 6, drift rt at 26" drops 77". AT has 503 ft-lbs at 1403 fps. FT 0.86
  82. debit card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    most people don't use their debit/credit card when buying coke..

    i hardly use cash at all anymore.. (although I sometimes wish I did)

  83. $100 bill stamps by dave562 · · Score: 1

    On a some what related tangent, the next time you get a bunch of $100 bills, take a look at them and see if you notice any small images that have been stamped onto them. Lowl level coke dealers are notorious for marking their money. A lot of them have their own unique stamps that they use. It would be interesting to do a study to see if there is a higher percentage of contamination on bills that have been stamped, versus those that haven't.

  84. How Pointless by flajann · · Score: 1
    The fact that so many bills have cocaine on them is a huge testament to the failure of the silly "war on drugs" campaign the US have had going for decades.

    It's plainly a waste of time, effort, and taxpayer's money. Let's end this silly "War on Drugs" and return the money to the taxpayer.

  85. Go figure by mordred99 · · Score: 1

    Especially $1 bills ... I am not surprised.

  86. News Flash: Japan's plastic straw distribution by Is0m0rph · · Score: 1

    Higher than any other country! Short 3" cuttings of straws found in abundance in land fills.

  87. I guess that means the government can TAKE IT ALL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_v._$124,700

  88. It's more likely.. by oljanx · · Score: 1

    ...that one of the scientists involved in the study uses cocaine. The sample taken is way too small for any reliable analysis.

  89. only losers use drugs by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

    Given the cost of the substance, you would think the American & Canadian coke heads would be better at keeping it separate from other things.

    You know the old marketing slogan, "Only losers use drugs" right? The drug users have their own version, "Only users lose drugs."

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
  90. Scrooge McDuck by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    Well this explains why Scrooge McDuck swims in gold coins & jewels even though cash would be less painful to dive into. At least for swimming purposes.

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
  91. Not a closed system by MaizeMan · · Score: 1

    I read somewhere the average bill only lasts 12-18 months in constant circulation (can't cite source, so take this with a grain of salt). Of course there's still cross contamination, I'm just pointing out that our nation's currency supply is not a closed system.

    1. Re:Not a closed system by noundi · · Score: 1

      I read somewhere the average bill only lasts 12-18 months in constant circulation (can't cite source, so take this with a grain of salt). Of course there's still cross contamination, I'm just pointing out that our nation's currency supply is not a closed system.

      Oh absolutely not, which is probably why it isn't closer to 99%.

      --
      I am the lawn!
  92. a dog "hit" by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And any handler can claim his dog "hit" on something as well, and use that as probable cause to confiscate the loot. And if someone was to loudly protest the confiscation of their money at some "random courtesy checkpoint", the cops can just shoot you and claim you made a "threatening furtive gesture" or were "interfering" or "resisting some lawful order" or anything else in cop CYA speak they dream up.

      The point being made was, in some areas the cops use this "dog drug hit" BS as an excuse to outright rob people and get away with it or for intimidation to get people to confess to something else or whatever. They even go so far as to terrorize school kids with these dogs inside the schools. It's a con more than anything else. And it can be even worse than that for some people with phony dog-police type work

    For legitimate rescue, I think dogs are great, useful, for most anything else as it intersects police work...starts to get wonky quickly.

        Of course I am also in favor of ending the retarded prohibition laws, because they just cause more harm than good. If a 200 dollar day coke or smack or whatever habit was legal, it might cost all of two bucks, and I don't think there'd be much in the way of crime associated with it like it is today. It would still be technically "bad" IMO, the habit and what it does to people, but we as a society would get rid of a lot of the vast collateral damage associated with it being illegal.

    1. Re:a dog "hit" by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      For legitimate rescue, I think dogs are great, useful, for most anything else as it intersects police work...starts to get wonky quickly.

      You wouldn't think that if a police dog had located a bomb that would have taken your life if it hadn't been found. Just saying, they have other uses in between "War on Drugs" and "Rescue".

      Of course I am also in favor of ending the retarded prohibition laws, because they just cause more harm than good.

      Amen to that.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:a dog "hit" by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Seconded. Though wed need anti-discrimination laws, due to prejudice.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  93. Eew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So this study shows that 90% of my bills are also contaminated with boogers?!

  94. We should ... by The+AtomicPunk · · Score: 1

    We should start a war on drugs. I bet that would put a stop to this, and without violating any civil liberties or overpopulating our jails.

    Also, I'd think this number would be dropping rapidly as fast as the Fed is inflating the money supply. :)

  95. Might be chance, might not be... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    This my just be a wild coincidence, but isn't 90% about the market share that Microsoft has for desktop OS installation? Hmmm...

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  96. it goes both ways by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder what "essence of G-string" levels respective countries have on their smallest denominational bills?

    Thanks, now I will be wondering what "Essence of stripper schlong" my 1's have...shudder

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  97. Re:Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by Mishotaki · · Score: 2, Funny

    Man i wanna be a ATM maintenance guy! you get free cocaine as a bonus while working!

  98. Opium by chicago_scott · · Score: 1

    FTA: But China and Japan were well behind the curve at 20% and 12%.

    Ahh, but what if you test the Chinese and Japanese dollars for opium, hmmmm? Hmmmmmmmmmmm?

    1. Re:Opium by alexborges · · Score: 1

      Gee 'merican man. Cant 'member reary.

      --
      NO SIG
  99. Who cares about the cocaine? by jshackney · · Score: 1

    90% of the bills in my wallet have been stuck up somebody's nose. Now that's nasty.

  100. Could we have a little less hype please? by Torodung · · Score: 1

    Stating that 90 percent of all bills in the US--even those that stay out of circulation in large cities--are carriers of cocaine is most likely an overstatement.

    So basically, we're not being given the real statistic, just a hyped up statistic. Have these people been talking to climatologists?

    Jeez. Could I have my science without hype please? Hype-ity hype, wonderful hype!

    --
    Toro

  101. Re:Why no constant stream of arrests. by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

    It's always a good idea to have lots of laws on the books that everyone is breaking so if you get pissed at someone - ANYONE, then throwing the book at them is a good way to inflict damage/death. It keeps the peasants in line.

    --
    ...
  102. Re:+ Addicts = + Atrocities in LatinAmerica by alexborges · · Score: 1

    Thanks to idiotic politicians in Latin America and specially in the US, the drug bussiness is illegal and gives a monopoly to gun-ready violent people called "narcs".

    Thanks to idiotic citizens in Latin America that actually supports this suicidal policy, we are worse than ever.

    Get SMART and start demanding from latin american governments to legalize soft drugs (we will work on hard drugs later)...

    Oh, and yes, stop whining.

    --
    NO SIG
  103. Drug sniffing machines by yabos · · Score: 1

    I wonder what's going to happen with these drug sniffing machines they want to put in airports. Supposedly they can detect such a low amount like being able to detect a grain of salt in a pool. Also with those machines, you might get caught for pot if you walk by someone smoking a joint on the way to the airport.

  104. Bail Out Money by NFN_NLN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In order to achieve this level on contamination, one needs to look to the source. Clearly this explains where all the bank bailout money went.... coke parties for all the bankers.

    1. Re:Bail Out Money by natehoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I had mod points, it would be a hard choice how to moderate your post.

      "Funny", no, it's really not. True things can't be funny.

      "Insightful" is probably closest.

      What I really want is "True, but depressing."

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:Bail Out Money by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      True things can't be funny.

      lolwut? The funniest jokes are funnier precisely because they're true.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    3. Re:Bail Out Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True things can't be funny?

      One word sir: Smegma.

