The manufacture of methamphetamine in clandestine drug laboratories occurs in various locations, including residential houses and apartments. Unlike the controlled manufacture of chemicals and drugs, clandestine manufacture results in the uncontrolled storage, use, generation, and disposal of a wide range of chemicals and the deposit of methamphetamine drug residues on indoor surfaces (1). These residues have been found at high levels on porous and nonporous surfaces and have been shown to persist for months to years (1). Persons exposed to these environments often have poorly defined exposures and health effects. It is commonly assumed that these levels of exposure are low compared with those related to illicit drug use or therapeutic use of amphetamine-based drugs for managing behavioral issues such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (2). In 2015, a family that was unknowingly exposed to methamphetamine residues in a house in Australia was found to have adverse health effects and elevated methamphetamine levels in hair samples, highlighting the potential for public health risks for persons who might live in methamphetamine-contaminated dwellings. This case study highlights the importance of the identification and effective decontamination of former clandestine drug laboratories.

Methamphetamine contamination has the potential to be present in residential and commercial buildings as a result of illicit manufacture and drug use, in particular smoking. The illicit manufacture of methamphetamine and the smoking of methamphetamine results in the generation and deposition of drug aerosols/residues on all surfaces, porous and non-porous. These drug residues can remain in the home for a long period of time and if they are not properly identified and cleaned this can result in unwitting exposures and adverse health effects by individuals and families who subsequently rent or purchase these properties. Research has been undertaken to better understand what levels of methamphetamine contamination remains in homes following manufacture or smoking, and what factors related to the manufacture and building design affect the spread of contamination throughout the property. Data on contamination levels, and property observations, has been obtained from 100 homes and apartments throughout Australia to assist in better understanding the level of methamphetamine contamination that may be present. This data has been reviewed to develop a risk matrix that can be used at the start of an investigation or property assessment to determine the level of risk a property may pose to the public. The level of risk then determines the level of further investigation and remediation work that may be required to ensure the property is safe for future occupants. The risk matrix can be used by property managers including managers of public housing authorities where a significant number of illicit drug laboratories are located. Originality – This study provides data on the level and spread of methamphetamine contamination in former clandestine drug laboratories in Australia.

The clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine in residential homes may represent significant hazards and exposures not only to those involved in the manufacture of the drugs but also to others living in the home (including children), neighbours and first responders to the premises. These hazards are associated with the nature and improper storage and use of precursor chemicals, intermediate chemicals and wastes, gases and methamphetamine residues generated during manufacture and the drugs themselves. Many of these compounds are persistent and result in exposures inside a home not only during manufacture but after the laboratory has been seized or removed. Hence new occupants of buildings formerly used to manufacture methamphetamine may be unknowingly exposed to these hazards. Children are most susceptible to these hazards and evidence is available in the literature to indicate that these exposures may result in immediate and long-term adverse health effects. The assessment of exposure within the home can be undertaken by measuring contaminant levels or collecting appropriate biological data from individuals exposed. To gain a better understanding of the available data and key issues associated with these approaches to the characterisation of exposure, a review of the published literature has been undertaken.

BACKGROUND:Farmworkers are at risk of exposure to organophosphate pesticides (OPs). Improvements of knowledge and perceptions about organophosphate (OP) exposure may be of benefit for the reduction in OP exposure.PURPOSE:The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of an educational intervention to improve knowledge and perceptions for reducing OP exposure among Indonesian and South Australian (SA) migrant farmworkers.METHODS:This was a quasi-experimental study. The educational intervention used a method of group communication for 30 Indonesian farmworkers and individual communication for seven SA migrant farmworkers. Knowledge and perceptions about OP exposure were measured pre-intervention and 3 months after the intervention.RESULTS:Unadjusted intervention effects at follow-up showed statistically significantly improved scores of knowledge (both adverse effects of OPs and self-protection from OP exposure), perceived susceptibility, and perceived barriers among Indonesian farmworkers compared with SA migrant farmworkers. Furthermore, these four significant variables in the unadjusted model and the two other variables (perceived severity and perceived benefits) were statistically significant after being adjusted for the level of education and years working as a farmworker. In contrast, knowledge about adverse effects of OPs was the only variable that was statistically significantly improved among SA migrant farmworkers. The results of this study suggests educational interventions using a method of group communication could be more effective than using individual intervention.CONCLUSION:These improvements provide starting points to change health behavior of farmworkers, particularly to reduce OP exposure, both at the workplace and at home.

Organophosphate (OP) compounds are the most widely used pesticides with more than 100 OP compounds in use around the world. The high-intensity use of OP pesticides contributes to morbidity and mortality in farmworkers and their families through acute or chronic pesticides-related illnesses. Many factors contributing to adverse health effects have been investigated by researchers to determine pathways of OP-pesticide exposure among farmers in developed and developing countries. Factors like wind/agricultural pesticide drift, mixing and spraying pesticides, use of personal protective equipment (PPE), knowledge, perceptions, washing hands, taking a shower, wearing contaminated clothes, eating, drinking, smoking, and hot weather are common in both groups of countries. Factors including low socioeconomic status areas, workplace conditions, duration of exposure, pesticide safety training, frequency of applying pesticides, spraying against the wind, and reuse of pesticide containers for storage are specific contributors in developing countries, whereas housing conditions, social contextual factors, and mechanical equipment were specific pathways in developed countries. This paper compares existing research in environmental and behavioural exposure modifying factors and biological monitoring between developing and developed countries. The main objective of this review is to explore the current depth of understanding of exposure pathways and factors increasing the risk of exposure potentially leading to adverse health effects specific to each group of countries.

Twenty-six species of anemonefish of the genera Amphiprion and monospecific Premnas, use only 10 species of anemones as hosts in the wild (Families: Actiniidae, Stichodactylidae and Thalassianthidae). Of these 10 anemone species some are used by multiple species of anemonefish while others have only a single anemonefish symbiont. Past studies have explored the different patterns of usage between anemonefish species and anemone species; however the evolution of this relationship remains unknown and has been little studied over the past decade. Here we reopen the case, comparing the toxicity of crude venoms obtained from anemones that host anemonefish as a way to investigate why some anemone species are used as a host more than others. Specifically, for each anemone species we investigated acute toxicity using Artemia francisca (LC50), haemolytic toxicity using ovine erythrocytes (EC50) and neurotoxicity using shore crabs (Ozius truncatus). We found that haemolytic and neurotoxic activity varied among host anemone species. Generally anemone species that displayed greater haemolytic activity also displayed high neurotoxic activity and tend to be more toxic on average as indicated by acute lethality analysis. An overall venom toxicity ranking for each anemone species was compared with the number of anemonefish species that are known to associate with each anemone species in the wild. Interestingly, anemones with intermediate toxicity had the highest number of anemonefish associates, whereas anemones with either very low or very high toxicity had the fewest anemonefish associates. These data demonstrate that variation in toxicity among host anemone species may be important in the establishment and maintenance of anemonefish anemone symbiosis.