Prohibited Chemical Cn Ver4.00.Xlsx
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Comprehensive Multi-Analytical Screening Of
COMPREHENSIVE MULTI-ANALYTICAL SCREENING OF DRUGS OF ABUSE, INCLUDING NEW PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCES, IN URINE WITH BIOCHIP ARRAYS APPLIED TO THE EVIDENCE ANALYSER Darragh J., Keery L., Keenan R., Stevenson C., Norney G., Benchikh M.E., Rodríguez M.L., McConnell R. I., FitzGerald S.P. Randox Toxicology Ltd., Crumlin, United Kingdom e-mail: [email protected] Introduction Biochip array technology allows the simultaneous detection of multiple drugs from a single undivided sample, which This study summarises the analytical performance of three different biochip arrays applied to the screening of increases the screening capacity and the result output per sample. Polydrug consumption can be detected and by acetylfentanyl, AH-7921, amphetamine, barbiturates, benzodiazepines (including etizolam and clonazepam), incorporating new immunoassays on the biochip surface, this technology has the capacity to adapt to the new trends benzoylecgonine/cocaine, benzylpiperazines, buprenorphine, cannabinoids, carfentanil, dextromethorphan, fentanyl, in the drug market. furanylfentanyl, meprobamate, mescaline, methamphetamine, methadone, mitragynine, MT-45, naloxone, ocfentanyl, opioids, opiates, oxycodone, phencyclidine, phenylpiperazines, salvinorin, sufentanil, synthetic cannabinoids (JWH-018, UR-144, AB-PINACA, AB-CHMINACA), synthetic cathinones [mephedrone, methcathinone, alpha- pyrrolidinopentiophenone (alpha-PVP)], tramadol, tricyclic antidepressants, U-47700, W-19, zolpidem. Methodology Three different biochip arrays were used (DOA ULTRA, -
Drug Early Warning from Re-Testing Biological Samples: Allen County, Indiana
Drug Early Warning from Re-Testing Biological Samples: Allen County, Indiana Office of National Drug Control Policy Executive Office of the President July 2018 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was funded by Cooperative Agreement #G1599ONDCP04A awarded by the Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), to the University of Maryland’s Center for Substance Abuse Research (CESAR). Eric D. Wish, Ph.D. (Principal Investigator), Amy Billing, MSSA, and Eleanor Erin Artigiani, MA, produced this report. Fe Caces, Ph.D., served as reviewer and Project Manager at ONDCP and Terry Zobeck, Ph.D., also served as a reviewer. We are grateful to the criminal justice and laboratory staff that worked with us on this project. Without the support and assistance of the Allen County Adult Probation Program and the HOPE Probation staff, this project could not have been completed. The independent laboratory analyses for this report were conducted by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System (AFMES) Laboratory. We would like to thank the specific staff listed below: Allen County Adult Probation (HOPE Probation - Indiana) Judge Wendy Davis Eric Zimmerman, Director of Court Services/Chief Probation Officer Steve Keele Thomas Felts Armed Forces Medical Examiner System, Division of Forensic Toxicology Dr. Jeff Walterscheid Lt. Commander Pedro Ortiz Major Lynn Wagner CTR Anastasia Berrier CTR Kimberley Heine CTR Theresa Hippolyte CTR Paul Kaiser ii Disclaimer The information and opinions expressed herein are the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) of the Executive Office of the President, or any other agency of the Federal Government. -
Medicines and Related Substances Act No. 101 of 1965
MEDICINES AND RELATED SUBSTANCES ACT NO. 101 OF 1965 [View Regulation] [ASSENTED TO 19 JUNE, 1965] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 APRIL, 1966] (Afrikaans text signed by the State President) This Act was published in Government Gazette 40869 dated 26 May, 2017. as amended by Drugs Control Amendment Act, No. 29 of 1968 Drugs Control Amendment Act, No. 88 of 1970 Drugs Laws Amendment Act, No. 95 of 1971 Drugs Control Amendment Act, No. 65 of 1974 Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, No. 19 of 1976 Health Laws Amendment Act, No. 36 of 1977 Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, No. 17 of 1979 Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, No. 