    4. Re:Bail Out Money by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Clarification: True things that are this sad can't be funny. Oh, wait, maybe we need a "Gallows Humor" mod.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    5. Re:Bail Out Money by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Of course. Coke is te ultimate "stimulus package."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  105. our Cash-less society by stock · · Score: 1

    The Federal Reserve and it's bank notes already had a devalued
    reputation. You know, Neel Kashkari etc. The conclusion of this study
    is however very weird. One might even conclude that anyone carrying
    Cash must be a Coke sniffer. It's no secret anymore that the hidden
    rulers want to have a Cash-less society. The story here certainly helps
    in fulfilling this objective. We just need to take care that besides
    the vanishing of Cash from our Society, our Society itself doesn't
    disappear as well.

    Robert
    --
    Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
    Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
    crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net

    1. Re:our Cash-less society by cifey · · Score: 1

      We just need to take care that besides the vanishing of Cash from our Society, our Society itself doesn't disappear as well.

      Maybe it helps eliminate political/business opposition but not necessarily society. Physical bartering or alternative currencies could suplement a 'cashless' society. Anyway I think a tribe of non-social robots could easily be assimilated by an ideological based culture, no guns required, the women would just get bored and the men would have to follow them.

      --
      Hello Cruel World
  106. This fact was used frequently in the 1980s by stiggs · · Score: 2, Informative

    By prosecutors in cocaine cases, until the first case in which a defense lawyer requested and got, with the judge's permission, the cash out of the prosecutor's wallet, sent it off for testing for cocaine, and came back with a 100% positive test for cocaine traces on every bill. How many people were wrongly convicted with the help of the prosecutor's trick of pointing out "traces of cocaine" on the money in evidence, was exposed?

  107. Laundry by cybereal · · Score: 1

    Clearly this is the result of increased efforts to curb money laundering.

    --
    I read the script, and I think it would help my character's motivation if he was on fire. -Bender
  108. Wait, what?!? by SeePage87 · · Score: 1

    Looking at bills from 17 cities, it's no surprise that the city with the highest level was Washington DC, where up to 95% of bills gathered there tested positive.

    Why is this no surprise? New York has Wall St, coke is imported into many Florida and California cities, etc. The only thing remarkable about DC is the presence of the Government, and since so many people here (I'm a resident of the District) want to get high levels of clearance for their jobs, most won't touch any illegal drugs. Really surprised by this, even though I do know where to get dank coke ;-)

  109. up to? by macterra · · Score: 1

    It is worth remembering that "up to" means "less than".

  110. Re:Cocaine on bill != haddirect contact with coke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill's can get cocaine on them without ever having been directly in contact with cocaine

    So, are you trying say that the cocaine materialized out of thin air? If so, its still in contact after it materialized. Or are you just pointing out that no atoms in any substance actually touch?

  111. In the US right now... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ...I'm not concerned much if any over random bombs all over. So rare it is almost a non issue. That might change, but now..meh. Where I live and my lifestyle I am way more concerned over disturbing a yellow jacket nest, hahahah!

        I am concerned over false flag phony "terrorist" attacks and using something like the bird/swine/human flu scare to give the government an open ended "emergency powers" excuse. Or more middle class ripoffs to enrich casino bankers. Or more cost increasaes in everything to go to fatcat energy traders with "cap and trade" non scientific wealth skimming scams. Stuff like that. Way more important and way more impacts "we the people" than random bomb attacks.

        Maybe they can train dogs to determine when an official authority figure or fatcat big economic "busy-ness" weasel is lying. THAT would be dang useful!

      "Look! Rover got a "big fat steenking lie" hit! Legal grounds for lynching on the spot!"

    1. Re:In the US right now... by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Hey, I didn't say I was concerned about random bomb attacks. All I said was that police dogs aren't limited to rescuing people or finding drugs. They can find bombs and track down fleeing criminals as well. In either case if they save a human life I'd say they did their job and were worth having around.

