In recent days there has been a really fascinating media
release from a think tank known as Australia 21. Described on their website as
"... an independent, non-profit organisation whose core purpose is
multidisciplinary research and inquiry on issues of strategic importance to Australia
in the 21st century", Australia 21 has released their much-anticipated
report on discussing the costs and benefits of any potential changes to
Australia's policy on illicit drugs.
The report itself is rather controversial. Not only does it broach a subject that many people still find taboo in this day and age, it also has quite a controversial title: "The Prohibition of Illicit Drugs is Killing and Criminalising Our Children and We Are All Letting It Happen". Title notwithstanding, the report makes for fascinating reading, though I
must admit that at the time of writing, I am only part way through reading it.
What has been clear so far is that the release of this report has already lead
to debate within the wider community over current legislation regarding
illicit/recreational drugs. As mentioned in a previous post, this is a
contentious issue that, unfortunately, tends to be political suicide for those
willing to bring it up for discussion and debate.
At any rate, the fact that drug legalisation and drug policy
is once again being discussed does give one hope that a more reasonable and
evidence-based approach to recreational drugs, harm minimisation and harm
reduction will be reached.
By presenting workshops and giving the occasional talk to high school students, I always make a point of allowing them to ask any relevant questions on science, chemistry and so on. I also try and ask them questions that make them think about the world and how it works. One of my favourite questions to ask is:
"Are organic things good for you?".
Most students surmise that I am referring to organic food, and respond with an emphatic "Yes!". This is a reasonable response, as depending on their year level, a number of students will not have encountered organic chemistry at this point in their schooling.
I then press the matter, and ask what does the term "organic" mean. In reply I'm told that it means that organic things are safe, natural, and so on. In response I ask whether they would eat arsenic, as it is naturally occurring. I explain that just because something is naturally occurring, it doesn't necessarily follow that it is safe.
The next question is whether they would ingest something like a cyanide salt, and receive an emphatic "No!" in response. This of course raises the question "Why?". After all, a compound like sodium cyanide is organic, and as the students have told me, organic things are safe and good for you.
At this point an explanation is in order, and discuss the different meanings attached to the word "organic". In particular, to scientists and chemists, "organic" describes a wide range of carbon-containing compounds, because hey, that's how we roll.
In short, it's always enjoyable to share knowledge during these workshops, and allowing the students to gain a more detailed understanding of the world around them.
Perhaps one of the more interesting issues I encounter as a chemist is that of chemophobia, an irrational fear of chemicals.
In my experience it emerges as a lack of understanding of what chemicals are, the fact that everything in our world is composed of chemicals, and most important of all, a lack of understanding of the relationship between dose and effect.
In relation to dose, the German/Swiss alchemist Phillipus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim, better known as Paracelsus, said it best:
"All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous"
Or as it is more simply put:
"The dose makes the poison"
One of the advantages of working with high school students in forensic/chemistry workshops is that it allows me to gauge their understanding of the chemical world. Whether it be a discussion on what the term "organic" means, the painful debate over the safety of vaccinations, or what everyday objects contain, the questions and feedback I receive are truly fascinating.
Perhaps one of my favourite demonstrations draws on the rather popular Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) hoax of years gone by. In my demonstrations, it begins by politely asking for volunteers from the audience, and if none are forthcoming, a bribe of crime scene tape works a charm. After the volunteers are assembled, I don my labcoat, goggles, and some nitrile gloves before continuing.
I then ask my volunteers to produce one of their hands, preferably their non-writing hand, before nervously producing a vial containing that dastardly compound, DHMO. After gingerly placing a drop on each of the volunteers' preferred and proferred hands, a short statement regarding the dangers of DHMO is read out. Ususally DHMO is switched out for the IUPAC name "oxidane", in order to throw off any students aware of the DHMO hoax.
Hide the children! It's oxidane!
The students are then questioned on any ill effects that they are experiencing following exposure. The effects I've had rattled off to me are curious, and have included anything from tremors, sweating and increased heart rate, to headaches, stomach cramps and dizziness. To quell any further worries, the ruse is revealed, and the students calm down significantly.
