Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

This Chip Can Tell If You've Been Poisoned

Posted by Soulskill on from the let-somebody-else-test-it-first dept.

sciencehabit writes "When you are dealing with a deadly poison that can be found in food and is a potential terrorist weapon, you want the best detection tools you can get. Now, researchers in France have demonstrated an improved method to detect the most deadly variant of the botulinum neurotoxin, which causes botulism. Their test — essentially, a lab on a tiny chip (abstract) — provides results faster than the standard method and accurately detects even low concentrations of the toxin."

21 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. Seriously, terrorists? by Aethedor · · Score: 1

    Tell me, when was the last time terrorists did food poisoning?

    --
    It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
    1. Re:Seriously, terrorists? by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Informative

      Weirdly, some hippie, sex-loving, heterodox Hindu preacher's followers tried it in 1984, infecting 751 people in Oregon with salmonella. But it didn't kill anyone.

      Their hope had been that everyone would stay home sick from the local elections, so they'd be able to vote in their preferred candidate.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    2. Re:Seriously, terrorists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you ate at a fast food chain?

    3. Re: Seriously, terrorists? by Aethedor · · Score: 1

      They don't classify as terrorists if you ask me. Not every lunatic murderer is a terrorist.

      --
      It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
    4. Re:Seriously, terrorists? by WoOS · · Score: 1

      Their hope had been that everyone would stay home sick from the local elections, so they'd be able to vote in their preferred candidate.

      Sounds to me like a different form of gerrymandering of a group not privy to change the voting districts. Not terrorism as it does not aim at creating terror, so does not count as example. Not legal either, obviously, in contrast to the actual gerrymandering.

    5. Re: Seriously, terrorists? by plover · · Score: 1

      If people who download music can be classified as file-sharing terrorists, then a calling every instance of murder 'terrorism' doesn't sound like much of a stretch.

      Hearing the word 'terrorism' coming from a news figure or politician is now a strong indicator that you are listening to a dangerous, scheming, untrustworthy authority figure who is trying to manipulate you through fear. It should make you want to vote the scumbag out; or at least turn off the TV they're bullshitting you through.

      --
      John
    6. Re:Seriously, terrorists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lol. Yea, Republicans do that all the time. It's on page 4 of the handbook they gave me at my first KKK meeting.
      How fucking stupid are you?

    7. Re: Seriously, terrorists? by JasonGoatcher · · Score: 1

      I told my dad I felt the biggest act of terrorism was the bombing of Hiroshima and he started arguing with me about it. Finally he asked,"Well, what's your definition of terrorist?" I told him my definition was when someone physically or mentally harmed civilians to fight a war, that was terrorism. He got a thousand yard stare for a second, and then simply walked away.

  2. Chaumas by rossdee · · Score: 2

    Every Great House should have a poison snooper

    1. Re:Chaumas by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I don't know how it can tell the difference between snooping a fast-acting poison and a Happy Meal.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    2. Re:Chaumas by plover · · Score: 1

      Great, so now they're automating the job of Royal Food Tasters. More unemployment. We should have Congress pass a law protecting their business model!

      --
      John
    3. Re:Chaumas by DexterIsADog · · Score: 1

      It is no longer edgy to call fast food and other low-nutrition products "poison".

  3. Put on cans? by mlts · · Score: 1

    I don't know how cheap/expensive this would be... or if it would be possible, but maybe put this chip on canned goods or produce with some obvious "this stuff isn't fit for consumption" alert if the chip detects any toxins?

    1. Re:Put on cans? by WoOS · · Score: 3, Informative

      From the article on botulism it appears that commercially canned goods are safe (and even terrorist would have a problem to get the toxin into the can after sealing and cooking which destroys spores and toxin). And on home-made goods it might be a bit difficult to enforce attachment of a chip on every glass of canned fruits.

      The analyzed attack vectors seem to be (according to the German wikipedia entry on the toxin, the english one is too occupied with medical use) milk, water and air. All of them do not lend well to chip attachment.

      Actually the chip talked about is for analyzing a patient's blood sample (see TFA) to detect he has been poisoned, not for detecting it in food.

    2. Re:Put on cans? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Not all botulism in canned food is the result of terrorism or maliciousness. Cans still get dented, and defective cans still make it through the manufacturing line. The chip would replace the "best before" date.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  4. Mobile app for detecting neurotoxins by abies · · Score: 1

    I suppose it should be possible to develop application for smartphones which would detect if you are poisoned by some of neurotoxins, based on accelerometer. When your position changes to horizontal and you start to spasm, you would hear the smartphone say "Dear Sir/Madam. Poison Exclamation Mark Poison Exclamation Mark Poison Exclamation Mark"
    or, in case of my phone:
    "Your beta version of voice synthetizer just expired, please download the new voice library from Google App store".

  5. Re:But can it tell if I have been BAD? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    Not necessary. These days, Santa can tell if you've been bad simply by analyzing your browsing habits using his Christmas server farm. It's more or less accurate enough for him.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  6. Re:Hope its cheap by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    "If it doesn't cost too much it'd be a godsend to those of us who are (probably needlessly) overly cautious (or perhaps just paranoid) about this sort of stuff."

    It's completely harmless, people like it so much, actors, politicians and housewives (real or not) even inject it into their foreheads.

    Perhaps it can detect that too?

  7. What isn't a potential terrorist weapon? by flyingfsck · · Score: 2

    In California, even a spit ball can be a potential terrorist weapon...

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  8. how targeted by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    this is great, because people are dropping like flies from food terrorism, usually botulism, and nearly always the particular strain this detector can find. yeah, just like the recent article on all those nuke plant insiders ready to pounce to sabotage plants, fear mongering bullshit.

  9. Re:The last time I heard about botulism by camperdave · · Score: 2

    That was about a search for some missing kids. The botulism was just a MacGuffin to get the ball rolling. The kids went camping and mom had packed some ham sandwiches. There was a radio announcement that the manufacturer was recalling canned ham, and when the mom checked the can's serial number... sure enough.

    There are about 250 food recalls a year with about a third of them related to microbiological issues like botulism.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!