• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Device Offers a Roadside Dope Test

phr

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
36,682
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.

Link!
 
Fuck man. People shouldn't be driving around drunk or high but what's next? Some device that can scan a street full of crowded people to find the person carrying a bag of weed?

Well it'd probably be a good time to invest in Phillips every police department in the country is going to want one of these.
 
Such a device would squash the prohibitionist's argument that legalizing pot would lead to more stoned drivers since there is not way to detect present use. I see this as a positive thing. Get stoned and sit in your home/walk to a park!
 
But drugs can be detected by saliva for a few days...what if you smoke some weed 2 days before getting pulled over and spit positive for THC? DUId?!
 
They already have a saliva test in Australia where I live. It doesn't seem to be that commonly used but they do break it out and catch some drug drivers. They claim that it only detects marijuana a few hours after it has been smoked but I do recall a fellow bluelighter saying they got done the day after a heavy smoking session.

The test in Australia is different to that one though its like a little strip you have to put on your tongue. They only test for MDMA, methapmhetamine and cannabis. I also just read today about another bluelighters mate who was smoking weed all day, including 5 minutes before they took the test, and passed.
 
But drugs can be detected by saliva for a few days...what if you smoke some weed 2 days before getting pulled over and spit positive for THC? DUId?!

Exactly. Also, what's the threshold for intoxication? Just another way to push drug testing.
 
Before you guys jump outta your skin, I have taken many saliva thc tests, and always passed, even when smoking a few hours before. I think you litterally have to have THC in your mouth from smoking to fail. I would be more worried about 'heroin'. Which moreso means 'opiates'. shit like that DOES come up positive. Even if you were in withdrawal, with just a very little bit of H in your system.
 
The article never makes clear whether the new machines are going to be testing for actual molecules of active drug, or some distinctive metabolite of each, that reaches detectable levels in saliva. I assume it's probably the latter, since I'd guess not all psychoactive drugs reach detectable concentrations in saliva and mucus, even when they're taken in highly intoxicating doses. It's probably easier to design the machine to look for simpler molecules, too.

If so, I'm afraid being a marijuana smoker and driving a car at all could become mutually exclusive, depending on what metabolite(s) they choose as the indicator, and what its pharmacokinetics are. Think this would be an outrage that wouldn't be stood for? I doubt it. After all, public and private makers and administrators of drug screens in the US don't face much of an uphill battle setting the bar for recent marijuana use at orders of magnitude longer than the effects of one marijuana intoxication. Only 10% of all Americans currently ever use marijuana, and they don't draw much sympathy from any civil servants having something to do with motor vehicles.

Also, as you mentioned phrozen, who else is going to get the rights to carry and use these, if they get small and cheap enough and prove highly reliable? Will institutions, places of business, and licensing bodies across the country be willing and able to discriminate against recent illicit drug users? Will a hardassed Asian nation someday be denying me a visa and banning me for life, because traces of drugs were found during my mandatory 5-second screening at their embassy?
 
I wouldn't invest in Phillips on the back of this technolgy,
Phillips are kind of smug with their new magnetic particle technology, what they don't know is that all their patents on this technology are invalidated by published prior art, also their technology infringes another earlier patent. If they succesfully market the technology then at some point expect fur to fly.
 
mdao said:
The article never makes clear whether the new machines are going to be testing for actual molecules of active drug, or some distinctive metabolite of each, that reaches detectable levels in saliva.
My guess would be metabolites. Also, a lot of drugs(although in very small amounts) pass through untouched and are excreted in their free form. Meth comes to mind, and I recall a story in here of people saving their urine in order to drink it later on...

Also, as you mentioned phrozen, who else is going to get the rights to carry and use these, if they get small and cheap enough and prove highly reliable? Will institutions, places of business, and licensing bodies across the country be willing and able to discriminate against recent illicit drug users? Will a hardassed Asian nation someday be denying me a visa and banning me for life, because traces of drugs were found during my mandatory 5-second screening at their embassy?
By threshold I meant what level is considered active intoxication. With alcohol it's .08. What about cannabis and what about drugs that exhibit tolerance and can be legally taken?
You bring up good points though, of who else will be jumping on this bandwagon.



Stories about similar devices come out ever so often. And I remember seeing at least one or two in this forum. They usually aren't much more than a thinly disguised press release to get investment.
 
Top