      Mind you, I don't think they should be able to be used to obtain probable cause. It's entirely too easy for them to hit on something by mistake or even for a less than honest handler to have them "hit" on something. I don't have a problem with the police using them once they have probable cause though. If the officer pulls you over and smells pot smoke he's probably justified in using the dog to help locate your contraband. If he pulls you over and his dog starts barking I don't think that should give him the right to search your property.

      (Of course, I also think the War on Drugs is complete bullshit, but that's another discussion....)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  112. Ridiculously small sample size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    234 bills were tested, spanning 17 cities. Thats about 13 bills per city, and from this, they are able to say that 90% of all bills (or 100% from places like Miami) are tainted? Given the amount of currency in circulation, doesnt this seem like a small sample size?

    I guess with a small enough sample size, any amount of statistics training can lead you to whatever conclusion you would like.

  113. C Notes by thorkyl · · Score: 1

    That's why I find them so addictive.

    --
    -- I am the NRA, enough said...
  114. Old copypasta is old! by kheldan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Haven't we already known this for decades now? Is it a slow news Monday or something?

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  115. Just wondering... by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    Do I sniff a few false positives?

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  116. Everything's so green! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's good to be the king.

  117. Best way to help law enforcement... by argent · · Score: 1

    he researchers hope that studies such as these will be of help to law enforcement ...

    Best way to help law enforcement is to quit treating drug use as a law enforcement problem and start treating it as a public health problem, and release a bunch of resources back to enforcing laws that need enforcing. This kind of study can help that by demonstrating just how bad an idea treating it as a law enforcement problem is.

  118. Angarak Gold? by NoobixCube · · Score: 1

    I can't believe nobody has mentioned this yet... In The Belgariad, by David Eddings, Angarak gold has the curious effect of making people want more of it, no matter how much they have. I imagine minute amounts of coke leeching from the surface of contaminated notes would have much the same effect.

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
  119. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other news, millions of free bill cleaning machines are popping up everywhere.

  120. The '80s called... by tubeguy · · Score: 1

    ...they want their drug back.

  121. Consider this the proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This should be proof to anyone that the war on drugs is a bigger failure than.. well nothing has been this costly and useless at the same time.

    Despite the 40 billion dollars a year all we are doing is making it more available. This should be the summary to the story.
    Washington DC had the highest, We need all politicians (senators, congressmen, aides, record keepers, the president and the VP, all municipal judges and all law enforcement officers through out the states, CIA, FBI, and especially the DEA) to have weekly random drug tests. Lets finally see just how "clean" the cleaners are. I do not want coke fiends making anti-drug policy, you end up with what we currently have, a broken system that is killing us.

  122. What's the solution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you de-coke the money? I don't want some dog keying on me or anybody just for what's in my wallet. Are they calibrated to ignore that trace of an amount? On the other hand, I bet if it was bleach necessary to clean the bills, they would train dogs to find bleach..

  123. OK by zogger · · Score: 1

    ..you have a point on the different uses. I like dogs, we have six now here on the farm. They are mostly companions (all rescue dogs) and useful when the wild dogs and coyotes come around. I wish even one of them was a herding dog though..eventually I'll get one maybe.

  124. this is news? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    And this just in: Money tested south of the Mason/Dixon line is more likely to test positive for crank. Duh! One day hopefully we will realize that prohibition simply doesn't work and we'll tax the garbage and use the money for rehabs. I believe if was William F. Buckley that said it better than any person-" If I put a bottle on a table, with a skull and crossbones on it, and say "Don't touch that! It is poison and will destroy you!" and you do it anyway? Then you deserve what you get and I shouldn't have to spend billions trying to protect you from your own foolishness"

    And he was right: I have know guys that have shot up JD and ditch water and drank brake fluid and huffed gasoline when their drugs of choice couldn't be scored. We gonna ban gasoline and brake fluid too? All drug prohibition has done it made it so a 15 year old, while not able to score a beer, can score any hard drug like crank within 30 minutes or less from where I live. Legalize and regulate, but give up this old tired prohibition crap. We have been at it for nearly a century, and lets be honest: Is there ANYBODY here that couldn't score dope in under an hour?

