4 ms·

At this point they’ll get blood samples, I’m pretty sure that we’ll know exactly what he took.

jMyles 7y ago
> At this point they’ll get blood samples, I’m pretty sure that we’ll know exactly what he took. ...what? This seems like a very strange assertion to me. LSD is obviously difficult to test for and is not typically part of a routine test at all. But even if it is in this case, unless things have rapidly progressed in the past few years, I don't think it's possible to differentiate between different tryptamines (or even different indoles) in the blood, and even detecting them at all is difficult or impossible after 12 hours or so. Are you saying that it's now possible, from a blood test, to make this differentiation? Do you have a source for this claim? Unless another dose of the material is provided, I doubt that we'll know what this person ingested.
- happytoexplain 7y ago
  I don't think your use of the qualifier "obviously" is quite called for. I also don't think it's reasonable to assume the statement was made by a professional, as you seem to be (correct me if I'm wrong?). The majority of people probably assume blood tests can detect most popularly known drugs when the dosage is high and the sample is collected within a reasonably short time.
  - jMyles 7y ago
    No, not a professional in this field - or even close - but with a smidgen of formal education (BA minor in physiological psych). I guess I thought it was "obvious" in the sense that many people routinely face employment-related drug screenings which don't test for these compounds. But yeah, reading my comment again, I think you're right that "obviously" is probably overstating things. I do think that it's probably sadly optimistic to say "I’m pretty sure that we’ll know exactly what he took", unless things have changed since I last studied this material. I hope that there is a conclusion on which psychoactive compound(s) this person ingested; I apologize for my tone.
    - jefft255 7y ago
      I had no idea LSD was difficult to test for; I guess I had some preconceived belief that most regular drugs (including LSD which is not rare) could easily be detected after a few hours of ingestion. It actually surprises me that you can be high as a kite in a hospital and that doctor might not be able to detect what drugs you’re on with blood/puke sample. I don’t actually have anything near medical training!!
      - jMyles 7y ago
        > It actually surprises me that you can be high as a kite in a hospital and that doctor might not be able to detect what drugs you’re on Funny - I have the opposite notion: it amazes me that it is possible, with blood alone, to determine what someone has ingested. I tend to think of digestion and metabolism as a sort of one-way hash function, but apparently it's a fairly weak function, and rainbow tables abound.

> At this point they’ll get blood samples, I’m pretty sure that we’ll know exactly what he took. ...what? This seems like a very strange assertion to me. LSD is obviously difficult to test for and is not typically part of a routine test at all. But even if it is in this case, unless things have rapidly progressed in the past few years, I don't think it's possible to differentiate between different tryptamines (or even different indoles) in the blood, and even detecting them at all is difficult or impossible after 12 hours or so. Are you saying that it's now possible, from a blood test, to make this differentiation? Do you have a source for this claim? Unless another dose of the material is provided, I doubt that we'll know what this person ingested.

happytoexplain 7y ago
I don't think your use of the qualifier "obviously" is quite called for. I also don't think it's reasonable to assume the statement was made by a professional, as you seem to be (correct me if I'm wrong?). The majority of people probably assume blood tests can detect most popularly known drugs when the dosage is high and the sample is collected within a reasonably short time.
- jMyles 7y ago
  No, not a professional in this field - or even close - but with a smidgen of formal education (BA minor in physiological psych). I guess I thought it was "obvious" in the sense that many people routinely face employment-related drug screenings which don't test for these compounds. But yeah, reading my comment again, I think you're right that "obviously" is probably overstating things. I do think that it's probably sadly optimistic to say "I’m pretty sure that we’ll know exactly what he took", unless things have changed since I last studied this material. I hope that there is a conclusion on which psychoactive compound(s) this person ingested; I apologize for my tone.
  - jefft255 7y ago
    I had no idea LSD was difficult to test for; I guess I had some preconceived belief that most regular drugs (including LSD which is not rare) could easily be detected after a few hours of ingestion. It actually surprises me that you can be high as a kite in a hospital and that doctor might not be able to detect what drugs you’re on with blood/puke sample. I don’t actually have anything near medical training!!
    - jMyles 7y ago
      > It actually surprises me that you can be high as a kite in a hospital and that doctor might not be able to detect what drugs you’re on Funny - I have the opposite notion: it amazes me that it is possible, with blood alone, to determine what someone has ingested. I tend to think of digestion and metabolism as a sort of one-way hash function, but apparently it's a fairly weak function, and rainbow tables abound.