The Cocaine Mummies

Peanuts, no. They're modern.

As to the yam/sweet potato, I first said "pshaw" and then looked it up. Yes, the humble yam is everywhere.

HOWEVER -- it turns out that "sweet potato/yam" is a name that'ls applied to about 20 different plants. The ones in the Old World aren't even the same genus and species as the New World (the native ones, that is) although they're in the same family. Separate evolution from a common ancestor that took place very very long ago (millions of years.)

So that piece of evidence doesn't hold up.

Thanks for the quick reply, Byrd.

Pretty much what I expected. But at least I made you do the research this time, while I sat out back on the patio with my margarita and sunglasses!

Hehehe.

Harte

lol...omg...that is crazy. Who woulda thought they used cocain...lol.

Originally posted by Byrd

To the best of my knowledge, only one study has been done that shows this. The mummies were not restudied by other labs, and studies of other mummies have showed no such contamination.

I will get back to you on my source for the secondary studies that had confirmed this. Granted, I too am having difficulty finding this online. However, It was on a video that I had shown to a neuropharmacology course I TA for.

So regarding the coc aine on the hair. It was on the outside of the hair, which might indicate that it was used in the 'embalming / bacteriostatic' process.
This also leaves the door open for contamination.

I am still trying to get a hold on the sources for the other labs that did the follow ups - however I do recall that there were four and they took place in Germany, England and Spain. - More on this to come.

I placed the transcript of the Discovery Channel Show up on my page
here

Originally posted by carlwfbird
I'm surprised I didn't find this in a search on the forum.

Analysis of hair on mummies has shown the presense of coc aine in the hair of Egyptian mummies from 3000+ years ago. The problem is: Cocaine is only found in South America!

Botanists can show no evidence for coc aine being grown in that hemisphere.
Even if international trade was possible, how could it be that the reed boats of the time could traverse an ocean and load up with several ton of cocoa leaf?

One of the original articles is posted here:
American Drugs Found In Egyptian Mummies

In addition to coc aine, nicotine was also found. However, that can be found in ethiopea but not in the concentrations found in the mummy. That is indicative only of the tobacco plant.

In my opinion, I think its very possible that certain plants (cocoa leaves, coc aine) were traded or somehow brought back to Egypt by explorers....maybe a small cargo ship from South America somehow ended up sailing across the continent and ended up near Africa and boarded by the Egyptians. (just a thought) There are currents in the South Atlantic ocean that makes sailing from South America to Africa possible.

See below....
www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

I've seen several documentaries (History channel) over the years that suggest that South America had a highly advanced civilization/s with a huge population...I've seen enough to definitely believe it. Some have speculated that there are many strong similarities between ancient cultures in South America and the Egyptians. Although the possibility seems remote, I think there's enough evidence out there to warrant more research. Hopefully for Christmas my fiancée buys me a bunch of Graham Hancock's books. He's done A LOT of research and I'm curious to know what he thinks.

Found the video! I watched it again yesterday. I know this isn't big news, b/c we all saw the transcript months ago.

I do have some doubt since there hasn't been much published since the initial hype (wtf!)
Someone needs to hold a scientific conference on the topic.

Originally posted by carlwfbird
Found the video! I watched it again yesterday. I know this isn't big news, b/c we all saw the transcript months ago.

I do have some doubt since there hasn't been much published since the initial hype (wtf!)
Someone needs to hold a scientific conference on the topic.

There hasn't been anything printed in the popular press because the "oh, wait. We were wrong" stories just don't make good reading fodder for most of the public. They do have conferences where evidence on mummies is presented... again, the public is unaware of them because nobody except a scholar or geek wants to sit through an hour of MULTISYSTEMIC TUBERCULOSIS IN A PRE-COLUMBIAN PERUVIAN MUMMY: FOUR DIAGNOSTIC LEVELS, AND A PALEOEPIDEMIOLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS (a real title) when they could go to seminars entitled MUMMIES REVEAL ANCIENT WISDOM AND SIRIUS CONNECTION.

