Historique
Article de Périodique
The detection and prevention of unintentional consumption of DOx and 25x-NBOMe at Portugal's Boom Festival (2017)
Auteur(s) :
D. MARTINS ;
M. J. BARRATT ;
C. V. PIRES ;
H. CARVALHO ;
M. VENTURA VILAMALA ;
I. FORNIS ESPINOSA ;
H. VALENTE
Article en page(s) :
e2608 ; 6 p.
Domaine :
Drogues illicites / Illicit drugs
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Discipline :
PRO (Produits, mode d'action, méthode de dépistage / Substances, action mode, screening methods)
Thésaurus géographique
PORTUGAL
Thésaurus mots-clés
MILIEU FESTIF
;
DEPISTAGE
;
DROGUES DE SYNTHESE
;
PREVENTION
;
LSD
;
ANALYSE CHIMIQUE
;
TEST
;
TOXICOLOGIE
Résumé :
Objective: This paper describes the misrepresentation of LSD at Portugal's Boom Festival 2014 and the prevention of unintentional consumption of DOx and 25x-NBOMe among LSD consumers attending a drug-checking service.
Methods: Two hundred forty-five drug samples expected to contain LSD were submitted to the drug-checking service for chemical analysis. One hundred ten post-test questionnaires were successfully matched with test results.
Results: About 67.3% of the alleged LSD samples tested contained only LSD; 0.8% contained LSD combined with adulterants; 24.1% did not contain LSD but did contain another psychoactive substance, including 11.4% that were 2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine derivatives and 9.8% that were N-benzyl-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine derivatives; and no psychoactive substance was detected in 7.8%. The majority of service users who received unexpected test results regarding their alleged LSD (74.2%) reported that they did not intend to consume the drug. Following dissemination of alerts on day 2, a larger than expected proportion of all tests conducted were for LSD, when comparing the 2014 festival to 2012, where no such alert was disseminated.
Conclusions: Although these results support the provision of integrated drug-checking services in party settings, evidence of their utility and effectiveness would be improved through future research incorporating more robust measures of outcomes following provision of drug-checking results.
Methods: Two hundred forty-five drug samples expected to contain LSD were submitted to the drug-checking service for chemical analysis. One hundred ten post-test questionnaires were successfully matched with test results.
Results: About 67.3% of the alleged LSD samples tested contained only LSD; 0.8% contained LSD combined with adulterants; 24.1% did not contain LSD but did contain another psychoactive substance, including 11.4% that were 2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine derivatives and 9.8% that were N-benzyl-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine derivatives; and no psychoactive substance was detected in 7.8%. The majority of service users who received unexpected test results regarding their alleged LSD (74.2%) reported that they did not intend to consume the drug. Following dissemination of alerts on day 2, a larger than expected proportion of all tests conducted were for LSD, when comparing the 2014 festival to 2012, where no such alert was disseminated.
Conclusions: Although these results support the provision of integrated drug-checking services in party settings, evidence of their utility and effectiveness would be improved through future research incorporating more robust measures of outcomes following provision of drug-checking results.
Affiliation :
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal