New Technology: Roadside Drug Test

[lysergic]

Device Offers a Roadside Dope Test
Alexander Gelfand
Technology Review
8.4.09


Later this year, Philips will introduce a handheld electronic device that uses magnetic nanoparticles to screen for five major recreational drugs.

The device is intended for roadside use by law enforcement agencies and includes a disposable plastic cartridge and a handheld analyzer. The cartridge has two components: a sample collector for gathering saliva and a measurement chamber containing magnetic nanoparticles. The particles are coated with ligands that bind to one of five different drug groups: cocaine, heroin, cannabis, amphetamine, and methamphetamine.

Philips began investigating the possibility of building a magnetic biodetector in 2001, two years after a team of researchers at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, first used magnetic sensors similar to those employed in hard drives to sniff out certain biowarfare agents. The NRL scientists labeled biological molecules designed to bind to target agents with magnetic microbeads, and then scanned for the tagged targets optically and magnetically. The latter approach used the same giant magnetoresistant (GMR) sensors that read the bits on an iPod's hard drive. They quickly developed a shoebox-sized prototype capable of detecting toxins, including ricin and anthrax.

Philips initially developed both a GMR sensor and an optical one that relies on frustrated total internal reflection (FTIR)--the same phenomenon that underlies fingerprint scanners and multitouch screens. The company decided to go the FTIR route in order to exploit its expertise in building optical sensors for consumer electronics devices, says Jeroen Nieuwenhuis, technical director of Philips Handheld Immunoassays, the division responsible for commercializing the biosensor technology, which goes by the trade name Magnotech.

Moving to an optical detection method also allowed Philips to simplify the test cartridges that the device employs, making them easier to mass-produce, says Nieuwenhuis. With the current FTIR-based system, "we can make simpler cartridges in larger quantities more easily," he adds.

Once the device's sample collector has absorbed enough saliva, it automatically changes color and can then be snapped into the measurement chamber, where the saliva and nanoparticles mix. An electromagnet speeds the nanoparticles to the sensor surface, different portions of which have been pretreated with one of the five target-drug molecules. If traces of any of the five drugs are present in the sample, the nanoparticles will bind to them. If the sample is drug free, the nanoparticles will bind to the drug-coated sensor surface instead.

The orientation of the magnetic field that first drew the nanoparticles to the sensor is then reversed, pulling away any nano-labeled drug molecules that may accidentally have stuck to the sensor surface but leaving legitimately bound ones in place. This last magnetic trick promises to reduce what Larry Kricka, a clinical chemist at the University of Pennsylvania who recently co-authored an article in Clinical Chemistry on the use of magnetism in point-of-care testing, calls "a major restraint in such assays": the unintentional capture of molecular labels on the test surface, a leading cause of both false positives and false negatives. Kricka is not involved with Philips but does serve as a consultant to T2 Biosciences, a Cambridge, MA, firm that promotes a magnetic biosensor based on MRI technology.



During the analysis phase, a beam of light is bounced off the sensor. Any nanoparticles bound to the surface will change its refractive index, thereby altering the intensity of the reflected light and indicating the concentration of drugs in the sample. By immobilizing different drug molecules on different portions on the sensor surface, the analyzer is able to identify the drug traces in question. An electronic screen displays instructions and a simple color-coded readout of the results.

The test takes less than 90 seconds and can detect drugs at concentrations measured in parts-per-billion using a single microliter of saliva. The sensor is capable of even greater sensitivity--it has been used to detect cardiac troponin, a commonly used indicator of heart attack, at concentrations 1,000 times lower.

Philips plans ultimately to enter the healthcare market. It is working on a platform capable of testing blood as well as saliva and is seeking partners that can help expand its testing menu by providing it with additional biomarkers.

Other researchers have built experimental devices to magnetically detect a wide range of biomolecules in minuscule samples of blood or saliva at extremely low concentrations. Often this involves using microfluidic or magnetic forces to quickly shepherd the magnetically labeled molecules through scanners--though a group at the University of Utah has even built a prototype in which a sample-laden stick is swiped across a GMR sensor, like a credit-card through a reader.

The combination of high sensitivity, low sample volumes, miniaturization, speed, and ease of use has raised hopes for a handheld biosensor that could perform sophisticated tests with high accuracy.

