New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Wastewater Analysis for Drug Abuse Evidence

A study in the journal Addiction shows that a viable system for measuring the consumption of illegal drugs in various communities is to analyze samples of untreated wastewater--which contains the leftovers. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

If authorities wanted to determine how pervasive the problem of illicit drug use was in their communities, how could they do it? One cheap and easy way has just been tried experimentally in Oregon. Based on the principle that what goes in must come out, researchers measured the amounts and kinds of drugs that made their way through users to become included in untreated wastewater. This first-of-its-kind research is reported in the journal Addiction.

Ninety-six municipal water treatment facilities across Oregon volunteered for the study, which concentrated on finding evidence of the drugs meth, cocaine and ecstasy. All samples were collected on the same day, in areas that include about two-thirds of that state’s population.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Some findings: evidence for cocaine use was primarily in urban areas, almost nonexistent in rural regions; ecstasy use tended toward urban areas as well, and only turned up in about half of all communities; meth was everywhere. More important than those one-day snapshot findings, however, is that this methodology was proven viable, and could be used to track patterns of drug use in multiple regions over time.

—Steve Mirsky

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe