• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New breathalyzer can detect marijuana

JacksinPA

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,771
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
New breathalyzer can detect marijuana -- ScienceDaily

University of Pittsburgh

Summary:
A team has developed a breathalyzer device that can measure the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound in marijuana, in the user's breath. The breathalyzer was developed using carbon nanotubes, tiny tubes of carbon 100,000 times smaller than a human hair. Nanotechnology sensors can detect THC at levels comparable to or better than mass spectrometry, which is considered the gold standard for THC detection.
============================================
With the spreading legalization of pot, the need for field testing equipment for the detection & measurement of THC has become a hot area. There are others working on different approaches but this one seems to have the promise of being able to quantitatively measure THC in a person's breath.
 
JacksinPA said:
New breathalyzer can detect marijuana -- ScienceDaily

University of Pittsburgh

Summary:
A team has developed a breathalyzer device that can measure the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound in marijuana, in the user's breath. The breathalyzer was developed using carbon nanotubes, tiny tubes of carbon 100,000 times smaller than a human hair. Nanotechnology sensors can detect THC at levels comparable to or better than mass spectrometry, which is considered the gold standard for THC detection.
============================================
With the spreading legalization of pot, the need for field testing equipment for the detection & measurement of THC has become a hot area. There are others working on different approaches but this one seems to have the promise of being able to quantitatively measure THC in a person's breath.
Click to expand...

Being as how THC stays in your system for at least a month, they are going to have a field day. Every stoner will test positive.
 
If this is the same thing I read about elsewhere, it specifically only works if you smoked recently, possibly vaped. But not if you just ate a handful of edibles.
 
I want you to blow into this.

What is it?

A new breathalyzer that detects THC.

No thanks.
 
Not that much info there but it does seem like it would be a more fair way to determine if someone was actually impaired when driving, rather than current blood tests that reflect usage up to a month after.

I dont know if they can gauge the amount in those blood fests tho...does the content taper off after time? (I'd think so) Do they have benchmarks that can interpret the influence on someone over time?

I live in a 'legal' state, but I havent seen this addressed in general local media. Should see what's out there.
 
d0gbreath said:
I want you to blow into this.

What is it?

A new breathalyzer that detects THC.

No thanks.
Click to expand...

Which results in automatic license suspension in most states. Depending on your circumstances (especially nearer to urban centers with subways/busses/uber) that may be the best bet, but it isn't for everyone.

Even in MA. There, the refusal to blow into a breathalyzer cannot be entered into evidence, but that's under our more protective state constitution than federally. Unless things have changed in the ten years it's been since I had reason to research it, federally they can charge you with OUI AND include evidence that you refused the breathalyzer. Not in MA. But they still sure as hell can charge you, and you also get a license suspension.
 
i'd be curious to learn more about this. anyone who has done pot knows that you can test positive weeks after you are no longer intoxicated.
 
Mr Person said:
Which results in automatic license suspension in most states. Depending on your circumstances (especially nearer to urban centers with subways/busses/uber) that may be the best bet, but it isn't for everyone.

Even in MA. There, the refusal to blow into a breathalyzer cannot be entered into evidence, but that's under our more protective state constitution than federally. Unless things have changed in the ten years it's been since I had reason to research it, federally they can charge you with OUI AND include evidence that you refused the breathalyzer. Not in MA. But they still sure as hell can charge you, and you also get a license suspension.
Click to expand...

In some places they will just forcibly draw your blood while screaming "Stop resisting!" I find that to be appalling.
 
d0gbreath said:
In some places they will just forcibly draw your blood while screaming "Stop resisting!" I find that to be appalling.
Click to expand...

Really? Where?
 
JacksinPA said:
New breathalyzer can detect marijuana -- ScienceDaily

University of Pittsburgh

Summary:
A team has developed a breathalyzer device that can measure the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound in marijuana, in the user's breath. The breathalyzer was developed using carbon nanotubes, tiny tubes of carbon 100,000 times smaller than a human hair. Nanotechnology sensors can detect THC at levels comparable to or better than mass spectrometry, which is considered the gold standard for THC detection.
============================================
With the spreading legalization of pot, the need for field testing equipment for the detection & measurement of THC has become a hot area. There are others working on different approaches but this one seems to have the promise of being able to quantitatively measure THC in a person's breath.
Click to expand...