The goal of all this is to demonstrate that an awareness of chemistry, if not an active interest in it, combined with a healthy dose of skepticism, can prove invaluable.After all, it pays to be aware of the world around you, and to have at the very least a basic knowledge of how things work. This brings to mind a very salient quote by Neil Degrasse Tyson:
"If you're scientifically literate, the world looks very different to you"
In future posts, I will further discuss chemophobia and how people perceive chemicals, more broadly, chemistry.
Well, that wraps up this post. Thanks for reading!
I am currently a PhD student, studying in the field of forensic toxicology. I was first drawn to science at a young age, with the gift of a chemistry set that would, in today's world, be seen as rather dangerous. In my mind, the chemicals were rather innocuous, and allowed me to explore a world that exists parallel to our own, though on a much smaller scale. That chemistry set, that I still recall fondly, kindled a fire inside me to better understand our world. From simple experiments, like making pH indicators, crystallising compounds and so on, it provided much joy to me. It also allowed me to turn my hand bright orange, a result of an overzealous mind bored when the listed experiments were completed.
This fascination with science has not only lead to my current position as a PhD student in Sydney, but has also given me the opportunity to work with high school students, and present forensic science and chemistry workshops for those that are interested. The look of excitement and fascination on the faces of the students bestows a remarkable feeling, and I am glad to be able to have a chance to ignite and pass on a passion for science that a humble chemistry set ignited in me all those years ago.
The research that I am currently working on pertains to urine testing for recreational substances, specifically, cannabis use. Though urine testing for a range of licit and illicit substances is well established, in recent years there has been an increasing problem with the use of adulterants to chemically alter urine samples in order to obtain a false negative. Currently, I am exploring a range of oxidising agents and their effect on urine samples that have been spiked with a key metabolite of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy THC (THC-COOH).
The key issue with the use of adulterants, in particular oxidising adulterants, is that they react with the metabolites present in a positive urine sample. These reactions render common methods to test urine samples ineffective. From immunoassays such as ELISA, to mass spectrometric techniques, these samples fly under the radar, as it were, for subtle changes to the structure of the metabolites of interest result in novel compounds that are not associated with a positive urine sample. Therefore, it has been the goal of my research to react THC-COOH with a range of oxidising agents, and to explore whether novel reaction products are formed, and if so, whether they are stable and suitable for incorporation into current testing procedures.
Urine adulteration has therefore become an increasing problem for law enforcement agencies. This has been compounded by the availability of a number of oxidising agents, able to be bought online or at your local supermarket. On that note, from the fantastic Adult Swim cartoon Metalocalypse, some insight on this matter:
Pickles: Dudes, we party too hard, so our bodies are in
terrible shape. We gotta trick the doctor by making it seem like we're
in really good shape. And there's only one way to do that. Bleach. [holds up a jug of bleach] Here, drink this Murderface. [hands it to Murderface]
Skwisgaar: Uhh, maybe this ams a stupid question, buts, why don'ts we just pours bleach into our cups of...urines?
Pickles:[looking angry at the suggestion] No! Drink the bleach!
Nathan: Bleach is healthy. It's mostly water. And we are mostly water. Therefore, we are bleach.
Or if you prefer a clip:
As a sidenote, please don't drink bleach. Pretty please?
Results have been promising to date. A number of viable oxidising agents have been selected, including betadine, alkaline hypochlorite (bleach), potassium/sodium nitrite, and pyridinium chlorochromate. As THC-COOH is quite prone to oxidation, a number of viable intermediates and products have been isolated, and are in the process of being analysed. For the oxidising agents containing halogens, it appears that electrophilic aromatic substitution (EAS) produces mono-halogen derivatives of THC-COOH as intermediates, with the di-halogen (di-chloro and di-iodo) THC-COOH derivatives representing the ultimate products. For nitrite-based reactions, an unstable nitroso-containing derivative forms, which undergoes further reaction to produce a stable nitro-THC-COOH compound.
Well, that covers who I am and what I do. As for this blog, well, I intend to comment on the perception of science, chemistry and drugs within society, and to discuss fascinating articles and the like.
So, thank you for reading this far. I truly hope that you will find my writings and ramblings fascinating. With kindest regards,
Nathan
