Flinders University - Peer Reviewed Study 
Published 20th August 2020

Picture


Kindly reproduced with permission from Dr Wright.

Abstract: The clandestine manufacture and use of methamphetamine can result in contamination of residential properties. It is understood that this contamination remains in homes for a significant period, however there are a lack of data available to understand the health effects of exposure to environmental methamphetamine contamination (third-hand exposure). Our study collected information from 63 individuals in 25 separate case studies where the subjects had unwittingly suffered third-hand exposure to methamphetamine from former manufacture, use, or both. Data included environmental contamination data, information on subjects’ health effects, and evidence of exposure using hair analysis. This study identified a range of health effects that occur from residing in these properties, including behavioural effects or issues, sleep issues, respiratory effects, skin and eye effects, and headaches. Methamphetamine was detected in hair samples from some individuals, including children. The exposures and concomitant reported health effects covered a wide range of environmental methamphetamine levels in the properties, including low levels close to the current Australian guideline of 0.5 μg methamphetamine/100 cm.

There were no discernible differences between health effects from living in properties contaminated from former manufacture or use. This study demonstrates that residing in these properties can represent a serious public health risk. 

Upon Hair Follicle analysis; "...external contamination of the hair occurred when living in the home, potentially via deposition from the air and direct contact of the hair with hands and surfaces, such as couches and bedding." Meaning simply residing in contamination results in absorption of the chemicals  from both respiration, and in-direct and direct skin contact with surfaces.

Upon analysis of personal items; "Where personal possessions were analysed in the case studies included in this study, this data indicated the presence of methamphetamine contamination of possessions brought into the property, supporting the potential for contaminant mobility and external contamination to occur..." Meaning that personal possessions, once contaminated, should not be taken to another premises as they will transfer that contamination from one property to another, and continue to affect the health of those in contact with the items. 

Upon documentation and analysis of health effects; "In relation to health effects, 6 participants did not report any health effects that specifically related to the time spent in the property. All other participants reported some health effects that were either unique to the time spent living in the property or were exacerbated by living in the property, regardless of the duration of exposure in the property. Of these participants, 67% provided doctors or school reports supporting the health effects or changes in health effects while residing in the property. Where health effects were identified for most participants, these resolved within weeks to months of moving out of the property.

One participant, an adolescent, developed a more chronic liver issue that was unchanged after moving out.  The adverse health effects identified have been grouped based on common effects reported: skin irritation or rashes; eye irritation (sore or watering eyes); respiratory effects (persistent cough, asthma or asthma-like symptoms); immune effects (persistent and recurring respiratory infections); sleep issues (difficulty sleeping and unusual dreams); headaches; and behavioural effects (fatigue or tiredness; increased aggression or irritability; depression, anxiety or moodiness; vagueness or not thinking clearly; memory issues).  Less commonly reported health effects included dental issues, particularly the delayed development of teeth in young children; speech delay in children; weight loss; appetite loss; loss of hair; having extra or excess energy; visual changes; dizziness and nausea; and increased blood pressure and tachycardia. 

It is noted that two of the participants involved in this study reported health effects that were so severe that an ambulance was called or hospitalisation was required. This related to headaches in an adult and asthma in a child. In addition, one adult with significant cognitive effects that only occurred while living in the contaminated property had attempted suicide."
Picture
This new research discredits and "debunks" the 2018 report from the PMCSA (The Gluckman Report) which stated "Toxicity assessments and exposure dose models used to establish standards for remediation of former meth labs (which are used in the NZS 8510:2017 to guide remediation, and do not distinguish between manufacture and use) have deliberately adopted conservative assumptions, with large (~300-fold) safety margins built in. These margins reflect data gaps and uncertainties in the calculations and are considered precautionary. Taken together, these factors indicate that methamphetamine levels that exceed the NZS 8510:2017 clean-up standard of 1.5 μg/100 cm2 should not be regarded as signalling a health risk. Indeed, exposure to methamphetamine levels below 15 μg/100 cm2 would be unlikely to give rise to any adverse effects. This level still incorporates a 30-fold safety buffer on a conservative estimate of risk.”

To their credit, the PMCSA report concludes "There is currently no evidence (in either humans or animals) that the levels typically resulting from third-hand exposure to methamphetamine smoking residues on household surfaces can elicit an adverse health effect. We note, however, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence of an effect. There is a clear need for more research and a co- ordinated inter-agency effort to build up a robust dataset."

There is NOW a robust dataset that proves, without any doubt, that persons residing in contaminated properties from BOTH methamphetamine use and manufacture see "no discernible difference" meaning both use and manufacture of meth affect the occupants health equally. 

