Post by Giar on Jan 14, 2007 16:30:40 GMT -1
just got this off myspace and i dont like it one bit cause ive been smoking loads of the crap!!! 
Press release 1st January 2007
Contact
Herbal cannabis on sale in the UK is now suffering widespread contamination. Analysis shows it to be small glass beads 50 - 120 micron in diameter. Sources suggest that this contaminant is industrial etchant spray used for glass frosting, a high pressure aerosol consisting of propellant, lubricant and silicate abrasives. This product has been identified as a likely candidate.
During the summer of 2006 police staged a series of raids against large scale cannabis grow-ops all over the UK known as "Operation Keymer", this had the effect of creating a sudden shortage of cannabis - no doubt it's desired effect.
However, within a very short period of time this shortage was at least partly filled by cannabis which was highly contaminated. Seemingly high quality "bud" - herbal cannabis - was found to contain some form of grit or sand. The website www.ukcia.org began hearing of this contaminated cannabis on sale from the far south west to the north of Scotland within weeks of the raids.
At first, the contamination was thought to be fairly benign with something inert being added simply to increase the weight of the deal, making the cannabis more expensive but otherwise not posing a danger. As time went past however, it became clear there was a potential danger which may be of great significance for the health of the user.
Photo's of the contaminated bud seemed to show some kind of glass fragments.
The contamination found by analysis is actually small beads 50 - 120 micrometers diameter, made of some non-soluble high melting point glass like substance. If smoked in a joint or chillum with no filter - as most cannabis smokers do - these glass beads will be drawn into the lungs with possibly devastating results, it's doubtful that using a pipe with a gauze will prevent this happening either.
Of course, given the illegal nature of cannabis and the workings of the law, this analysis cannot be verified and the author of it is unknown, but the methodology provided and the conclusions drawn seem reasonable.
This contamination is a direct result of the policy of prohibition and the danger it represents is in addition to any danger that may exist from using pure cannabis. It is a very graphic illustration of how the policy of prohibition not only increases the dangers associate with illegal drugs but also creates dangers of its own.
There is an urgent need to publicise this contamination in order to advise cannabis users not to smoke this "grit weed" and dealers not to sell it.
Derek Williams of Cannaprag said:
"What has become clear through this incident is that the government has no method of warning illegal drug users of dangers such as this and seemingly has no desire to do so. We do have a very expensive advertising campaign known as "Talk to Frank" which makes strange adverts but seems unwilling or unable to respond to such incidents.
"Government policy towards illegal drugs should not act in such a way as to increase the danger of using them by adding unknown risks, however contamination of supplies is used as a measure of "success" of the prohibitionist drugs policy.
"Cannaprag is calling for a public information campaign to raise awareness of this contamination as a matter of urgency. It will be affecting a huge number of people, literally millions. A public health warning is urgently needed to inform users that they should not smoke this contaminated cannabis and dealers should not sell it".
--------------ends----------------
The analysis - author unknown.
The following analysis and comment has been obtained by www.ukcia.org and can be seen on the forum:
Under microscope at 50x magnification, contaminants appear as very small (50-120 um) beads, with regular circular shape and small pores/ single holes present.
Beads do not dissolve in non polar solvents (pet ether) or polar solvents (ethanol, acetone).
Beads are insoluble in conc NaOH solution, conc H2SO4.
Melting point is above 400C, but cannot perform TG, DTG analysis at the moment so cannot specify any transition temperatures or accurate melting points.
The beads have a significant sodium and silicon content, suggesting that the comments previously about silicates are correct.
Reliable sources say that this contaminant is industrial etchant spray used for glass frosting, It is a high pressure aerosol of propellant, lubricant and silicate abrasives. This accounts for the high permeation levels displayed in all 3 samples, with particulates presents inside even 'tight' buds all the way into the stems. This also may account for the non plany oils present in the bud which have been previously described as a 'glue'
Obviously a further qualitative analysis is needed and I may be able to perform MS, IR, NMR and thermal methods on the samples, in particular the oil 'glue' and the gritty particulates.