Good. I know far too many people who believe driving stoned is somehow better than driving drunk. I'm usually like, WTF? You can't mean that.
 
I've recently changed my stance on marijuana legalization, coming out in favor of it. I'm glad they are treating "driving while stoned" like "driving while drunk", otherwise I would've stuck with my original opinion.
 
JacksinPA said:
New breathalyzer can detect marijuana -- ScienceDaily

University of Pittsburgh

Summary:
A team has developed a breathalyzer device that can measure the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound in marijuana, in the user's breath. The breathalyzer was developed using carbon nanotubes, tiny tubes of carbon 100,000 times smaller than a human hair. Nanotechnology sensors can detect THC at levels comparable to or better than mass spectrometry, which is considered the gold standard for THC detection.
============================================
With the spreading legalization of pot, the need for field testing equipment for the detection & measurement of THC has become a hot area. There are others working on different approaches but this one seems to have the promise of being able to quantitatively measure THC in a person's breath.
Click to expand...

Excellent.

Pot is an incredibly dangerous and addictive drug, and anything which can be done to regulate its use is a positive.
 
Helix said:
i'd be curious to learn more about this. anyone who has done pot knows that you can test positive weeks after you are no longer intoxicated.
Click to expand...

Correct; and with it being medical now, it highlights the need for more information. If the government would stop this nonsense with the schedule one, we could get some real medical testing done to determine metabolization rates to adequately determine intoxication. As someone who takes it almost nightly to stop stomach issues, I don't drive after I take it - but if I metabolize it slowly I could fail a test even if I am not actually intoxicated.

The government needs to stop this madness and remove it from scheduling. It's a miracle drug.
 
Roadvirus said:
I've recently changed my stance on marijuana legalization, coming out in favor of it. I'm glad they are treating "driving while stoned" like "driving while drunk", otherwise I would've stuck with my original opinion.
Click to expand...

They have to treat it as a DUI. No one should be driving intoxicated, on any substance, cannabis included.
 
calamity said:
Good. I know far too many people who believe driving stoned is somehow better than driving drunk. I'm usually like, WTF? You can't mean that.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that tests have been conducted years ago with stoned drivers. Maybe in driving simulators?

What they found is that stoned drivers are actually more cautious and conservative than drunk drivers. 2 different drugs having 2 different sets of effects.
 
Thoreau72 said:
I'm pretty sure that tests have been conducted years ago with stoned drivers. Maybe in driving simulators?

What they found is that stoned drivers are actually more cautious and conservative than drunk drivers. 2 different drugs having 2 different sets of effects.
Click to expand...

This is correct, however, I don't think anyone should be on any mind altering substance. Cannabis, for example, makes me very sleepy. So while I would be cautious and more conservative, I'd also be at risk of falling asleep at the wheel.

We need testing on the metabolite range to determine with any efficacy how intoxicated someone can be.
 
Obscurity said:
This is correct, however, I don't think anyone should be on any mind altering substance. Cannabis, for example, makes me very sleepy. So while I would be cautious and more conservative, I'd also be at risk of falling asleep at the wheel.

We need testing on the metabolite range to determine with any efficacy how intoxicated someone can be.
Click to expand...

Is caffeine a mind-altering substance? Nicotine?

When it comes to driving, today's behavior with cell phones is a far greater threat to safe driving than most mind-altering substances IMO. Distracted driving is far more dangerous than some mild form of euphoria IMO.
 
Thoreau72 said:
I'm pretty sure that tests have been conducted years ago with stoned drivers. Maybe in driving simulators?

What they found is that stoned drivers are actually more cautious and conservative than drunk drivers. 2 different drugs having 2 different sets of effects.
Click to expand...

1. Driving simulators.

2. Inexperienced smokers: impaired in both individual tasks and driving simulator

3. Experienced smokers: somewhat impaired in individuals tasks, but more cautious than sober drivers and not impaired.

4. Drunks: more impaired in both

5. Drunk + smoked, whether or not experienced: even more impaired than just drunk.

So basically, it found that if you're used to smoking you are probably going to be unimpaired driving, but it obviously depends on the amount/etc. But that's not an argument that will go anywhere with the public, data or not.

At any rate, the data line up with what police report: field sobriety tests generally do not catch people who are merely stoned since their movements are in fact not impaired.
 