"Everyone's trying to get there," says Kricka. "The question is who's going to win?" With Philips set to introduce its drug tester in Europe by the end of the year in partnership with the British diagnostics firm Cozart, the consumer electronics maker appears poised to take the prize.


http://www.technologyreview.com/biom...e/23111/page2/

Coming to a pig near you!

[Oblivion]

The device is intended for roadside use by law enforcement agencies

Yea, Im sure they'll never use it at concerts or festivals. Never.

[cpshult]

Originally Posted by Oblivion

Yea, Im sure they'll never use it at concerts or festivals. Never.

Uh oh.. now I wonder how they will deal with people who have legal perscriptions for ADD medication but don't have it on them..

[Sweet_Pea]

Yay! another way to arrest more non violent people....meanwhile....the violent rapist down the street has struck again....lets give the guy with drugs 15 years...and the rapist 10....b/c DRUGS ARE BAD!

[jay-pheno]

seems like this violates some rights , like mofos would need a warrent to take a saliva sample being it contains dna , i dunno
this is bad tech for sure ,, soon they will have gizmos that sniff farts in crowds , detecting terrorists by how much rice they eat .. fuckers !

[Hippie3]

only way a cop's getting any saliva from me
will be dripping off his face

[prism]

I wonder if this is like the tech they use to search for Bombs and Drugs at the airport?

I would assume they will make it mandatory for a driver to submit to the test for the privilege of getting a licence. If you refuse the test in my state they threaten you with longer Suspension of privileges. Which is BS but it scares most first timers into testing.

Sigh...

[dead_diver]

Where can I buy stock in this technology? If I can't beat 'em I may as well make a buck

[masterplain88]

thats bullshit it bad enought when you get caught to pass the test. now they got a machine that can detect it. thats crazzy. i remember something a while back about the thc saliva test but never seen it put to use.

[masterplain88]

thats crazzy

[kcmoxtractor]

Yeah I'm definitely not gonna give it up willingly. Fuck that.
That's a good question about Adderal CP, I wonder how they will handle that. I also wonder if it detects opiates in general or specifically heroin. That would suck to be prescribed pain medication when this thing comes around.

[plantman21]

hopefully pot laws change very quickly aand it will be a waste of time. If your not high while driveing then your good to go.
Plantman

[RestartLater]

Originally Posted by plantman21

hopefully pot laws change very quickly aand it will be a waste of time. If your not high while driveing then your good to go.
Plantman

yea that would be nice to see things change!

I am sure these are like any another drug test. Test for only amounts not whether your high at that time of driving. The difference here is they supposedly will be able to determine under-the-influence right on the spot.

[TVCasualty]

They're going to have to figure out a way to avoid testing the kids of politicians, judges, police chiefs, and the like. I'd also expect these machines to be very expensive, and where I live the sheriff and police budgets are being slashed. There are actually fewer deputies on the street in my county today than there were two weeks ago.

On the other hand, this device generates profits so may be purchased as an investment by cash-strapped departments.

But on the third hand, the Supreme Court just ruled we have the right to cross-examine breathalyzer evidence in DUI cases (that damn Constitution tying cops hands again!) and you can bet that will happen with this machine. This level of sensitivity requires a skilled operator and most likely some very precise calibration; can a unit remain calibrated and give accurate results while bouncing around in a car all day and is used by a law enforcement officer who is clearly not a trained scientist? I guess we'll have to wait for the lawsuits to find out.

[Oblivion]

Notice they're cartridge based. That means cartridge replacement, that means money. Get to the bottom of anything the gov does and you will find a pile of cash.

[RestartLater]

Well sure it is about the money...LOL But then for instance a state agency where I used to live were carrying piss tests around that were over 6 month past expiration and in a hot car over the recommended heat by the manufacture. Sad things how many false positives put people on probation back in jail or locked up somewhere. If I had not kept that piss test bottle I would have never had the proof to help the in question teenager that had no longer been using any drugs at all. But then as the probation officier stated during the next test, " That bottle will be leaving with me negative or positive."

So to cover themselves for administering expired tests this was their answer. I luckily did believe this teenager that he / she had not been using any drugs and had him or her tested at the doctors office the same day a false positive was found.. Guess what him / or here was negative at the expense of me not the state agency, whom caused the entire matter.

