Your Sewer on Drugs

Sewage is more than just filth. It’s evidence of our worst habits, everything from caffeine to cocaine, all ingested and flushed down the toilet. Now scientists are using wastewater to drug-test entire cities, and the results are sobering

By Eric Hagerman Posted 02.21.2008 at 3:51 pm 11 Comments

Sewer epidemiology stalled stateside until 2006, when environmental chemist Jennifer Field of Oregon State University hit upon the idea as a way to help assess Oregon’s growing meth problem (state officials reported 90 meth-related deaths in 2006, up from 56 in 2000).

Field read up on Zuccato and Fanelli’s work and began conducting a small proof-of-concept study, analyzing teaspoon-size samples of wastewater from 10 cities left over from an older environmental study. She found that a sample from a popular gambling destination boasted the widest range of drugs, while one from an affluent town tested positive exclusively for cocaine (Field won’t disclose the cities’ names). Her team made headlines last August when they presented these and other findings at the American Chemical Society meeting in Boston. Their results—similar to those of Zuccato and Fanelli—showed cocaine levels highest on the weekends, while levels of methamphetamine remained constant. “Once you’re hooked, you’re hooked,” Field points out.

Today, Field is heading up the most ambitious community urinalysis test yet. She’s soliciting wastewater samples from 130 treatment plants throughout Oregon, which service approximately 80 percent of its 3.7 million residents. Her aim is a high-resolution snapshot of drug use from a broad swath of the population during a single 24-hour period, sort of a day in the drug-using life of the state. Oregon Health Sciences University, which is footing the $30,000 bill through its Medical Research Fund, stands to gain a trove of data about drug use in individual communities, since Field will have direct estimates from areas in which surveyors have surely never set foot.

Toilet to Test Tube : What’s the life cycle of cocaine? After ingestion, the drug is metabolized into a compound called benzoylecgonine, and then excreted in the urine. Eventually the by-product makes its way down the plumbing, where it mixes with millions of other chemicals in the sewer. To isolate benzoylecgonine from this stew, scientists collect a small sample, centrifuge it to remove solid waste, and then use machines to identify benzoylecgonine’s molecular signature. Paul Wootton

Previous Article: O'Reilly Introduces Mathematica-based Online Math Classes

Next Article: The Endorsement: Emergen-C

Want to learn more about breakthroughs in electronics, medicine, nanotech, and more?
Subscribe to Popular Science and enter to win $5,000!

11 Comments

link to this comment

daveywavey

02/29/08 at 6:11 pm

daveyWavey

link to this comment

jabailo

03/23/08 at 3:56 pm

I just finished reading "The Ghost Map", a true epidemiology detective story to figure out what was causing cholera outbreaks in London during the mid-1800s. Turns out, it was a common well into which sewage had leaked.

We certainly live in a "global village" with stranger and more persistent disease.

link to this comment

themarla

03/29/08 at 3:08 am

Oh, please come to Fresno, CA. I can almost guarantee that this entire city is being "whacked out" on chemicals, which leaves them oblivious to what is taking place right under their noses.
Think I'm kidding? I wish I was.

link to this comment

dontbother

04/18/08 at 1:45 am

This might be an interesting article, but I will never know. Instead of simply publishing the story and taking the advertising revenue, Popular Science has chosen to (as many other sites do) spread the article over several pages to artificially over-inflate their page views and advertisement impressions.

If you made it through this article, you are a stupid victim of an unimaginative advertising scheme.

link to this comment

Hitari0

05/15/08 at 10:13 pm

Could they simplify it to one page, perhaps?

link to this comment

kardelen133 (not verified)

05/26/08 at 11:24 am

Hi All
I am a huge supporter of small wind, but I cannot think of many applicable situations for this design. This turbine seems to produce a pretty small amount of power for it's size and logistical concerns. A balloon holding up the other end of a string of turbines?? Good luck passing that through planning and zoning. I also believe that maintenence would be much more frequent with multiple turbines than some simpler designs. It's a cool idea, but before this guy spends much more time and money, he should pick up his guitar again.
saç ekimi saç ekimievden eve nakliyat evden eve nakliyat
thanks.

link to this comment

worldcommander

05/30/08 at 3:28 pm

dontbother said "if you made it through this article, you are a stupid victim of an unimaginative advertising scheme."

Wow, ease up salty! This is no different than the ads on the pages of almost every published magazine, the commercials between segments of the news, or the billboards on the way to some far off destination. Stupid is being offended or surprised they're there. Stupid is also the advertiser that thinks anyone is paying attention to the ads in the first place. Stupid is hardly anybody that made it to page seven of the article and didn't feel victimized by Popular Science.

link to this comment

ilahilere

07/23/08 at 4:49 pm

ilahiler
kral oyun
islami sohbet
kraloyun

link to this comment

ilahilere

07/23/08 at 4:53 pm

This turbine seems to produce a pretty small amount of power for it's size and logistical concerns. A balloon holding up the other end of a string of turbines??gazete okurüya gsmodelleri1 out of 2 people found this comment helpful

link to this comment