Links to the 25 Case Studies are below:

Twenty-five opportunistic case studies were identified and included in this study between 2013 and 2019. As these case studies were opportunistic, each case study was different, particularly in relation to the housing and exposure situations. The following provides a brief summary of the exposure situation, specifically the length and level of contamination. Click the cases below to read in detail regarding the individual statistics, health effects and, where obtained, hair follicle sampling results.
contents of meth can blow up and are highly addictive in Auckland New Zealand
CASE STUDY ONE
This case study relates to a rural house with manufacturing levels of 107 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 1.5 years.  Click here to read the full case study
What is meth and what are the effects on health for our people in New Zealand
CASE STUDY TWO
This case study relates to an urban house with manufacturing levels of 42 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 2 years.  Click here to read the full case study
methclear for your auckland property
CASE STUDY THREE
This case study relates to an urban house with manufacturing levels of >10 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 8 months.  Click here to read the full case study
Meth info available in Auckland and Hamilton New Zealand
CASE STUDY FOUR
This case study relates to an urban house with manufacturing levels of 8.3 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 5 weeks.  Click here to read the full case study
What to do if your addicted to Meth or P in New Zealand
CASE STUDY FIVE
This case study relates to urban public housing with meth use levels of 20.7 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 3 years.  Click here to read the full case study
Cleaning fixing contaminated property for sale or rental in Auckland hamilton New Zealand
CASE STUDY SIX
This case study relates to urban public housing with meth use levels of 1.32 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 7 years.  Click here to read the full case study
K2 testing for Meth
CASE STUDY SEVEN
This case study relates to an urban house with meth use levels of 4.4 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 2 years.  Click here to read the full case study
How are homes affected by Methanphetamine labs in Auckland New Zealand
CASE STUDY EIGHT
This case study relates to an urban house with meth use levels of 5.7 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 4 months.  Click here to read the full case study
Is meth safe no its not p labs are very dangerous
CASE STUDY NINE
This case study relates to an urban apartment with potential manufacturing and meth use levels of 53 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 5 months.  Click here to read the full case study
The best meth solutions for Auckland New Zealand is Meth Xpert nz
CASE STUDY TEN
This case study relates to a rural public housing apartment with suspected manufacturing levels of >100 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 3 years.  Click here to read the full case study
House inspections testing in Auckland
CASE STUDY ELEVEN
This case study relates to an urban house with potential manufacturing and meth use levels of 42.9 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 7 months.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWELVE
This case study relates to an urban house with potential manufacturing and meth use levels of 7.8 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 4.5 months.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY THIRTEEN
This case study relates to urban public housing with meth use levels of 20 ug/100cm2. They were in the process of moving in and only entered the premises for short periods of time (up to 40 min duration). 
​            Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY FOURTEEN
This case study relates to an urban apartment with  the mother of the child involved in meth use. This shared child custody case had the child residing in the rented property for 10 days every fortnight.  
​           Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY FIFTEEN
This case study relates to an urban public housing apartment with meth use levels of 0.13 ug/100cm2. They resided in the rented property for 3 years.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY SIXTEEN
This case study relates to an urban apartment with manufacturing levels of 107 ug/100cm2. They resided in the rented property for 8 months.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY SEVENTEEN
This case study relates to an urban house with potential manufacturing and use levels of 45.09 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 5 months.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY EIGHTEEN
This case study relates to an urban house with manufacturing levels of 9.9 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 8 months.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY NINETEEN
This case study relates to an urban house with manufacturing levels of 245 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 8 years.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWENTY
This case study relates to a rural house with meth use levels of 31 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 2 years at a few days at a time whilst renovating.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWENTYONE
This case study relates to an urban house with meth use levels of 2 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 4 weeks.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWENTYTWO
This case study relates to an urban house with potential manufacturing and potential meth use levels of 250 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 10 years.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWENTYTHREE
This case study relates to an urban house with meth use levels of 125 ug/100cm2. They owned and resided in the property for 6 years.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWENTYFOUR
This case study relates to an urban house with potential manufacturing and potential meth levels of 25 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 6 weeks.  Click here to read the full case study
p or methanphetamine users in Auckland and Waikato NZ are illegal
CASE STUDY TWENTYFIVE
This case study relates to a urban public housing with potential manufacturing and potential meth levels of 3.5 ug/100cm2. They rented and resided in the property for 13 months.  Click here to read the full case study
Scroll below to read the Research:  Environmental Methamphetamine Exposures and Health Effects in 25 Case Studies.

Click the PDF file to download the Research:  
​Environmental Methamphetamine Exposures and Health Effects in 25 Case Studies.
environmental_methamphetamine_exposures_and_health_effects_in_25_case_studies.pdf
File Size: 1173 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

To find out more, click the links below:

22 Vialou Lane
Stonefields
Auckland 1072
0800 746 473
021 638 401
​021 METH 01
© 2016-2024 Meth Xpert New Zealand Ltd
FOLLOW US
Meth Xpert   NZLtd
212a Newell Road
Tamahere
Hamilton 3283
0800 746 473