20 of 1981 Transfer of Powers and Duties of the State President Act, No. 97 of 1986 [with effect from 3 October, 1986] Businesses Act, No. 71 of 1991 [with effect from 24 May, 1991] Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, No. 94 of 1991 General Law Amendment Act, No. 49 of 1996 [with effect from 4 October, 1996] Abolition of Restrictions on the Jurisdiction of Courts Act, No. 88 of 1996 [with effect from 22 November, 1996] Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, No. 90 of 1997 Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Act, No. 59 of 2002 Judicial Matters Amendment Act, No. 66 of 2008 [with effect from 17 February, 2009] Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Act No. 72 of 2008 Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Act, No. 14 of 2015 GENERAL NOTE There is a discrepancy between the English and Afrikaans texts of section 1 of Act No. -
Descriptive, Observational Study of Pharmaceutical and Non-Pharmaceutical Arrests, Use, and Overdoses in Maine
Open access Research BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027117 on 29 April 2019. Downloaded from Descriptive, observational study of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical arrests, use, and overdoses in Maine Kevin J Simpson,1 Matthew T Moran,1 Michelle L Foster,2 Dipam T Shah,1 Daniel Y Chung,1 Stephanie D Nichols,3 Kenneth L McCall,4 Brian J Piper1 To cite: Simpson KJ, Moran MT, ABSTRACT Strengths and limitations of this study Foster ML, et al. Descriptive, Objectives The Maine Diversion Alert Program grants observational study of healthcare providers access to law enforcement data on ► All arrests involving illicit or licit drugs reported to pharmaceutical and non- drug charges. The objectives of this report were to analyse pharmaceutical arrests, use, and the Diversion Alert Program of Maine in 2017 were variations in drug charges by demographics and examine overdoses in Maine. BMJ Open examined. recent trends in arrests, prescriptions of controlled 2019;9:e027117. doi:10.1136/ ► Controlled substance transactions reported to the substances and overdoses. bmjopen-2018-027117 Drug Enforcement Administration were evaluated. Design Observational. ► Drug-induced deaths (n=2432) reported to the ► Prepublication history and Setting Arrests, controlled prescription medication Maine Office of Medical Examiner were analysed. additional material for this distribution and overdoses in Maine. paper are available online. To ► These complementary results from Maine may not Participants Drug arrestees (n=1272) and decedents view these files, please visit generalise to larger states with younger or more di- (n=2432). the journal online (http:// dx. doi. verse populations. org/ 10. 1136/ bmjopen- 2018- Primary outcome measures Arrestees were analysed by 027117). -
Prohibited Chemical E Ver4.00.Xlsx
Revision date: July 15, 2021 Nitto Group Prohibited Chemical Substances or Substance Groups Version 4.00 Remarks Chemical Substance Analysis Threshold Level (Regulations used as a guide for identification of Examples or Substance Group Data substances, not for application purposes) Substances included on the list in Certificate for Non-Use of Prohibited Chemical Substances in Delivered Products EU REACH Annex XVII Asbestos No intentional addition and < 1000ppm Required Analysis required only for mineral raw materials that may Table A contain asbestos, such as talc Certain azo dyes/ pigments No intentional addition N/A EU REACH Annex XVII (producing specific amines) No intentional addition and < 5 ppm as Cadmium and cadmium compounds Required 2011/65/EU (EU RoHS2 Directive) cadmium No intentional addition and < 100 ppm as Hexavalent chromium compounds Required 2011/65/EU (EU RoHS2 Directive) hexavalent chromium No intentional addition and < 100 ppm as Lead and lead compounds Required 2011/65/EU (EU RoHS2 Directive) lead No intentional addition and < 100 ppm as Mercury and mercury compounds Required 2011/65/EU (EU RoHS2 Directive) mercury Polybrominated biphenyls No intentional addition and < 100 ppm as Required 2011/65/EU (EU RoHS2 Directive) (PBBs) PBB Polybrominated diphenyl ethers No intentional addition and < 100 ppm as Required 2011/65/EU (EU RoHS2 Directive) (PBDEs) PBDE Montreal Protocol Ozone depleting substances No intentional addition N/A Prohibiting use in manufacturing processes also Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate No intentional -