Of course as long as there is money made in testing people for drugs it will continue :+{ Legal or not!

RestartLater

[bugs]

Originally Posted by Oblivion

Notice they're cartridge based. That means cartridge replacement, that means money. Get to the bottom of anything the gov does and you will find a pile of cash.

Not just da gummint. That cheap razor expensive blade approach makes billions for the companies that use it.
They'll sell the instrument at cost or less, and make a huge margin on the assays.
They'll soon be selling them to the private sector, if not already.

I can just see it now. Go to work in the morning, puch in and spit on the time clock.

[Dank Side Of The Shroom]

yeah thas shitty. i seen them talking about this on some show the other night. sux very much so.

[RestartLater]

Originally Posted by bugs

Not just da gummint. That cheap razor expensive blade approach makes billions for the companies that use it.
They'll sell the instrument at cost or less, and make a huge margin on the assays.
They'll soon be selling them to the private sector, if not already.

I can just see it now. Go to work in the morning, puch in and spit on the time clock.

Well sure they will because now there is usually a testing facility in almost every bigger city / town to test employees prior to employment.

By using this method they are looking at cutting their drug screening costs and doing it themselves. Which will not be under a regulated environment at all. Take for instance said employee and supervisor administering said saliva testee do not always get along.... It would be very easy for someone to get fired whether positive or negative results are found. After all big business will factor in any possible lawsuits verses the cost savings of administering the tests themselves. Sorry the accountant is coming out of me today.... LOL

RestartLater

[eatyualive]

ill let em test my ball sweat before they test my saliva...

[mystic]

Originally Posted by TVCasualty

They're going to have to figure out a way to avoid testing the kids of politicians, judges, police chiefs, and the like. I'd also expect these machines to be very expensive, and where I live the sheriff and police budgets are being slashed. There are actually fewer deputies on the street in my county today than there were two weeks ago.

In my county there are a total 2 county cops per shift now. Its good for the chance of getting pulled over not good if there really is a emergency that needs attended to.

As for this super sniffer spitter devise. KISS MY LILY WHITE ASS AND TAKE IT TO COURT AND THEN GET A LAB TECH TO PROVE IT.

[Diacetyl-M]

So would traces show up even if your not high? What if you just got a small amount of frug in your mouth like rolling a joint and licking your fingers etc. I don't have a full understanding of how this test works.. Does anyone know the answer to that? How long are various drugs testable in your saliva, and do you actually have to ingest and metabolize the drug to test positive? I'm assuming it must test for metabolites? People metabolize drugs differently depending on a host of factors... anything from age/sex, to prescription meds and liver/kidney function. Theres a lot of room for error with this I think. Not like a breathlyzer... much less room for false positives with that (unless you just swished with mouthwash perhaps?).

Either way this invention sucks and everyone should be really really mean to the people who are developing this lol.

[cpshult]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

only way a cop's getting any saliva from me
will be dripping off his face

lol -- i really wonder if you are unwilling to give a sample what they will do

you can refuse a breathalizer -- but when can they force you to take a blood sample?

i know when i got popped for public intox i refused breathalizer until the next day (still drunk =/) when i thought i had sobered up -- and no blood test

[eatyualive]

don't they charge you if you refuse a breathalizer? i think it would be something similar to this.

[toadshroom]

Originally Posted by eatyualive

ill let em test my ball sweat before they test my saliva...

lmao... and they can have my butt putty

[greenie]

grab ur guns folks... its almost time...

[roc]

I have a really bad case of cotton mouth right now officker...

[GadgetGuy]

Originally Posted by Sweet_Pea

Yay! another way to arrest more non violent people....meanwhile....the violent rapist down the street has struck again....lets give the guy with drugs 15 years...and the rapist 10....b/c DRUGS ARE BAD!

Fuck those pigs and I couldn't agree with you more. So many people who are actually BAD people get away with so much shit but pot smoking franky can't even drive down the fucking road anymore.

[TVCasualty]

Originally Posted by Diacetyl-M

Not like a breathlyzer... much less room for false positives with that (unless you just swished with mouthwash perhaps?).

Breathalyzers are garbage-tech. They are often erroneous, the software is buggy, and it goes on and on from there. In a real lab they wouldn't even qualify as scientific instruments. But that's irrelevant, they still use 'em all the time although the backlash has been growing.



