Lively Case Discussion #574 1/15 - 1/17/2007

[Carnut]

So, if cleaning fluid was found, it didn't come from GHB in her drink?

If there was something in her drink to drive the reaction backwards, you'd end up with the original components.  However, the body utilizes & breaks down (moves the chemical reaction forward) the GHB into metabolites.  GHB is the precursor to GABA a neurotransmitter that regulates sleep, awakeness & physical activity.  GHB is a naturally occuring substance, so it will be always be present in the body making it difficult to determine if someone dies of its overdose.

OK, if something else was in the drink that would drive the reation backwards, how likely that would be drinkable?

Is there any realistic way to get from Nat to cleaning fluid in the car, other than using cleaning fluid to clean the car?

[Anna]

Rumor:  Does anyone remember something about a substance in an eye dropper bottle?  Too much time has passed and now I can't remember who said this.  

And just because something could have been put in a drink at Carlos and Charlie's does not guarantee that we know the purity or what the substance even could have been.

I don't recall Dennis Jacobs saying with what they drug tourists at C&C, just that they did.

If anyone has a source for the exact substance please post.

Will check for that tomorrow.

Heading finally for the Monkey Bunkey for it is bitterly cold here now.  Electric blanket is going to feel good tonight.  Don't get to use one often.

.

[SunFreak2]

Bam contains sulfamic acid acid.

It's not an article but a PDF of an actual university research study.  It's 109 pages long and yes, I have read most of it but not every word.

There is absolutely no proof of anything.  All we have is the presence of Natalee in the back seat of the car and the presence of this cleaning fluid in the back seat of the car.  Same location.

Even a degreaser like Dawn can be called a "solvent" because it dissolves grease.  Kids huff all kinds of things to get high.  I used to think it was just the propellant in aerosol products but know a kid who died from butane fluid only.

Not knowing what specifically a person may have been given by way of drugs makes it very difficult to discuss what the effects might be.  She was fine one minute and fifteen minutes later was reportedly having trouble walking.  Eyewitness report only other than the report about the cleaning fluid in the back seat where she was.

I try to present the information only.  I am sure Peter deVries has his own thoughts on whether or not there is a connection and what the possible effects might be and would also likely already know of the local practice of brewing up stuff.  My ego is not so big that I think he is likely to be swayed by any opinion that I might state so just like to put it out there and let his staff know where it is.  Seems to be pretty universal with kids these days unfortunately, experimenting with strange chemicals.  Always some up to something in every location.  

And I don't care whether or not anybody thinks there is a connection or thinks I sat down and typed out a 109 page fake research study. The information is there to take or leave.  I have never made a serious post to this forum without citing sources and my reason for doing so. I don't just "get the idea" and present it as fact and I don't like for people to imply that I do.  If I post it, I have a reason, a source or sources.  If it is based on rumor, I clearly state so at the time I post.  

And I wish everyone else did so, too.  I seriously doubt Peter deVries is interested in rumors or likely to be led astray by any information I might provide to his staff.  Something tells me he can handle it.  But it seems there are always going to be those with only negative things to say no matter what one does.  Or doesn't do.  Sorry, can't base my actions on that.

Goodnight, all.

Anna - I never implied that any 109 page research paper written by a University was phony.  All I said is that just b/c a solvent is used in the production of GHB, does not make GHB a cleaning fluid.  I said that it is erroneous & misleading to imply that it is a cleaning fluid.  I tried to explain how combining chemicals causes a chemical reaction that changes the original compounds into different compounds that have different properties and uses.

I believe in finding the truth, and not posting rumors as well.  This is why I have gone into great length to explain that GHB is not a cleaning fluid.  GHB occurs naturally in our bodies.  Just like a rose is a rose is a rose, GHB is GHB, whether it comes from our bodies, a pharmaceutical company or a home chemist.

[SunFreak2]

So, if cleaning fluid was found, it didn't come from GHB in her drink?

