Via CHEMED-L (the chemical education list), here’s an article on a recent Canadian drug bust.
Actually it’s only sort-of a big drug bust. The person charged had some marijuana plants, but the big news is that he was accused of:
selling and possessing “precursor chemicals” for meth
These “precursor chemicals” were the makings of, according to the article, nine million Canadian dollars of meth.
She said the seizure, the result of months of investigation, is the RCMP’s biggest ever in the national capital region.
“It is huge,” Beauchamp [of the Canadian police] said
The chemicals? Red phosphorus and iodine. (Stop laughing.)
Red phosphorus is one of the forms of the element phosphorus. White phosphorus is the other form. It’s nasty stuff, and you’d be well-advised to avoid it.
Red phosphorus, on the other hand, is usually considered non-toxic. Extremely flammable, but non-toxic. Got a match? Well, you’ve quite likely got red phosphorus.
Then there’s iodine. Well, iodine’s just neat stuff. However, it’s actually a lot more toxic than red phosphorus is, in pure solid form. Solutions of iodine, on the other hand, are commonly used as disinfectants – check your local drugstore or your medicine cabinet.
Without making any additional commentary on the various “wars on drugs” and their usefulness, I’ll just say this: If you want to bust someone for meth, bust them for actually having or distributing meth. Busting someone for “precursors”, many of which are extremely common substances, will not lead us anywhere we as a technological society want to go. (See here for what sort of things you could be considered a criminal for having in a certain large US state. Scroll down to see the silliest of the stuff.)
(Edited to add: Or bust the guy for having a ton of highly flammable material in a residential neighborhood, perhaps. But not because it’s a “precursor”.)
that is kind of a slippery slope.
e+
what the heal are they thinking…is that really true…???i think they have lost their minds…