Comments on: York tests positive for cocaine

By: mr. thomas

mr. thomas — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 11:52:16 +0000

Go Kato! You’re great!

Brilliant.

Clear concise points- MERIT

By: Kato Harris

Kato Harris — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:20:30 +0000

Hang on! I’ve just read the Editor’s reply to my earlier post.

Possession of cocaine is illegal. Nouse used verified cocaine to complete the test.

So I’ll ask again: how did Nouse possess cocaine without breaking the law?

If you really think I’ve got this wrong then why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and issue a writ for criminal libel?

By: Raf Sanchez

Raf Sanchez — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:38:48 +0000

Hi Kato,

Thank you for your comment.

1) Nouse did not purchase cocaine and as far as I’m aware “condoning” the purchase of cocaine is not illegal. I think you would struggle to prove that anyone at Nouse broke the law.

2) I have not seen anywhere that cetirizine hydrochloride can lead to false positive results. Even if it can, I find it unlikely that allergy medicine would be taken from a toilet cistern or lid, where the tests were carried out. As mentioned in the article, Crackdown is the primary producer of cocaine swabs in this country and supplies swabs to a number of Britain’s police forces.

All the best,

Raf Sanchez
Editor

By: Kato Harris

Kato Harris — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:39:13 +0000

Hang on a cotton-picking minute!

(1) Where did Nouse acquire verified cocaine? Are you seriously suggesting that you broke the law and supported drug trafficking by purchasing, or condoning the purchase of, cocaine?

(2) Cetirizine hydrochloride (allergy medicine) can trigger a cocaine test.

The only people we can prove broke the law are you.

By: Dumbstruck

Dumbstruck — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:49:10 +0000

With what money did you purchase your ‘control sample’, and from where? Unless you sourced it through official channels, the public admission that you purchased cocaine is a very serious error indeed. The editor of Nouse should step forward and explain his methods, before someone calls for a formal investigation.

By: Th real Dan Taylor

Th real Dan Taylor — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 06:51:16 +0000

Editors, I didn’t write that last comment so please either remove it or remove the name in which it was posted under.

Thanks,

Dan Taylor

By: Dan Taylor

Dan Taylor — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 11:53:06 +0000

At least it’s a relative classy drug. Not quite like having heroin needles in Derwent toilet, is it.

By: Absolute Nonsense

Absolute Nonsense — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 08:59:59 +0000

Cocaine isn’t the only pharmaceutical that reacts with Cobalt thiocynate – the antihistamine used in lots of OTC hayfever medications (most notably Benadryl) produces false positives on these tests. What with the time of year and all, reckon there’s at least a decent chance that this is part of the explanation for your positive results?

Oh, an I hope that Nouse didn’t use their grant funds to purchase their control sample…

By: Pablo Escobar

Pablo Escobar — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:00:17 +0000

I think every here knows that drugs really aren’t a issue in York, the fact is York as a city and as a university has hardly any exposure to drugs, especially when compared to places nearby such as Leeds. As a topic this is a non-starter, its not a problem, and is very unlikely ever to be one.

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 29 May 2008 21:24:01 +0000

Wait… students at university do drugs? That’s a scoop and a half.

No, say it ain’t so.

By: Joseph Burnham

Joseph Burnham — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:55:31 +0000

You’re aware that those tests are detecting cocaine use for the entire 50+ years of the University’s existence? Theoretically, this could have all occured during a few months in the 70s – I’d be skeptical about considering it a recent trend. I’d suggest only including data from extremely new blocks/toilets, and even that has serious methodological problems.

By: Eleanor

Eleanor — Thu, 29 May 2008 14:14:56 +0000

I’m confused – is this a story about cocaine use on campus or the poor cleaning of the toilet facilities???

By: Ah-ha

Ah-ha — Thu, 29 May 2008 10:47:04 +0000

I reckon Sanchez had just been racking up between swabs. BUSTED!

By: Tom Fitz-Hugh

Tom Fitz-Hugh — Thu, 29 May 2008 08:31:10 +0000

Shitometer, I think the word “despite” in the paragraph you quote is not suggesting that the university should do something, but rather is criticising the university for querying the investigation without seeking to clarify how it took place. This seems to me a perfectly reasonable criticism to make.

For the record, although I write for Nouse I had nothing whatsoever to do with this article, and have no more knowledge of anything related to it than any other reader.

By: Bifo

Bifo — Wed, 28 May 2008 20:03:41 +0000

Cocaine found on the bottom floor of Grimston. Isn’t that where Nouse is based?

By: Shabba

Shabba — Wed, 28 May 2008 15:39:43 +0000

Yeah, I’ve often seen people taking coke in the library. It’s the ideal place to do it.

By: Shitometer

Shitometer — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:31:33 +0000

“In the statement the University added that it felt it would be “premature to draw any firm conclusion from these results” and queried the methodology and equipment used by Nouse, despite not asking to see the positive swabs nor seeking details of how the investigation was carried out.”

Who’s writing this rubbish? This paragraph isn’t reporting, it’s suggesting that the University should have done something. “Despite” is such a loaded term, no wonder no-one has claimed a by-line.