If there was something in her drink to drive the reaction backwards, you'd end up with the original components.  However, the body utilizes & breaks down (moves the chemical reaction forward) the GHB into metabolites.  GHB is the precursor to GABA a neurotransmitter that regulates sleep, awakeness & physical activity.  GHB is a naturally occuring substance, so it will be always be present in the body making it difficult to determine if someone dies of its overdose.

OK, if something else was in the drink that would drive the reation backwards, how likely that would be drinkable?

Is there any realistic way to get from Nat to cleaning fluid in the car, other than using cleaning fluid to clean the car?

Carnut, the drink would not be very palatible if there was something in it to drive the reaction backwards b/c it would most likely have already driven the reaction backwards.  It is said to be colorless, odorless and has no taste, while others say that it is salty. Maybe that is why it is put in shooters, so that it is swallowed in one shot.

As I have said before, GHB is a precursor to GABA which regulates awakeness, sleep, and physical activity.  It has a sedative effect on them.

IMO, there is no evidence to support that the cleaning fluid in the car is anything other that what was used to clean the car.

[SunFreak2]

Goodnight all.  Stay warm and sleep well.  Pleasant dreams.

[LilPuma]

Anna - I never implied that any 109 page research paper written by a University was phony.  All I said is that just b/c a solvent is used in the production of GHB, does not make GHB a cleaning fluid.  I said that it is erroneous & misleading to imply that it is a cleaning fluid.  I tried to explain how combining chemicals causes a chemical reaction that changes the original compounds into different compounds that have different properties and uses.

I believe in finding the truth, and not posting rumors as well.  This is why I have gone into great length to explain that GHB is not a cleaning fluid.  GHB occurs naturally in our bodies.  Just like a rose is a rose is a rose, GHB is GHB, whether it comes from our bodies, a pharmaceutical company or a home chemist.

I understand what you're saying, SunFreak.  If you mix water, lemon juice and sugar, you get lemonade.  You have not changed the chemical composition of any of the ingredients, you've simply combined them.  but in other mixtures of chemicals, for example, a chemical reaction takes place that actually changes the original ingredients.   I think that's as simple as I can express it without knowledge of chemistry.

[Anna]

Sunfreak,
I really don't know if GHB could be used as a cleaning fluid or not.  I understand ether can and you know acetone certainly can be.  Again, that is not what I said or was saying that GHB is a cleaning fluid but that it is very similar to one.  Or rather to certain ones.  And mascara is the same as charcoal lighter.

I base this on the study but have also read extensively on the internet and in a few books here on chemical interaction, etc.  And while a good working knowledge of chemistry is nice and always good to have this falls under more biology more and we don't really know the chemicals involved.  

You and Carnut seem to be very very concerned that all my posts are somehow so very misleading as to portend disaster when nothing could be further from the truth as far as I can see it.  If I stated something as you imply without a source then maybe, yes, it could mislead but when I only quote the study and post a link to it, no one should be mislead for one minute or one little bit even.  They have the actual study at hand to clarify any misstatements foolish me might make.  We all misspeak from time to time but with the source right there, anyone with half a brain should be able to figure out what is meant, even by the likes of me.

{{edit - let's not get personal}}

Maybe if you are so worried I am deceiving the masses, you should take the time to actually read it and then you would better understand what it is saying with regard to the two being so similar.  And note I said CERTAIN cleaning fluids.  

I only used this study as an example of what is out there in this regard.  It seemed to address the issue in a fairly concise manner. So I do hope the two of you can find it in your hearts to overlook my shortcomings and failures to measure up to your own high standards and just read my sources in the future and don't even bother with my comments on them.

  I am so sure you can always find something with which to find fault.  But then bet I could do the same if I really put my mind to it about things you two post as well.  Fortunately, I would rather put my efforts into something more constructive such as threads that others can use for their edification regardless of my foolish prattle.  And I hate to have to be this direct but yes, I believe a university research study over both of you, combined even.  In spades.  It's not the only one out there, either.

