Titre : | Technical review. Hair testing: just how accurate is it? |
Titre traduit : | (Revue technique. Test sur cheveux : à quel point est-ce précis ?) |
Auteurs : | J. DITTON |
Type de document : | Périodique |
Année de publication : | 2005 |
Format : | 86-101 |
Note générale : |
Surveillance & Society, 2005, 1, (1), 86-101
|
Langues: | Anglais |
Discipline : | PRE (Prévention - RdRD / Prevention - Harm reduction) |
Mots-clés : |
Thésaurus mots-clés PHANERES ; DEPISTAGE ; METHODE ; MDMA-ECSTASY ; VALIDITE ; MEDECINE LEGALE |
Résumé : |
ENGLISH :
Extensive forensic examination of the hair of 209 ecstasy (MDMA) users demonstrated virtually no correlation between self-reported tablet use, and traces of MDMA in the hair of users. Why should this be so? Three answers are possible, and all true. First, self-report is fallible; second, tablet strength varies enormously; and third, forensic analysis is of unknown accuracy. The first two are well known. Forensic analysis, however, typically presents itself as impeccably precise. The review demonstrates that not only is this claim spectacularly untrue, but also that validation of forensic analysis (and, thus, indirectly, self-report) lies in the very blind intra- and inter- laboratory comparisons that are never undertaken. |
Domaine : | Drogues illicites / Illicit drugs |
Sous-type de document : | Revue de la littérature / Literature review |
Refs biblio. : | 81 |
Affiliation : |
Dpt of Law, Univ. of Sheffield and Scottish Centre for Criminology, Glasgow. Email : jasonditton@lineone.net Royaume-Uni. United Kingdom. |
Numéro Toxibase : | 1301268 |
Centre Emetteur : | 13 OFDT |
Cote : | A02393 |
Lien : | http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/ |
Exemplaires
Disponibilité |
---|
aucun exemplaire |
Accueil