Elimination of 7-aminoflunitrazepam and flunitrazepam in urine after a single dose of Rohypnol

The hypnotic benzodiazepine flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) has been identified as the drug of choice for the purposes of "drugging" unsuspecting victims and raping them while they are under the influence of this substance. The objective of this paper was to study elimination of flunitrazepam and 7-aminoflunitrazepam in urine collected from ten healthy volunteers who received a single 2 mg oral dose of Rohypnol, to determine how long after drug administration 7-aminoflunitrazepam can be detected. A highly sensitive NCI-GC-MS method for the simultaneous quantitation of flunitrazepam (LOQ 100 pg/mL) and 7-aminoflunitrazepam (LOQ 10 pg/mL) in urine was developed. All samples were screened for benzodiazepines using optimized micro-plate enzyme immunoassay. The highest concentrations of 7-aminoflunitrazepam (70-518 ng/mL) and flunitrazepam (0.7-2.8 ng/mL) in urine were observed 6 h after drug administration in nine subjects and after 24 h in one subject. In six subjects 7-aminoflunitrazepam was detected up to 14 days after flunitrazepam administration, in one subject up to 21 days and in three subjects up to 28 days. In urine samples collected from six volunteers, flunitrazepam was detected three days after Rohypnol intake, in three subjects 24 h, and in one subject 5 days later. Benzodiazepine micro-plate enzyme immunoassay kit allowed the detection of flunitrazepam and metabolities 5 to 21 days after drug administration.     

Australia and the Emergence of the Modern Two-Party System

Although the Australian party system is accepted in some literature as a "classic" example of a two-party system, information about how this system came about does not feature prominently in international studies on political parties. It is here argued that Australia indeed blazed the trail for the two-party model by being the first to link parliamentary organisation directly to a mass electorate.     

House of Lords simplifies the law on patent entitlement

The House of Lords has held that, to claim entitlement to another'spatent or patent application, a person need only prove thathe was the inventor of the subject-matter of the patent, anddoes not also need to invoke ‘some other rule of law’as required previously by the Court of Appeal in Markem v Zipher[2005] RPC 31.