The Effect of Household Oxidizing Cleaners on Chemiluminescence of Blood Using Bluestar® |
| |
| Authors: | Joshua L. Adams Ph.D. Emily D. Rancourt M.S. Angi M. Christensen Ph.D. |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. United States Army Criminal Investigation Command, 105 Fenton Circle, Bldg 305, Joint Base Myer‐Henderson Hall, VA, 22211;2. Department of Forensic Science, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA, 22030Corresponding author: Joshua L. Adams, Ph.D. E‐mail:;3. Department of Forensic Science, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA, 22030;4. Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA, 22135 |
| |
| Abstract: | This study tests the effect of three common oxidizing cleaners on the ability of the Bluestar Forensic® presumptive test for blood to identify the presence of blood on ceramic tile after cleaning. The cleaners tested were Lysol®, OxiClean®, and Arm & Hammer®. This study also tested which cleaner was the most effective at removing blood, measured by the intensity of chemiluminescence, which was quantified using RGB values in ImageJ. A “hasty” 1‐min cleaning of a blood droplet was simulated using the three cleaners. The chemiluminescence of the Bluestar® reactions after cleaning the blood‐treated region was compared to an untreated region of the same tile for each cleaner, as well as to the treated regions of tiles between the three cleaners. Results indicate that none of the three cleaners removed all of the blood (all p < 0.001) and that Lysol® removed more blood compared to the OxiClean® and Arm & Hammer®. |
| |
| Keywords: | forensic science crime scene investigation Bluestar® blood oxidizing cleaners crime scene alteration |
|
|