And ALWAYS refuse a breathalyzer. You lose your license automatically if you refuse, but you lose it anyway if the bogus machine says you're guilty so it's best to lose it without getting the DUI. I am of course assuming that you are not truly a danger to others while out on the road; I'm not advocating ever driving while truly intoxicated, but .08 is a bit lower than that and the test equipment is often faulty and snares many many people who are not any kind of threat at all.

Consider that any time you read about a cop, lawyer, judge, or legislator getting popped for DUI, the story almost always mentions that they refused the breathalyzer. That doesn't mean you won't get busted for DUI, just that you won't be spoon feeding them the 'evidence' to use against you. Your defense takes place in court, not on the side of the road, so take the long view when deciding what to do. Then again, if you're in Texas or one of the other states that's exploring allowing police to conduct forced blood draws right there at the scene and the cops try to draw your blood without your consent, it's probably time to shift to defending yourself there on the side of the road. Forcefully. You'll probably get your skull caved in, but you might prevail and either way it'll become an unpopular tactic if every incident resulted in a national news story.

[bugs]

Originally Posted by eatyualive

ill let em test my ball sweat before they test my saliva...

Be careful what you wish for

[Diacetyl-M]

Breathalyzers are garbage-tech. They are often erroneous, the software is buggy, and it goes on and on from there. In a real lab they wouldn't even qualify as scientific instruments. But that's irrelevant, they still use 'em all the time although the backlash has been growing.

Sorry, I didn't mean that breathalyzers didn't have false posistives as I've read about many many such cases like you mentioned exisit. I just meant that there seems to be even more room for false positives with this new tech because of the differences in how drugs and alcohol are metabolized. The technique itself (not the equipment) for measuring blood-alcohol via the breath, is a very accurate representation of the blood alcohol levels and of how intoxicated the person is due to the even distribution throughout the body.

My mom refused a breathalyzer once and got charged but the judge let her off with no penalty of any kind lol. She hadn't been drinking either, just heard you should refuse so did...

[TVCasualty]

Originally Posted by Diacetyl-M

The technique itself (not the equipment) for measuring blood-alcohol via the breath, is a very accurate representation of the blood alcohol levels and of how intoxicated the person is due to the even distribution throughout the body.

But they don't measure blood alcohol. They infer it. The software helps with that, and the software is pure shit according to programmers who've looked it over.

Not to mention...

What these machines actually detect and measure is any chemical compund that contains the methyl group in its molecular structure. There are thousands of such compounds, including quite a few which can be found on the human breath. And this machine that determines a person's guilt or innocence will "see" all of those chemicals as alcohol and report a falsely high "blood-alcohol" concentration (BAC).

http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/26/br...asure-alcohol/

[Vincent]

just dont drink or drive intoxicated... problem solved.. Its pretty simple.

The governments always trying to make money off the normal innocent citizen. Thats how corrupt the government is. The "system" is out to take advantage of you.

[SilvrHairDevil]

You have to realize that with talk of legalizing pot, has to come ways of roadside testing for it, likely accompanied by stiff tickets, handed out on the spot.

Many of the legalization proposals mention Legalize it and make tax money. Well, that's one of the ways they'll tax it.

[TVCasualty]

Originally Posted by Vincent

just dont drink or drive intoxicated... problem solved.. Its pretty simple.

The governments always trying to make money off the normal innocent citizen. Thats how corrupt the government is. The "system" is out to take advantage of you.

The solution doesn't sound so simple in light of your second paragraph. If "the system" is out to take advantage of us and make money off innocent citizens, then simply obeying the law isn't going to cut it. If you read some of the other posts on that DUIblog site I linked you'll see that plenty of people are being charged and convicted of DUI who were not drunk or who were not driving, so it's not really that simple after all.

[Redlocks]

they'd have to reqrite law for this too, like it's not technically illegal to BE high, but if proven it would be so there'd be a decent grace period id assume, i could be wrong. and then they'd have a fight for everyone whose rights it does infringe on. id definitely say its a strong possibility, but i'd doubt itd be in effect or use for another 5 years or so. sounds pretty hard to beat though. and hippie i love your respone, only way a cop'll get my saliva is dripping off his face, that's amazing lol.