So in the future, kindly just read my sources, links or skip over my posts entirely since they are so fraught with errors and misstatements, etc.  That will save us all lots of trouble and if they are in fact so flawed, I am sure no one will take them seriously anyway.  Just as you do, they will immediately see how foolish I am.  In other words, don't worry about it.  It's a self-correcting problem.
.

[Tylergal]

Tyler
That is what I was thinking.

 My question earlier stems from not knowing exactly how chemically diet coke and chocolate might differ when their chemical components are broken down. Chocolate = cocoa powder,  diet coke=cocoa powder(about this I am not sure)

cacoa bean.

[Tylergal]

http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-4571.html

GBL, or Gamma Butyrolactone, is an industrial solvent used in the production of GHB. It is used in making paint strippers and surface cleaners. BD, or 1,4 Butanediol, is an industrial solvent that also turns into GHB in the body. It is marketed and sold as a printer cleaner and nail polish remover.

Like the old days of ether.

[Tylergal]

http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-4571.html

GBL, or Gamma Butyrolactone, is an industrial solvent used in the production of GHB. It is used in making paint strippers and surface cleaners. BD, or 1,4 Butanediol, is an industrial solvent that also turns into GHB in the body. It is marketed and sold as a printer cleaner and nail polish remover.

It burns into the body therefore they neutralize the acid effect with lye......Yum. It is then realitively safe for consumption  

Well, what about all that formaldehyde in sweetners that we consume.

[LilPuma]

I don't know who is right or wrong in this debate, but I do think what SunFreak is saying is that if you make GHB from a cleaning solvent, a chemical reaction will take place so that you no longer have a cleaning solvent, but GHB.  The chemical reaction is the key because if this takes place, you no longer have a cleaning solvent and it won't show up as such in forensic testing.  

Of course, she's gone to bed and I could be all wrong.  

[Tylergal]

Sunfreak - there is the FDA approved GHB and the home grown variety.  It's the home grown variety in which the cleaning solvent is used.

Moonshine versus Black Jack Walker and the moonshine.

[Tylergal]

Printer cleaner as in a computer printer, the kind that exists in an internet cafe that processes photos?     Okay, I may be reaching on that one.

Joran had to print out the papers for school the following day.

[Tylergal]

Any strong base, such as bleach, would probably do the same thing.

Lye would be hard for the guys to get on their own. Bleach wouldn't.

According to the recipe they could use NaOH.........sodium hydroxide(where do you get that?)

http://www.neonjoint.com/drug_recipes/chapter4.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_hydroxide

It is readily available to water treatment facilities.  At least that is what my DH tells me and he works at one.  Well, lye is in Drano isn't it?

Huge water treatment facility in Aruba where salt water is converted to drinking/domestic water.

[Tylergal]

I don't know who is right or wrong in this debate, but I do think what SunFreak is saying is that if you make GHB from a cleaning solvent, a chemical reaction will take place so that you no longer have a cleaning solvent, but GHB.  The chemical reaction is the key because if this takes place, you no longer have a cleaning solvent and it won't show up as such in forensic testing.  

Of course, she's gone to bed and I could be all wrong.  

If all the ingredients were not consumed and some of it was spilled in the car then the digestive system did not use it.  It would separate over time, even if it was mixed with some else, like paint on a shelf in the hot sun, perhaps be further broken down by cleaning it again, and then combined with the new cleaning fluid, you have almost pure cleaning solvent, no?  I can ask of a physician, but will not be able to divulge his name nor his credentials, but I am sure he is on the cutting edge of this for more reasons than one.

[Tibrogargan]

Oh well, I guess Tibro forgot to sweep...Hugs to Nemo everyone.

No, I didn't forget.  Easier to sweep, mop and dust when all monkeys are up in their trees asleep and have finished dropping banana peels everywhere!
       

[Anna]

I don't know who is right or wrong in this debate, but I do think what SunFreak is saying is that if you make GHB from a cleaning solvent, a chemical reaction will take place so that you no longer have a cleaning solvent, but GHB.  The chemical reaction is the key because if this takes place, you no longer have a cleaning solvent and it won't show up as such in forensic testing.  

Of course, she's gone to bed and I could be all wrong.  

We all understand what Sunfreak is saying, Lil Puma, but since no one ever made the assertion she claims in the first place, it doesn't matter.  No one is claiming GHB and GBL are identical at all as she is implying. We are not absolute idiots, believe it or not.

But GHB given a once around the digestive juices might not be as easy to recognize as it once was.  No one is even certain that this is what Natalee might have ingested.

Some like to shoot from the hip and not bother to read the thread or the research study or anything, just jump right in and start accusing others of saying things they didn't in the first place.  

NO ONE EVER MADE THAT CLAIM AT ALL.  And that was not the point.  It would help greatly if folks would at least read the thread and the study being cited before doing their critique of the posts of others.  If one can't be bothered to do that, common courtesy would dictate one refrain from offering posts of condemnation without getting the facts straight first.

Of course I understand what she is saying as it is pretty basic.  But since I never said what she claimed in the first place, I tried to ignore it until it got too personal with her and Carnut's concern that I am once again misinforming the masses.  Some on this forum seem to be on some sort of mission to prevent me from doing that and seem a bit overly anxious about it and can't bother to see what I might actually have said.

I really do try to ignore these rude responses but sometimes they just won't stop until they get a response. They don't even understand the purpose of the post or anything about it but just have to start with the corrections when they are just plain wrong. And downgrading a university research study to an "article" is a cheap shot, too, makes it sound as though I read a couple of paragraphs and jumped to some wild conclusion.  I did try to avoid even acknowledging this second useless attack in one day to no avail.  OK, so guess I have to respond when I am accused of making claims that neither I nor anyone else posting on the subject made.

 Again, no one ever claimed GHB and GBL were identical. And I don't know if GHB can be used as a cleaning substance or not for so many other things surely can be.  We don't know GHB was even involved at all.  I have asked for sources on that and got none.  

What is being said is only that Natalee was in the back seat.  Cleaning fluid was in the back seat.  Certain cleaning fluids are very similar to GHB.  The study even names the ones that are.  A fool could understand that one ingredient does not a compound make but then the reverse is also true.  If you take the element out of a compound that results in the action, you would very likely get the same action. If it is the GBL component in GHB that makes it such a fine date rape drug, then GBL alone or with other substances might also result in that without the other attributes of GHB.  Many substances besides GHB do, far too many in fact.  Kids experiment with a wide variety of substances to get high or absolutely stoned.  Very few seem to require hospital, pharmaceutical grade anything to do so either.  This is more or less an example of something that can be so used and has the desired effect that might be sought in a case of kidnapping for the purpose of rape.

Again, if folks would just read the thread and links before going off half-cocked with their wild criticism, most of these little misunderstandings could be avoided in the first place.  And if anyone can't be bothered to do that as some so obviously chose not to do, they should basically just refrain from the accusations that are totally unfounded.  Used to call that making a straw man then knocking him down.  Total lack of respect for other posters and even Klaas trying to reason with some does no good.  

It's getting so it's not worth it to even post here any more.  I will defend the posts I have already made from wrong-minded attacks but doubt I will make any more in the future. Maybe I will just sit back and take potshots at others without any good reason, too.  It's sure easier than actually trying to do something constructive.

.

[Tylergal]

In defense of what Anna is/was trying to say.  I don't think she implied by any stretch of the imagination that these two were synonymous but one of the properties of GHB is a solvent.  I do not think anyone else implied it either.  I can only imagine the frustration Beth and Dave have been through.

[LilPuma]

First, I don't think any of you are idiots.  I simply tried to clarify what SunFreak was saying since it seemed to be getting lost based on what I understood of what I read.  So maybe I'm the idiot.  Or maybe an idiot for trying.  

There are drugs all over that island and I don't think they make their own GHB.  They buy it or "earn" it somehow.

[LilPuma]

Don't worry, LilPuma, I saved the link for you...
 

Thanks, Sleuth.