"The emergence of deep web marketplaces: a health perspective", Caudevilla; ch7, The Internet and drug markets 2016:
At the end of 2012 and during 2013, the Energy Control team was aware of the growing popularity of DWMs through information provided by recreational drug users. An exploratory search of the available markets at that time (Silk Road, Black Market Reloaded and Sheep) prompted the development of the IDTS provided by Energy Control and focusing on DWMs.
During the first quarter of 2014, a specific protocol with objectives, procedures, methods and techniques was elaborated using TEDI (Transnational European Drug Information: TEDI, 2014) guidelines as a reference. All samples were analysed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The fee for a simple analysis was EUR 50 (to be paid in bitcoins). All funds raised were put back into running the project.
A one-year pilot project started in April 2014; drug users who purchase drugs in DWMs were the target population. Several threads in the main DWM forums were opened offering general information about the IDTS with links to a specific IDTS page on Energy Control's website ( 12 ). An email address for users to contact the service for detailed information about the process was made available. After submitting samples for analysis, users receive a detailed report with drug test results and specific and individualised harm reduction information. Users were encouraged to engage with Energy Control experts by emails or in DWM forums in order to resolve their questions.
...A total of 129 samples were analysed over this period, as shown in Figure 7.2. Users are asked about the type of substance they believe they have purchased. In 120 of 129 samples (93%), the main result of the analysis was consistent with the information provided by the user. In the remaining 9, the sample contained another drug, a mixture of substances was detected or it was not possible to determine the composition of the sample with the analytical techniques employed. The main results of the drug testing are shown in Table 7.2 Cocaine was the substance most frequently submitted for analysis. Purity levels were high, although more than 50% of samples were adulterated. Levamisole was the adulterant most frequently detected, in 43% (23 out of 54) of samples. Other adulterants detected in cocaine samples were phenacetin in 9% (5 out of 54), caffeine (1 sample) and lidocaine (1 sample). MDMA samples (in both pill and crystallised forms) showed high levels of purity, and no adulterants or other active ingredients were detected. Other samples analysed were MDA and methamphetamine (n=3), 2C-E, alprazolam, mephedrone, 2C-B, butyrfentanyl, synthetic cannabinoids (n=2), clonazepam, DOB, DOET, DOM, DON, DXM, kratom, mescaline, methylone, midazolam, modafinil and pentobarbital (n=1). Results for MDMA pills, showing very high dosages of MDMA that can lead to significant adverse or toxic effects, are similar to those reported by other harm reduction groups offering drug testing programmes (TEDI, 2014). The high frequency of non-adulterated cocaine samples is also notable, although levamisole contamination seems to be a widespread problem, as reported in the rest of the global drug market...Another interesting aspect is the low frequency of 'legal highs' in samples submitted for analysis.
TABLE 7.2: Test results for samples analysed by the Energy Control International Drug Testing Service (Samples analysed between April and December 2014. Categories with n<5 samples not included.)
Sample n Only main compound detected Purity (m ± SD) Range Cocaine 54 48.1% (26/54) 70.3 ± 19.9% 5-99% MDMA (crystal) 9 100% (9/9) 91.1 ± 8.0% 78-99% MDMA (pills) 8 100% (8/8) 142.1 ± 40.2 mg 94-188 mg Amphetamine (speed) 8 37.5% (3/8) 51.6 ± 34.6% 10-98% LSD 8 100% (8/8) 129.7 ± 12.1 μg 107-140 μg Cannabis resin 5 100% (5/5) THC: 16.5 ± 7.5% / CBD: 3.4 ± 1.5% THC: 9.1-16.4% / CBD: 1.6-5.3% Ketamine 5 40% (2/5) 71.3 ± 38.4% 27-95%
22 samples until March 2016. 100% no adulterants. Mean 125 mg.
We Love you Gwern