SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Officials told residents of a small Colorado community [Hugo, CO] not to drink or shower in tap water Thursday because one of the town's wells may have been contaminated with THC, marijuana's intoxicating chemical.
[...] Investigators found signs that one of Hugo's five wells had been tampered with, but they hadn't determined whether someone deliberately tainted the water.
Hugo prohibits marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing facilities and retail marijuana stores, although those activities are legal elsewhere in the state.
Peter Perrone, owner of a marijuana testing facility in the Denver area, expressed doubt that THC could be in the water. The chemical isn't water-soluble, he told The Denver Post.
It's unlikely that consuming pot-tainted water would cause lasting health effects, said Mark Salley, a spokesman for the state Department of Public Health and Environment.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Ellis D. Tripp on Sunday July 24 2016, @01:45PM
Considering the little fact that THC isn't water soluble and all.
The "positive" result came from using a standard home urinalysis kit on a sample of tap water. Yes, the same lousy tests that commonly cross-react with stuff like ibuprofen or antibiotics.
"Society is like stew. If you don't keep it stirred up, you end up with a lot of scum on the top!"--Edward Abbey
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Sunday July 24 2016, @06:02PM
The "positive" result came from using a standard home urinalysis kit on a sample of tap water
That does not seem possible - the piss tests are looking for metabolites of cannabinoids and not the cannabinoids themselves. They don't detect THC, they detect what your body converts THC into as it processes out of your body. If they freaked out over a home test then they need to be much more concerned about the amount of dem damns hippies draining their lizard into the town water and not someone's lost stash fell in a well.
The home piss tests also say the reagent strip is for preliminary analysis only and includes a cup for storage of urine and postage to send it to a lab for GC/MS which has a near zero false positive rate.
Maybe they relied on a field test drug identification kit that selects for THC and not metabolites. I would imagine they have the same requirements to use a more accurate machine and assume the reagent test will throw false positives.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Sunday July 24 2016, @07:24PM
You can assume that the field test is always followed up with a more accurate analysis, but reports seem to show that the assumption is invalid. One can *hope* that it usually is...but I know of no evidence supporting that hope.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Ellis D. Tripp on Sunday July 24 2016, @08:23PM
From TFA:
He said a company that administers employee drug tests was the first to detect THC in Hugo's water. A tester sampled tap water, assuming it would be negative, but it was positive.
Apparently the cops followed up with field test (presumably looking for actual THC, not metabolites) that gave mixed results:
THC was detected in tests conducted with field kits, although other field tests were negative, sheriff's Capt. Michael Yowell said.
So apparently whatever is in the town's water, can trigger false positives on both the metabolite immunoassays AND at least some of the police field substance ID tests.
"Society is like stew. If you don't keep it stirred up, you end up with a lot of scum on the top!"--Edward Abbey