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  125. Don't forget the Germans by necrostopheles · · Score: 1

    There's a 2003 article on the BBC reporting similar levels of coke on German euros.

  126. From which data I conclude... by ibsteve2u · · Score: 1

    ...that bacteria do a lot of coke.

    --
    Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
  127. trace of cocaine use of cocaine by JumpSocial · · Score: 1

    Because money has cocaine on it doesn't mean it was used with cocaine. It could just means it was stored with bills that were.

    --
    Inventor, Artist http://www.Rubber-Power.com
  128. Really? by symbolset · · Score: 1

    I usually agree with you but I think you're wrong here. US Paper currency fuels an underground economy in about half of the world. It's our biggest export, and North Korea's too (though they print their own). During the recent difficulties in the middle east we were legendary for losing track of pallets of Benjamins simply because that's the currency that you use to get the locals to do stuff they ordinarily wouldn't. I think in Iraq alone we can't account for three billion dollars worth of genuine US currency. The power of the dollar extends far past where you think it does.

    So no, while you can't pay your French taxes in greenbacks you can buy with them anything that matters, and the seller almost always prefers it to the local coin in most places. The "informal" exchange rate is almost always better than the official one.

    /Spent a lot of greenbacks overseas. Prefers money that glitters and rings true. Don't get caught smuggling currency - it's not worth a year in a Turkish prison.

    Or to quote Benjamin Franklin:

    "It is a happy country where justice and what was your own before, can be had for ready money. It is another addition to the value of money, and of course another spur to industry."

    I think he was a bit more cynical than he let on.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  129. Worrying tendency by jandersen · · Score: 1

    Those who know me will know that I am not very prudish about the use f recreational drugs, an increase in the use of cocaine is something to be worried about. It means that has become more socially acceptable to use cocaine, and I think that has to be a bad thing all around. Along with the opiates, the central stimulants - especially cocain and meth - are the most objectively harmful on many levels.

    I also think that instead of getting hysterical and slamming more restriction on and increasing penalties, it is now time to consider not just a sensible form of regulated legalisation, but also the active development, by competent scientists of recreational substances that are reasonably safe to use. At the moment the situation in many countries is absurd in that you can legally create a "new" drug by making a minor change to the chemical structure of a well-known, banned substance. What this means is that you can legally buy something that is very close to, say, Ecstasy, but which may be much more dangerous; and nobody knows what the hell it will do to your body and brain. That clearly is the wrong way around. It should be like it is for medicine: any new drug should have to pass strict tests, and then be legalized under some sort of regulation.

    1. Re:Worrying tendency by testadicazzo · · Score: 1
      It's time to bring a little rational though to government policy, instead of treating everything as an emotional, idealogical issue. It's sad that so many issues in American politics wind up being a debate between "let's have a rational conversation about this" versus "No, my faith says you're wrong".

      This finding is just another piece in a century's worth of evidence that drup prohibition just plain does not work. It doesn't reduce drug use, it doesn't reduce addiction rates, it doesn't reduce the harms inflicted on society due to drug abuse, it doesn't protect kids... In short, it doesn't accomplish any of the things it claims to accomplish. It does do an enormous amount of harm.

      If these teabaggers actually cared about small government, privacy, individual liberty, government staying out of health care, etc, they should start fighting drug prohibition, asset forfeiture, and all the screwed up big government, big brother crap that comes out of drug prohibition. The reason why they don't is of course obvious: These teabaggers are essentialy modern day brownshirts screwing up democratic processes in an orgy of racism: usually as subtext, but more and more out in the open. The modern system of drug prohibition is of course our strongest form of institutionalized racism. These guys don't mind big government poking around in our private lives, and making decisions about our health, as long as they are targeting hispanics and blacks vastly more than whites.

      It is of course an indisputable fact that the first Marijuana laws were nothing more than a legislative method of screwing hispanics in California, but I always figured the racist outcomes of drug prohibition were an accidental by-product of faulty and emotional thinking. Nowadays, when I see the overlap between the hard-line prohibitionists and the teabaggers, I start thinking, yeah, maybe deep down a lot of it is just plain racially motivated. Maybe.

      I do regret letting this post devolve into a flaming of tea baggers, but I just can't help myself. I find it awesome that they chose to name themselves after the practice of laying your testicles on something. I always knew all those right wing fundamentalists were total perverts. I don't live in the states, but can I suggest that those of you living there start going to teabagger meeting with large photo collections of your testacles layed out on various things? Start whipping that tea-bag out and laying it on the speaking podium or coffee machine and taking pictures.

  130. Yeah, sure. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The Chinese and Japanese bank notes are covered with Teflon[tm]....

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  131. Funny how.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... bank notes elsewhere don't have the same percentage of microscopic amounts of drugs.

    Why don't you accept the logical conclusions of such an study instead of making lame excuses?

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  132. How it comes .... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ..... that machines in other countries are not as contaminated? (assuming your theory is correct).

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  133. Oh yeah, the numbers. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Lets listen to them when they tell us things we want to hear.

    Lets condemn the numbers when they spell out the ugly malfeasances that could not be possibly true.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  134. You don't carry your life savings in cash. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Sorry, you simply don't. If you are carrying too much cash in most likelihood you are trying to stay under the police's radar...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:You don't carry your life savings in cash. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      You and I don't, but we grew up in the era of banks, and now credit cards. Some older people, and many people from 3rd world countries still don't trust the banks (often with good reason, in the old country). As a young Chinese friend of a friend says, if you're a perp and want a quick haul, you rob an old Chinaman, because they don't trust banks and they DO carry their life savings around with them.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  135. Victimless crime by mspohr · · Score: 1

    Why are people obsessed with cocaine use? This is a victimless crime. We would be much better off to just tax it and make it legal. Much better for the countries that consume it. Much better for the countries that produce it. Also, we could stop the drug wars which do produce real victims.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  136. This is old news. by GarryFre · · Score: 1

    It amazes me how many times I have seen old news passed off as new news over the decades. its about time for them to repeat for the fifth time that they have JUST discovered that the universe is not expanding at a constant rate.

    --
    www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
  137. Cocaine doesn't kill people dollars do!! by GarryFre · · Score: 1

    Nuff said.

    --
    www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
  138. Debunked already by BeCre8iv · · Score: 1

    As notes are mechanically sorted for ATMs they are shuffled together at high speed... Amongst all the detritus that has fallen off other notes that have been through the machine... Since it was last cleaned.

    --
    This perpetual motion machine Lisa made is a joke, it just keeps getting faster and faster. - Homer
  139. Smells like.... by CristalShandaLear · · Score: 1

    Just earlier today I was thinking that some of the bills I had smelled like marijuana. There were only a few them and they came from my banks ATM but they had the distinct odor of weed. I don't smoke or use weed and I haven't been around anyone that has in at least a few years.

    I thought I was imagining things and then I come across this article. Which may not be news to some, but was definitely news to me.

  140. Ewwwww. Disgusting. by CaspianHiro · · Score: 1

    This could imply that 90% of paper money has been up someone's nose.

    If it's Lindsey, Kim K., Paris, ok, but what if it's Charles, Chuck, Nancy or Barack. No telling *where* their noses have been.

  141. Re:I think maybe the Fed got the wrong idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also - we now have a great way of reducing the outstanding money supply. Just seize all US money as drug money, and you're done. No joke, btw, law enforcement does that quite regularly 'sorry mum, the dog indicates your life savings are drug money. You may consider yourself lucky we don't put you in jail...'