Methodology:
The tests were rudimentary to the extreme but allowed for a qualitative analysis of the contaminants.
As you will appreciate, cannabis bud is plant tissue and so is an extremely complex subject. The contaminants which cause the most worry (the crystals) are a very uncomplex subject.
So I burnt away all of the material in a methane-air flame (about 1500C) until there was no appreciable plant material left (a reasonably homogenous charred mixture).
The oils were extracted with a non-polar solvent- that is one which is immiscible in water, petrol and cooking oil being two examples, however I used petroleum ether which is a low boiling fraction of oil.
Acetone was used as a polar solvent to strip the material of more polar oils which would still be water insoluble. The sample was then further oxidised with concentrated sulfuric acid, sulfuric acid is a very strong dehydrating agent, stripping hydrogen and oxygen from a substance in the ratio 2:1.
The sample was then neutralised with household bicarb and washed with water.
It was then dried to a constant mass. Using a fine mesh I was able to remove the majority of the contaminant from the charred sample and study it under a microscope. Unfortunately I was unable to make a further qualitative analysis of its oxygen, silicon, aluminium or sodium content as I do not have access to expensive analytical instruments or reagents such as HF for at least a month.
I am almost certain that it is an aluminosilicate and I think that the information about etchant could well be correct.
The author who provided this analysis makes the following comments:
Smoking this has resulted in mouth ulcers and sore throats/ chesty coughs which never occur when smoking normally due to the good health and only occasional cannabis use of the subject.
DO NOT SMOKE THIS, IT MAY POSE A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH HAZARD AND WE MAY SEE A DRUG TAKING COMMUNITY CRISIS ON A LARGER SCALE THAN THE MPTP CRISIS OF THE EARLY 80'S.
BUYERS: PLEASE RECONSIDER BEFORE BUYING ANY MORE OF THIS, AND CONSIDER THE DAMAGE YOU MAY BE CAUSING TO YOUR CUSTOMERS.
OTHER CONTAMINANTS SUCH AS NATURAL SAND ARE PROBABLY THE RESULT OF SUPPLIERS COPYING THE ETCHANT METHOD WITH WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO HAND.
Press release 1st January 2007
Contact
Herbal cannabis on sale in the UK is now suffering widespread contamination. Analysis shows it to be small glass beads 50 - 120 micron in diameter. Sources suggest that this contaminant is industrial etchant spray used for glass frosting, a high pressure aerosol consisting of propellant, lubricant and silicate abrasives. This product has been identified as a likely candidate.
During the summer of 2006 police staged a series of raids against large scale cannabis grow-ops all over the UK known as "Operation Keymer", this had the effect of creating a sudden shortage of cannabis - no doubt it's desired effect.
However, within a very short period of time this shortage was at least partly filled by cannabis which was highly contaminated. Seemingly high quality "bud" - herbal cannabis - was found to contain some form of grit or sand. The website www.ukcia.org began hearing of this contaminated cannabis on sale from the far south west to the north of Scotland within weeks of the raids.
At first, the contamination was thought to be fairly benign with something inert being added simply to increase the weight of the deal, making the cannabis more expensive but otherwise not posing a danger. As time went past however, it became clear there was a potential danger which may be of great significance for the health of the user.
Photo's of the contaminated bud seemed to show some kind of glass fragments.
The contamination found by analysis is actually small beads 50 - 120 micrometers diameter, made of some non-soluble high melting point glass like substance. If smoked in a joint or chillum with no filter - as most cannabis smokers do - these glass beads will be drawn into the lungs with possibly devastating results, it's doubtful that using a pipe with a gauze will prevent this happening either.
Of course, given the illegal nature of cannabis and the workings of the law, this analysis cannot be verified and the author of it is unknown, but the methodology provided and the conclusions drawn seem reasonable.
This contamination is a direct result of the policy of prohibition and the danger it represents is in addition to any danger that may exist from using pure cannabis. It is a very graphic illustration of how the policy of prohibition not only increases the dangers associate with illegal drugs but also creates dangers of its own.
There is an urgent need to publicise this contamination in order to advise cannabis users not to smoke this "grit weed" and dealers not to sell it.
Derek Williams of Cannaprag said:
"What has become clear through this incident is that the government has no method of warning illegal drug users of dangers such as this and seemingly has no desire to do so. We do have a very expensive advertising campaign known as "Talk to Frank" which makes strange adverts but seems unwilling or unable to respond to such incidents.
"Government policy towards illegal drugs should not act in such a way as to increase the danger of using them by adding unknown risks, however contamination of supplies is used as a measure of "success" of the prohibitionist drugs policy.
"Cannaprag is calling for a public information campaign to raise awareness of this contamination as a matter of urgency. It will be affecting a huge number of people, literally millions. A public health warning is urgently needed to inform users that they should not smoke this contaminated cannabis and dealers should not sell it".
--------------ends----------------
The analysis - author unknown.
The following analysis and comment has been obtained by www.ukcia.org and can be seen on the forum:
Under microscope at 50x magnification, contaminants appear as very small (50-120 um) beads, with regular circular shape and small pores/ single holes present.
Beads do not dissolve in non polar solvents (pet ether) or polar solvents (ethanol, acetone).
Beads are insoluble in conc NaOH solution, conc H2SO4.
Melting point is above 400C, but cannot perform TG, DTG analysis at the moment so cannot specify any transition temperatures or accurate melting points.
The beads have a significant sodium and silicon content, suggesting that the comments previously about silicates are correct.
Reliable sources say that this contaminant is industrial etchant spray used for glass frosting, It is a high pressure aerosol of propellant, lubricant and silicate abrasives. This accounts for the high permeation levels displayed in all 3 samples, with particulates presents inside even 'tight' buds all the way into the stems. This also may account for the non plany oils present in the bud which have been previously described as a 'glue'
Obviously a further qualitative analysis is needed and I may be able to perform MS, IR, NMR and thermal methods on the samples, in particular the oil 'glue' and the gritty particulates.
Methodology:
The tests were rudimentary to the extreme but allowed for a qualitative analysis of the contaminants.
As you will appreciate, cannabis bud is plant tissue and so is an extremely complex subject. The contaminants which cause the most worry (the crystals) are a very uncomplex subject.
So I burnt away all of the material in a methane-air flame (about 1500C) until there was no appreciable plant material left (a reasonably homogenous charred mixture).
The oils were extracted with a non-polar solvent- that is one which is immiscible in water, petrol and cooking oil being two examples, however I used petroleum ether which is a low boiling fraction of oil.
Acetone was used as a polar solvent to strip the material of more polar oils which would still be water insoluble. The sample was then further oxidised with concentrated sulfuric acid, sulfuric acid is a very strong dehydrating agent, stripping hydrogen and oxygen from a substance in the ratio 2:1.
The sample was then neutralised with household bicarb and washed with water.
It was then dried to a constant mass. Using a fine mesh I was able to remove the majority of the contaminant from the charred sample and study it under a microscope. Unfortunately I was unable to make a further qualitative analysis of its oxygen, silicon, aluminium or sodium content as I do not have access to expensive analytical instruments or reagents such as HF for at least a month.
I am almost certain that it is an aluminosilicate and I think that the information about etchant could well be correct.
The author who provided this analysis makes the following comments:
Smoking this has resulted in mouth ulcers and sore throats/ chesty coughs which never occur when smoking normally due to the good health and only occasional cannabis use of the subject.
DO NOT SMOKE THIS, IT MAY POSE A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH HAZARD AND WE MAY SEE A DRUG TAKING COMMUNITY CRISIS ON A LARGER SCALE THAN THE MPTP CRISIS OF THE EARLY 80'S.
BUYERS: PLEASE RECONSIDER BEFORE BUYING ANY MORE OF THIS, AND CONSIDER THE DAMAGE YOU MAY BE CAUSING TO YOUR CUSTOMERS.
OTHER CONTAMINANTS SUCH AS NATURAL SAND ARE PROBABLY THE RESULT OF SUPPLIERS COPYING THE ETCHANT METHOD WITH WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO HAND.