[cuts]

Originally Posted by kcmoxtractor

Yeah I'm definitely not gonna give it up willingly. Fuck that.
That's a good question about Adderal CP, I wonder how they will handle that. I also wonder if it detects opiates in general or specifically heroin. That would suck to be prescribed pain medication when this thing comes around.

It will most likely only pick up heroin, morphine because many other opiates won't show up in the NIDA test

[vil3x]

imo. it's not so much a bad idea.
i mean. I honestly don't wanna be driving on the same road with someone who's under the influence.
you shouldn't drive at all when high,drunk, etc. it could end up costing you your life in the end of death or jail time for killing an innocent person or child.
you should be in a good situation somewhere safe and if you do gotta go out. have someone else drive who isn't under the influence.

and if the pig decides to pull you guys over and you are in backseat and decides to test you who isn't driving and doing nothing stupid. i'd fight that and get the best lawyer and sue the city and the pig for everything i could get for it.

i've lost numbers of friends and family from under the influence drivers and it's not fun.

[floppypeter]

[Hippie3]

it's not technically illegal to BE high

depends on the 'high'-
illegal drugs can be
charged as 'internal possession'
which is still a crime.

[TVCasualty]

Originally Posted by vil3x

imo. it's not so much a bad idea.

Well that's just it... these things never stay confined within the original scope of the idea; it will creep into other aspects of life and before we know it kids will have to blow into the machine before going through the metal detector before entering their high school where they can walk quietly in single-file lines down the halls looking neither left nor right under the watchful eyes of the ever-present armed police officers.

These things are all connected. There is a stigma associated with causing a wreck because you're high or drunk that isn't really there for those who wreck because they were arguing on the phone or texting their friends or eating a double bacon cheeseburger AND talking on the phone, yet the evidence shows texting while driving is every bit as dangerous as driving intoxicated and driving while talking on a cell is only slightly less risky. The people in the other car are just as dead no matter what causes the wreck.

MADD wants everyone busted for DUI to get an ignition interlock device, an easily defeated bit of trash-tech that will only really serve to make the manufacturer a ton of money, sort of like drug tests in general or this new roadside bullshit specifically.

Back when I was learning how to drive, I was also learning how to smoke pot. In fact, I learned how to do both at the same time and although my reaction time may be a bit slower if I'm stoned, I'm also driving a bit slower too, and not getting pissed off at other drivers' stupidity or being aggressive, and aggressive driving is the most dangerous type of all. So, if you yank all the pot smoking drivers off the road, it may well become more dangerous out there.

Lastly, if this tech is anywhere near as reliable and robust as breathalyzers, then a lot of innocent people are going to be sent to jail.

[vil3x]

These things are all connected. There is a stigma associated with causing a wreck because you're high or drunk that isn't really there for those who wreck because they were arguing on the phone or texting their friends or eating a double bacon cheeseburger AND talking on the phone, yet the evidence shows texting while driving is every bit as dangerous as driving intoxicated and driving while talking on a cell is only slightly less risky. The people in the other car are just as dead no matter what causes the wreck.

actually in state of Michigan. texting while driving is now illegal was just passed a month ago or so here. it's a 2nd offence just like when wearing seatbelts was first made illegal where they can't pull you over for it. but they can pull you over for something else, etc. i agree cell phones are just as bad.

[SilvrHairDevil]

Here in British Columbia, new legislation is due in Jan:

No operating or holding hand-held cellphones or other electronic devices.

No sending or reading emails and/or texting (e.g., BlackBerry, PDA, cellphone).

No operating or holding hand-held music or portable gaming devices (e.g., MP3
players, iPods).

No manual programming or adjusting GPS systems, whether built in to the vehicle or not, while driving. Settings must be programmed before driving.

Permitted actions and devices:

Hands-free cellphones that are built in or securely fixed to the vehicle, and used by pressing a single button — once only — in order to activate a hands-free device for incoming or outgoing calls.

Pre-programmed and voice-activated GPS devices.

Two-way radios for industry (e.g., trucking, logging, oil and gas).

Any of the above devices can be used if the vehicle is legally parked and not impeding traffic.

911 calls to report an emergency.

And we will still be able to tune the radio and change CDs.

[copelandiaKidd]

eeeeek!

[Hippie3]

nice of them to leave us radio
fuckers...

[DarkLestor]

: horse:
uke:


AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!