Posted By Diane Thomason Martin The cannabis plant is a flowering plant. The person could only have inhaled pollen if the plants were in flower and at the pollen-producing stage. My understanding is that cannabis producers need the leaves and maybe stems - I would be surprised if they allowed their plants to flower so I would not expect pollen. Was any pollen visible? or other dusty material? If they are breeding the plants, rather than just growing them to produce cannabis, then they would of course need the plants to flower and set seed. I would have thought that minimal PPE would be needed for seizing and destroying the plants. When you say they tested positive for the effects of cannabis - was a blood test done? If so what exactly were they tested for? I'm no expert in cannabis handling! but I do have experience of growing plants with "pharmacologically active" ingredients in containment, so if you don't get the answer you want from this forum, email me direct and we can talk if you like. Diane

Posted By Jeffrey Watt Martin A very interesting post. I feel you can't really go into a lot of specific detail but could any of the following be relevant. Same outcome but different cause? The cannabis test was spoofed by a health effect from a different agent e.g. carbon monoxide/dioxide build up in a loft or greenhouse, I read that the growers can flood extra CO2 in as a growth enhancer. My mate recently told me of working in a food suppliers cold store and coming over a bit sick. I urged him to get it investigated cos I know he is pretty tough and a bit of cold wouldn't phase him, so it could have been a chemical agent. Turns out they had regular coolant leaks but didn't bother telling anyone or getting it fixed. Biological agent? Hydroponics troughs also grow other nasties that may have an effect on people if they used poor occ hygiene. Your staff are sampling the product? Female plants produce the resin, whens the last time sticky resin atomised itself straight off the plant to become inhalable without passing through a lit rizla first? Skin absorption? Again don't know if the resin can gain entry past the skins natural oils. If gloves are worn it shouldn't matter. Ingestion? Handling contraband (gloved hands)using pen to take notes,pen becomes contaminated, pen carried out of crime scene and goes in mouth. Martin, I would be interested to know if the test is time dependant and can tell if the person was exposed in the last 24 hrs or is like other urine test kits that cannot be time specific and just indicate you took something at sometime in the past year. Jeff

Posted By MarkS Martin was this person using any eye protection with the dust mask ?

Posted By Diane Thomason Martin, Another couple of thoughts - Presumably Customs & Excise have a lot of experience of this, do you have procedures in common with them? if not, do they have any info you could use in your review of procedures? I'm quite intrigued by the possible route of exposure, which someone has already discussed above. I would be amazed if the plants were shedding active chemicals at such a rate and in such a form that your PPE (including face-fitted RPE) does not protect people from exposure. If this was the case then procedures might need to include transferring the plants without contact with them (e.g. bagging them whilst touching only the bags, not touching plant and growth medium.) I have plenty of extremely knowledgeable plant scientists whom I could ask for data on this if you like. Again, I would expect Customs to have relevant info here. Final thought - it is possible someone had been smoking in the plant growth room shortly prior to the seizure? Your colleague might then have been exposed to the smoke - it might not have been because he handled the plants. Other people similarly exposed might not have experienced symptoms, hence giving you no clue that there had been exposure.

Posted By Jeffrey Watt Des Short term memory loss...hmmmm. Do you feel the need for snacks? I see a possible pattern emerging. Jeff

Posted By Adrian Watson Dear All, Several years ago I did some work on this subject in drug stores because of concerns over this subject. - Dusts containing cannabis can be generated by opening packets or containers in poorly ventilated areas; - These aerosols can remain in the air for long periods and lead to surface and skin contamination; - Tetrahydrocannabinol can be inhaled, ingested and absorbed through the skin. The most effective monitoring methods are direct reading dust meters and biological monitoring of urine. Control is through good ventilation, use of ffp3 face masks, disposable protective clothing and suitable gloves. Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Adrian Watson Frank, I agree whole-heartedly with you! However, one of the problems with the discussion forum is how do you reduce what was around a 30 page report to a 1 or 2 paragraph summary, without over simplifying matters, and yet still provide useful information! In this scenario, the main issue is how you prevent exposures from contaminated dusts and contaminated surfaces. So in this case and I must emphasise in this case, the primary means of protection is through the provision and proper use of suitable PPE. However, to use PPE properly, all persons must be trained in how to use it and remove it, if it is to be effective in providing protection. Regards Adrian

Posted By Martin Gray Can I thank everyone who has contributed to the discussion I have found the responses via the forum and direct to me very useful and have given me a lot to consider when re assessing the risk assessment and writing a procedures document, I was not foar out in the original ones but again your responses have focused me on specific issues. I shall also be making use of a visit to the NEC next week to speak with manufacturers of respirator protection. Martin