Letter from the National Statistician
Government Buildings Tel: 020 7592 8613 Cardiff Road E-mail: [email protected] Newport NP10 8XG www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk Professor Sir Ian Diamond | National Statistician Grahame Morris MP House of Commons London SW1A 0AA 13 November 2020 Dear Mr Morris, As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your Parliamentary Question asking what proportion of drug-related deaths registered in 2019 involved combinations of cocaine with (a) opiates, (b) fentanyl and (c) other synthetic opiates (114142). The Office for National Statistics (ONS) produces an annual report on deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales, which includes figures for deaths involving cocaine. The most recent figures available are for deaths registered in 20191. ONS mortality statistics are compiled from information supplied when deaths are certified and registered as part of civil registration. Drug poisonings deaths involve a broad spectrum of substances, including controlled and non-controlled drugs, prescription type drugs and over-the- counter medications. It is important to be aware that over half of all drug poisoning deaths involve more than one drug and/or alcohol, and it is not possible in those cases to tell which substance was primarily responsible for the death. The ONS does not have access to post-mortem reports or toxicology results, so the accuracy of figures on deaths related to drug poisoning depends on the information provided by the coroner on the death certificate. Table 1 shows the number of deaths where the underlying cause was drug poisoning and cocaine was mentioned anywhere on the death certificate. -
Chapter 420-7-2 Controlled Substances
Health Chapter 420-7-2 ALABAMA STATE BOARD OF HEALTH ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 420-7-2 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES TABLE OF CONTENTS 420-7-2-.01 Authority 420-7-2-.02 Definitions 420-7-2-.11 Prescription Drug Monitoring Program – Collection Of Fees To Support Database 420-7-2-.12 Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Reporting To Database By Dispensers 420-7-2-.13 Access To Database Appendix Controlled Substances List 420-7-2-.01 Authority. (1) The Alabama Controlled Substances List, shown as Appendix to this Chapter, comprises a complete listing of said substances, pursuant to Code of Ala. 1975, Sections 20-2-1, et seq. (2) The Controlled Substances List shall be published annually, reflecting the date of adoption and the effective date. (3) As substances are designated, rescheduled or deleted as controlled substances, the appendix and other publications shall be amended accordingly by adding to said listing a slip-sheet of the action taken and the effective date. Each annual publication, as provided in (2) above, will contain any amendment occurring during that year. Author: Alabama Department of Public Health Statutory Authority: Code of Ala. 1975, §§20-2-1, et seq. History: Filed September 1, 1982. 420-7-2-.02 Definitions. Supp. 12/31/16 7-2-1 Chapter 420-7-2 Health (1) Controlled Substance. A drug, substance or immediate precursor in Schedules I through V of Rule 420-7-2-.03 of this Chapter. (2) Drug. (a) Substances recognized as drugs in the official United States pharmacopoeia, official homeopathic pharmacopoeia of the United States or official national formulary or any supplement to any of them; (b) Substances intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease in man or animals; (c) Substances (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or animals; and (d) Substances intended for use as a component of any article specified in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c) of this subdivision. -
New Psychoactive Substances. a Challenge to Public Health
portada_AF_ingles.pdf 1 24/07/14 10:57 O H N CH3 CH3 NEW PSYCHOACTIVE OH H SUBSTANCES. H OH O A CHALLENGE TO PUBLIC HEALTH The Spanish Early Warning System C O OH H M H OH Y CM O H MY N CH3 CY CH3 CMY K OH H H OH O O OH H Financed by: H OH SECRETARÍA DE ESTADO SECRETARÍA DE ESTADO DE SERVICIOS SOCIALES DE SERVICIOS SOCIALES E IGUALDAD E IGUALDAD MINISTERIO MINISTERIO DE SANIDAD, SERVICIOS SOCIALES DE SANIDAD, SERVICIOS SOCIALES E IGUALDAD DELEGACIÓN DEL GOBIERNO E IGUALDAD DELEGACIÓN DEL GOBIERNO PARA EL PLAN NACIONAL SOBRE DROGAS PARA EL PLAN NACIONAL SOBRE DROGAS NEW PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCES. A CHALLENGE TO PUBLIC HEALTH The Spanish Early Warning System Authors: Julia González Alonso Noelia Llorens Aleixandre We would like to thank the Spanish Government Office for the National Drug Plan, and in particular, Mr. Francisco de Asís Babín (Government Delegate), Mr. José Oñorbe (Deputy Director), Ms. Rosario Sendino and Ms. Elena Álvarez, for their collaboration and support. Translation by: Álvaro Ruiz del Real and Marta Jiménez Bermejo Layout and printing: SERVICIOS ADI EDITORIALES www.auladoc.com Legal deposit: M-21193-2014 ISBN: 978-84-940849-5-9 NEW PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCES A CHALLENGE TO PUBLIC HEALTH Presentation The Association of Experts for the Development of Social Programs (Asociación de Técnicos para el Desarrollo de Programas Sociales, or ADES, Spanish acronym), in collaboration with the Spanish Government Office for the National Drug Plan (DGPNSD, Spanish acronym) has developed training and refresher programs on drug addiction -
Drug Testing: the Moving Target
4/20/2015 Drug Testing: the moving target Kara Lynch, PhD, DABCC [email protected] University of California San Francisco San Francisco, CA Learning Objectives • Understand recent trends in designer drug use • Describe challenges the laboratory faces in keeping up with the detection of novel psychoactive substances and new pharmaceutical agents • Develop a laboratory based approach for detecting novel psychoactive substances and new pharmaceutical agents in biological samples Emergence of Designer Drugs / Novel Psychoactive Substances (NPS) First synthetic cannabinoids Methcathinone sold on internet methylaminorex ALD‐52 Novel anabolic PCP analogues steroids 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s DOM Internet Sales “research chemicals” for “scientific research” MDMA Fentanyl/meperidine analogues 2012: Synthetic Drug 1986: Federal Analogue Act Abuse Prevention Act 1 4/20/2015 Traditional Drug Screening Approach • Screening for classes of abused or prescribed drugs (Immunoassay, ELISA) –rapid, minimal labor • Limitations: 1) Assays not available for all drugs of clinical Screen interest, 2) prone to false positives and false negatives •Targeted confirmation testing (GC/MS or LC‐MS/MS) • Limitations: 1) Testing not always available in‐house, 2) Long turn around times, 3) not designed to detect new/novel Confirm pharmaceutical and illicit drugs Drug Screening Panels by Immunoassay Drugs commonly in “Drug of Abuse” and/or “Pain Management” Panels Amphetamines Opiates Benzodiazepines Cocaine Barbiturates Methadone Phencyclidine (PCP) Marijuana -
\ T MNH/Pyt~/Lj ORIGINAL: ENGLISH ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA SANTE
I 1 I ' I /i ~ ~ " )' .~1\- WORLD HEALTH ORG£TION \ t MNH/PYt~/lJ ORIGINAL: ENGLISH ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA SANTE I, i ;' ,, : ~. tJ ""7 I , ,) , ' , r f ' "' Programme Planning Working Group Report of the Third Meeting Geneva, 3-8 March 1986 Contents Page 1. Introduction 3 2. Presentation by NGOs and Representatives of Individual Pharmaceutical Manufacturers • • • • • • • • • 3 3. Review of Activities undertaken by the WHO Secretariat in 1985/86 4 3.1 Exempted Preparations 4 3.2 Report of the Working Group on the "Impact of Scheduling of Drugs on the Practice of Medicine and Pharmacy" • • • • • • 5 3.3 Outline of the Type of Information Required for decision making for international control of psychoactive drugs • • • • • • • • 6 3.4 Implementation of Long-term Storage of Information used in the WHO Review Process . 6 3.5 Executive Board Adoption of Guidelines for the WHO Review of Dependence Producing Psychoactive Substances for International Control • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7 4. Classes of Drugs to be Reviewed by WHO in the future 7 4.1 Selection of Drugs for the Review Process • • • • 7 4.2 Formalization of ECDD Report • 9 4.3 Review of 2PPWG Prioritization of Specific Drugs or Groups of Drugs • 11 The issue of this document does not constitute Ce document ne constitue pas une publication. formal publication. lt should not be reviewed, 11 ne doit faire l'objet d'aucun compte rendu ou abstracted, quoted or translated without the resume ni d'aucune citation ou traduction sans agreement of the World Health Organization. l'autorisation de !'Organisation mondiale de la Authors alone are responsible for views expressed Sante. -
Gundersen (482.2Kb)
Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 2019;00:1–9 doi: 10.1093/jat/bkz081 Article Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jat/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/jat/bkz081/5627731 by Universitetet i Trondheim user on 02 December 2019 Article Metabolite Profiling of Ortho-, Meta- and Para-Fluorofentanyl by Hepatocytes and High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Per Ole M. Gundersen1,2,*, Anna Åstrand3, Henrik Gréen3,4, Martin Josefsson5,6, Olav Spigset1,2 and Svante Vikingsson3,4 1Department of Clinical Pharmacology, St. Olav University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway 2Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway 3Division of Drug Research, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden 4Department of Forensic Genetics and Forensic Toxicology, National Board of Forensic Medicine, Linköping, Sweden 5Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden 6National Forensic Centre, Drug Unit, Linköping, Sweden *Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected] Abstract New psychoactive substances are emerging on the illegal drug market. Synthetic opioids including fentanyl analogues are of special concern due to their high potency. This indicates the possibility of low drug concentrations in vivo and calls for sensitive analytical methods and identification of the most appropriate analytical targets. In this study the in vitro metabolism of ortho-, meta- and para-fluorofentanyl, three fluorinated derivatives of fentanyl, has been investigated using human hepatocytes and compared to the results from an authentic human urine sample. Based on knowledge on the metabolism of similar fentanyl analogues N-dealkylation and hydroxylation was hypothesized to be the most central pathways. -
Designer Drugs: Past History and Future Prospects
Gary L. Henderson, 1 Ph.D. Designer Drugs: Past History and Future Prospects REFERENCE: Henderson, G. L., "Designer Drugs: Past History and Future Prospects," Jour- nal of Forensic Sciences. JFSCA, Vol. 33, No.2, March 1988, pp. 569-575. ABSTRACT: Historically, drugs of abuse have come from two sources: plant products and di- verted pharmaceuticals. Today, new, totally synthetic drugs produced by clandestine laborato- ries have become an increasingly important source of abused substances. Of particular concern are the fentanyls, a family of very potent narcotic analgesics, which first appeared on the streets in California in 1979 under the name "China White." At least 10 different analogs have been identified to date and are thought to be responsible for over I00 overdose deaths. The fentanyls are not used by any particular ethic or age group, but rather by the general heroin using popula- tion.Their use, however, does seem to be restricted to suburban, rather than urban areas, and almost exclusively to the state of California. The most potent analogs, the 3-methy- and beta- hydroxy-Ientanyls, may be up to 1000 times as potent as heroin, but are not chemically related to the opiates and therefore not detected by conventional narcotic screening tests. However, using a sensitive radioimmunoassay highly specific for the fentanyls they can be measured at the very low concentrations observed in body fluids. generally less than 10 ng/mL. It is likely that, as efforts to restrict the importation of natural products and prevent diversion of pharmaceuticals become more effective, the fentanyls and other synthetics will become increasingly important drugs of abuse.