Forensic cases involving the use of GHB in The Netherlands

In this study, forensic cases involving the use of Gamma Hydroxy Butyric acid (GHB) from the second half of 1999 through the second half of 2001 in The Netherlands (blood >5mg/l and urine >10mg/l) are described. GHB was analysed by GC-MS after lactone formation and using GHB-d6 as internal standard. The results are divided into three groups: cases of chemical submission, cases of driving under the influence and cases of unknown causes of death.GHB was found in six cases of possible chemical submission. In these cases, relatively low concentrations of GHB were found. The results show that in cases of chemical submission, urine should be analyzed, because GHB is present longer in urine than in blood. The police should collect the samples in containers that do not contain citrate as anticoagulant. Especially at low levels of GHB, the formation of GHB in these tubes hampers an interpretation of the results.GHB was found in 13 cases of driving under the influence. In contrast to the cases of chemical submission, high concentrations of GHB were found, corresponding with observations of extreme sleepiness or temporary loss of consciousness.GHB was found in 16 cases of unexplained death: the measured range of GHB concentrations in blood might correspond to effects such as drowsiness, but not to serious toxicity of GHB. In 4 of these 16 cases, the role of GHB could be excluded. In the remaining cases, the role of GHB remains unclear; more research into "background" concentrations of GHB in post-mortem material is required.The incidence of the use of GHB in The Netherlands cannot be derived from these toxicological data. As GHB is not routinely found during systematical toxicological analyses, these data may seriously underestimate the use of GHB. Therefore, information from the police to the forensic institute is essential.     

Water as a political good: implications for investments

There is an urgent need for investments in the water sector. Still about a billion people lack access to drinking water services, and the double amount lacks proper sanitation services. To reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) substantial additional funding needs to be accessed. In view of the low priority given to the water sector by all prospective investors, the perspective of failure to reach the MDGs is eminent. The main argument made in this paper is that a formidable obstacle in accessing and using funds in the water sector is the omission to include explicitly the political nature of water in investment decisions. Due to its multifaceted and internally conflicting character, politics are a fact of life in the water sector. The menu of (suitable) investment options for a given locality is very much dependent on the political environment in which these water services are to be provided. While the impact of the political realm on water services is often acknowledged (most frequently in negative terms as it is seen as one of the main causes of poor performance of public utilities), few professionals really take the political environment explicitly into account when taking decisions relating to the provision of water services. In this paper it is propagated that the political dimension of water should be made explicit in an attempt to increase access and sustainability of investments in the water sector. Sound and sustainable investment in water services can only be achieved by taking into account the existing political environment in which those water services are to be delivered.     

Post-mortem cases involving amphetamine-based drugs in The Netherlands. Comparison with driving under the influence cases

In this study we reviewed the post-mortem cases in the years 1999-2004 that were presented at the Netherlands Forensic Institute. The concentrations of amphetamine-based drugs in femoral blood from cases of suspected unnatural death were compared with concentrations in whole blood from non-fatal cases of driving under the influence (DUI cases) and with literature. Furthermore, the combinations with other drugs and/or alcohol were investigated. Amphetamine-based drugs were present in 70 post-mortem cases and 467 DUI cases. The most detected amphetamine-based drug was MDMA, followed by amphetamine. The presence of MDA could usually be explained by metabolism of MDMA. Methamphetamine and MDEA were rarely present. Frequently, the amphetamine-based drugs were taken in combination with alcohol and/or other non-amphetamine-based drugs such as cocaine or cannabinoids. The 70 post-mortem cases were divided into 38 amphetamine-based drug caused (i.e. the amphetamine-based drug directly caused or contributed to the death) and 32 amphetamine-based drug related deaths (i.e. death was not directly caused by the amphetamine-based drug). In the latter category, other (poly)drug intoxications and death by violence or drowning were the most frequent causes of death. In 30 cases, MDMA caused death directly. The range in blood concentrations of MDMA in these cases was substantial, i.e. 0.41-84 mg/L with a median concentration of 3.7 mg/L (n=30). MDMA blood concentrations in the MDMA related deaths (n=20) and in the DUI cases (n=360) varied up to 3.7 and 4.0 mg/L, respectively. Seven victims died from the direct effects of amphetamine; the blood concentration of amphetamine ranged from 0.24 to 11.3 mg/L, with a median concentration of 1.7 mg/L (n=7). The median concentrations of amphetamine in the amphetamine related deaths (n=13) and the DUI cases (n=208) were much lower, i.e. 0.28 and 0.22 mg/L, respectively. Amphetamine blood concentrations up to 6.0 and 2.3 mg/L were seen in the drug related deaths and DUI cases, respectively. The most frequently encountered amphetamine-based drugs in the investigated deaths were MDMA and amphetamine. The majority of MDMA- and amphetamine-caused deaths, i.e. 90% of these deaths, occurred with blood concentrations above 1.5 and 0.80 mg/L, respectively. MDMA and amphetamine blood concentrations in drug related deaths and DUI cases, however, overlap the range of fatal concentrations. Therefore, MDMA or amphetamine concentrations should never be used alone to establish the cause of death.     