Mr Person said:
1. Driving simulators.

2. Inexperienced smokers: impaired in both individual tasks and driving simulator

3. Experienced smokers: somewhat impaired in individuals tasks, but more cautious than sober drivers and not impaired.

4. Drunks: more impaired in both

5. Drunk + smoked, whether or not experienced: even more impaired than just drunk.

So basically, it found that if you're used to smoking you are probably going to be unimpaired driving, but it obviously depends on the amount/etc. But that's not an argument that will go anywhere with the public, data or not.

At any rate, the data line up with what police report: field sobriety tests generally do not catch people who are merely stoned since their movements are in fact not impaired.
Click to expand...


I believe this is the paper you're referring to...

THE EFFECT OF CANNABIS COMPARED WITH ALCOHOL ON DRIVING

"Abstract:
[FONT=&quot]The prevalence of both alcohol and cannabis use and the high morbidity associated with motor vehicle crashes has lead to a plethora of research on the link between the two. Drunk drivers are involved in 25% of motor vehicle fatalities, and many accidents involve drivers who test positive for cannabis. Cannabis and alcohol acutely impair several driving-related skills in a dose-related fashion, but the effects of cannabis vary more between individuals than they do with alcohol because of tolerance, differences in smoking technique, and different absorptions of Δ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]9[/FONT][FONT=&quot]-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active ingredient in marijuana. Detrimental effects of cannabis use vary in a dose-related fashion, and are more pronounced with highly automatic driving functions than with more complex tasks that require conscious control, whereas with alcohol produces an opposite pattern of impairment. Because of both this and an increased awareness that they are impaired, marijuana smokers tend to compensate effectively while driving by utilizing a variety of behavioral strategies. Combining marijuana with alcohol eliminates the ability to use such strategies effectively, however, and results in impairment even at doses which would be insignificant were they of either drug alone. Epidemiological studies have been inconclusive regarding whether cannabis use causes an increased risk of accidents; in contrast, unanimity exists that alcohol use increases crash risk. Furthermore, the risk from driving under the influence of both alcohol and cannabis is greater than the risk of driving under the influence of either alone. Future research should focus on resolving contradictions posed by previous studies, and patients who smoke cannabis should be counseled to wait several hours before driving, and avoid combining the two drugs."


At the end of the day, cannabis needs to be studies thoroughly. The scheduling of the drug is clearly standing in the way of this.[/FONT]
 
Midwest Lib said:
I believe this is the paper you're referring to...

THE EFFECT OF CANNABIS COMPARED WITH ALCOHOL ON DRIVING

"Abstract:
The prevalence of both alcohol and cannabis use and the high morbidity associated with motor vehicle crashes has lead to a plethora of research on the link between the two. Drunk drivers are involved in 25% of motor vehicle fatalities, and many accidents involve drivers who test positive for cannabis. Cannabis and alcohol acutely impair several driving-related skills in a dose-related fashion, but the effects of cannabis vary more between individuals than they do with alcohol because of tolerance, differences in smoking technique, and different absorptions of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active ingredient in marijuana. Detrimental effects of cannabis use vary in a dose-related fashion, and are more pronounced with highly automatic driving functions than with more complex tasks that require conscious control, whereas with alcohol produces an opposite pattern of impairment. Because of both this and an increased awareness that they are impaired, marijuana smokers tend to compensate effectively while driving by utilizing a variety of behavioral strategies. Combining marijuana with alcohol eliminates the ability to use such strategies effectively, however, and results in impairment even at doses which would be insignificant were they of either drug alone. Epidemiological studies have been inconclusive regarding whether cannabis use causes an increased risk of accidents; in contrast, unanimity exists that alcohol use increases crash risk. Furthermore, the risk from driving under the influence of both alcohol and cannabis is greater than the risk of driving under the influence of either alone. Future research should focus on resolving contradictions posed by previous studies, and patients who smoke cannabis should be counseled to wait several hours before driving, and avoid combining the two drugs."


At the end of the day, cannabis needs to be studies thoroughly. The scheduling of the drug is clearly standing in the way of this.
Click to expand...

It may be a related study.

It says "Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 May 1" and below it, something about a final form being published in some journal in 2009. I could swear what I was referring to is from the last few years. Either way, it sounds consistent with what I read
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom