Public Address | Cafe | Hard News: Meth Perception

Russell Brown

Mon, 03 Jul 2017 20:17:20 +1200

It really seems like numbers under 10 µg per 100 cm^2 are just being, uh, greedy might be a word. If meth doesn’t actually stick to skin much better than wall, any numbers under 100 µg don’t even make sense, but of course you’d never be able to find that…

FletcherB

Mon, 03 Jul 2017 19:53:40 +1200

And everything sticks to infants, apparently…

Have you had one? It's essentially true... :D

linger

Mon, 03 Jul 2017 02:04:46 +1200

Ah, but the minimum level is decided by the Won't somebody think of the children? factor … hence the effective dose is much smaller — let's say divided by 100 to scale for order-of-magnitude mass ratio, so 100µg/ 100cm^2 = 1 mg/ m^2. And everything sticks to infants, apparently…
Try…

tussock

Mon, 03 Jul 2017 00:36:28 +1200

1.5 µg, per 100cm^2, of wall, that didn't come off with a quick wipe.

Therapeutic doses are 10-25 mg per day, or 10000 to 25000 µg per day. Illicit use is higher still up over 60 mg per day for heavy users, or 60000 µg.

So to get any affect,…

Glenn Pearce

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 11:25:13 +1200

Isn’t the testing between tenancies being driven as much by the Insurance Companies as anything esle?

I think they require that you prove the contamination occurred during the period of cover in order to claim against your policy

Moz

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 10:14:09 +1200

MethSolutions

Great name, I presume they make a vape-able form of the drug?

Russell Brown

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:39:48 +1200

The Drug Foundation Twitter posted this shot of the standards committee today.

I guess you could argue Hill Laboratories, who make money from the industry, but – unlike the others – actually have some expertise. Well, okay, maybe also Forensic and Industrial. But MethSolutions, who've played a major role in…

Sacha

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:38:40 +1200

It would seem to be in everybody's interest to have a meaningful standard of contamination.

Yes. Sadly this is not it.

Tim Darlington

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:35:15 +1200

The problem is that isn't in everyone's interest to have a meaningful standard. It's not in the interests of the testing companies, or the clean-up companies, or the companies taking a cut of the proceedings (Ray White Real Estate, for example).

william blake

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:28:21 +1200

For a couple of hundred bucks this would be a perfect way for a dissatisfied tenant to get back at a landlord. But if landlords aren't going to test and a tenant is concerned about real contamination, it's an option. It would seem to be in everybody's interest to have…

andin

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:19:47 +1200

zero-tolerance policy
I have one of those too. For money grubbing fuckwittery.
Eat shit ray white.

Rich of Observationz

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 13:21:07 +1200

It's obviously not in the interests of a landlord to perform a test – I certainly wouldn't. Property owners should always be wary of creating a paper trail that impacts their LIM or creates something you are bound to disclose – for instance, if you have an issue with neighbours,…

Russell Brown

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 13:04:35 +1200

And lo, the standard has just been published.

Sacha

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:03:45 +1200

A Standards-setting committee stacked with rogue testing companies – what could possibly go wrong?

Russell Brown

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:21:48 +1200

If you're wondering about what I've said about the standard and health risks, I wrote it up in more detail last October when the 1.5mcg standard was proposed.

Key paragraph from an ESR analysis commissioned by MoH as part of the standards process:

The highest calculated exposures to MA are…

Public Address

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:21:48 +1200

Discussion from blog post.