Post-mortem cases involving amphetamine-based drugs in the Netherlands: Comparison with driving under the influence cases

In this study we reviewed the post-mortem cases in the years 1999–2004 that were presented at the Netherlands Forensic Institute. The concentrations of amphetamine-based drugs in femoral blood from cases of suspected unnatural death were compared with concentrations in whole blood from non-fatal cases of driving under the influence (DUI cases) and with literature. Furthermore, the combinations with other drugs and/or alcohol were investigated. Amphetamine-based drugs were present in 70 post-mortem cases and 467 DUI cases. The most detected amphetamine-based drug was MDMA, followed by amphetamine. The presence of MDA could usually be explained by metabolism of MDMA. Methamphetamine and MDEA were rarely present. Frequently, the amphetamine-based drugs were taken in combination with alcohol and/or other non-amphetamine-based drugs such as cocaine or cannabinoids. The 70 post-mortem cases were divided into 38 amphetamine-based drug caused (i.e. the amphetamine-based drug directly caused or contributed to the death) and 32 amphetamine-based drug related deaths (i.e. death was not directly caused by the amphetamine-based drug). In the latter category, other (poly)drug intoxications and death by violence or drowning were the most frequent causes of death.In 30 cases, MDMA caused death directly. The range in blood concentrations of MDMA in these cases was substantial, i.e. 0.41–84 mg/L with a median concentration of 3.7 mg/L (n = 30). MDMA blood concentrations in the MDMA related deaths (n = 20) and in the DUI cases (n = 360) varied up to 3.7 and 4.0 mg/L, respectively. Seven victims died from the direct effects of amphetamine; the blood concentration of amphetamine ranged from 0.24 to 11.3 mg/L, with a median concentration of 1.7 mg/L (n = 7). The median concentrations of amphetamine in the amphetamine related deaths (n = 13) and the DUI cases (n = 208) were much lower, i.e. 0.28 and 0.22 mg/L, respectively. Amphetamine blood concentrations up to 6.0 and 2.3 mg/L were seen in the drug related deaths and DUI cases, respectively. The most frequently encountered amphetamine-based drugs in the investigated deaths were MDMA and amphetamine. The majority of MDMA- and amphetamine-caused deaths, i.e. 90% of these deaths, occurred with blood concentrations above 1.5 and 0.80 mg/L, respectively. MDMA and amphetamine blood concentrations in drug related deaths and DUI cases, however, overlap the range of fatal concentrations. Therefore, MDMA or amphetamine concentrations should never be used alone to establish the cause of death.     

A case of extreme agitation and death after the use of mephedrone in The Netherlands

A 36-year old man, having injured himself severely by smashing windows in a rage of fury, was arrested by the police. He died despite resuscitation attempts. The forensic autopsy showed many superficial skin lacerations, bruises and minor brain swelling, but there was no definitive cause of death. Toxicological analysis showed a high concentration of mephedrone in femoral blood (5.1mg/L) and traces of cocaine, MDMA and oxazepam. The remaining dose of mephedrone in the stomach contents was estimated at 113 mg. Tablets that were found in the house of the deceased also contained mephedrone. We attribute this man's death to a fatal oral intake of mephedrone, which probably led to a state of excited delirium. This was aggravated by blood loss from multiple wounds.     

Excessive spending by firms to avoid accidents: Is it a concern in practice?

Shavell’s [Shavell, S. (1986). The judgment proof problem. International Review of Law and Economics, 6, 45–58] original model of the judgment proof problem treats costs of care to prevent accidents as non-monetary. Noting that this is unrealistic when injurers are firms, several authors have found that with monetary care costs, some judgment-proof firms perversely take excess rather than insufficient care. In this paper, we make explicit the quite specific assumptions required for the excess-care result to arise even in theory, and demonstrate that, even under these assumptions, the result is likely to be quantitatively unimportant. We also suggest an alternative model that, while treating care costs as monetary, avoids the excess-care result.