| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 1,595 |
|
|
Valued Member
United Arab Emirates
242 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
4411 Posts |
The sample sizes seem very small to make such a big conclusion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3253 Posts |
I'm still more interested in collecting my currency, than in what my currency is collecting!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
So roll up your old paper one dollar bills, light up one of them, and start smokin'!
Have you ever tried to smoke a polymer banknote? YUCH!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2602 Posts |
You apparently speak from experience sel :P
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4078 Posts |
This topic is fodder for debate. Give us a break, or is it brake? LOL
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16810 Posts |
Here's the story on mythbusting website snopes.com. Basically, yes, it is true that a large percentage - every study quoted there found it on more than 50%, though none were as high as 90% - have traces of the drug on them. Given how sensitive our drug detecting machines have become, it's not that hard for detectable "traces" to jump from one surface to another. It only takes one "bad" note to contaminate an entire batch of notes from a cash register, note sorting machine or ATM.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Valued Member
 United Arab Emirates
242 Posts |
mycrob said: Quote:
You apparently speak from experience sel :P  Cheers
|
|
Valued Member
United States
366 Posts |
I don't really care much about the traces of cocaine found on US bills. What I don't like is the fact that about 10% of bank notes carry potentially harmful bacteria. And this also applies to gaps in individuals' cleanliness standards.
Wash your hands and don't try to eat or inhale your money.
~JobIII
Edited by JobIII
09/24/2012 09:53 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2295 Posts |
Quote:
The scientists analyzed a total of 234 banknotes from the U.S. and found that up to 90 percent of the banknotes contain traces of cocaine. Amounts ranged from .006 micrograms (several thousands of times smaller than a single grain of sand) to over 1,240 micrograms of cocaine per banknote (about 50 grains of sand). For comparison: A grain of sand weighs approximately 23 micrograms; there are one million micrograms in a gram and 28 grams in an ounce. That sample size is so small, it isn't worth noting. Shame on those scientists!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Actually...if it is a well defined randomized sample...you only would have to test 30 notes to give valid results.....statistically speaking anything over 30 treads into the realm of "diminishing returns", so 234 ( again...assuming a properly randomized selection) is enough to give you validity to say that your results are more than 99.9% reliable. In other terms, it means that one in one thousand random samples of 234 notes would give you results not consistent with results if you could sample every single note in exsistance.
|
|
Valued Member
United Arab Emirates
242 Posts |
@unholyroller,
I think you are talking about "Law of Large Numbers" pertaining to the required "Sample Size" and its Confidence Interval by estimating proportions and the Mean (μ) ...
Cheers
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,595 |
|
Posted 09/21/2012 10:50 am