The Germans are sticking by their guns, but the truth is that nobody has found any other evidence of coc aine/tobacco on other mummies - OR - evidence of leaves and indications that these herbs were used in Egypt in any other burials (including burials of common people.) Nor is there any evidence of trade between the two cultures. Jaguar pelts and leopard pelts would have been eagerly traded, since both cultures held these animals in special significance.

...and South America would have gotten the European rat much earlier.

I don't necessarily think it's because of a lack of an interest to publish information on Type I errors by the Germans.

What surprises me is the apparent lack of other institutes to apparently pick up on the idea and test their own mummies. Once the hair shaft tests (of the primary sample) were confirmed by other laboratories other than that of the primary investigator, I would expect others in the field of mummy-study (not just egyptian, but chinese and others which were addressed as well) to test their own mummies. This lacking evidence is what surprises me still.

For the moment I just want to throw out the idea of cross-Atlantic trade and look at the apparent evidence rather than theory.

It is not out of the question to say that the Pharos were junkies.
There are temples in egypt which are elaborately decorated with the flower of the poppy. Opium surely was known to the culture.
Hashish also was used by ancient people.

Now for a talk about the hair shaft test.
This forensic test analyses not the entire hair, but the center of the hair - thereby preventing contamination from someone perhaps smoking coc aine in Munich lab leading to a false positive. This still leaves room for a Type I error by pure mistakes in protocol. However, this was conducted by someone familiar with police forensics and this data was reported to be confirmed by labs who were not associated with the Munich Museum.

Previously I had mentioned the hair shaft test is used by forensic scientists to see if a drug was taken by an individual during their lifetime and that metabolism played a part in it's input into the hair.

I personally believe both the coc aine and the tobacco were used as part of the sacred (and unwritten) procedure to embalm the mummies. This makes sense since both compounds are bacteriostatic. Now modern forensics uses this test on prisoners (and many others) to see if they have been using. The method is more reliable since many who know they are going to be tested for drugs have tried to titrate their urine by drinking large quantities of water to throw off a urine test. In these recent cases the positive findings are the closest things to what you can call proof of drug use by scientists.

However, scientists rarely investigate bodies more than 50 years old.
If the coc aine is as I believe it is to be part of the mummification process then the presence of coc aine in the shaft may be due to thousands of years of seepage of the compound into the preserved hair and not by metabolism.

Next, we have the story of Ramses II - a separate mummy from that found by the controversial Munich scientists. A team of French scientists found tobacco on the body linings of the mummy.
This evidence is nearly a decade old and needs to be revisited.
A botanist identified the traces of tobacco only microscopically.
This could only narrow down the identification to the family which includes tobacco
Here further analysis could be conducted on DNA, but this analysis has not been conducted.

More error comes in when the keeper of Ramses admitted that he smokes the pipe in and arround the area where Ramses was kept.
This led to more research that looked within the mummy's cavities rather than upon the body wrap of the mummy. Again tobacco family plant cells were identified.

Finally venture back to the controvercial findings of Munich.
These findings reported that their mummies had concentrations of nicotine (only found in large concentrations in the Americas) in excess of 35 times that which would kill a smoker today. Their studies also indicated that mummies from around the world, including China also tested positive for nicotine.

Botanists can not find evidence of any unknown tobacco plant which would have high nicotine levels. This leaves three possibilities, unknown plants - trade routes with the americas - or crazy contamination.



A professor once told me
Theory without data is garbage.
Data without theory is treated like garbage.

While I believe there is something to this case with the data, it is all puzzling because it goes against everything that was previously thought to be true.
No pre-Columbian trade of nicotine or coc aine
No nicotine usage pre-Columbian

Like Columbus (although I know this is attribution and not fact) I feel like I am saying the World is Round in a sea of mockery.

Originally posted by carlwfbird
I'm surprised I didn't find this in a search on the forum.

Analysis of hair on mummies has shown the presense of coc aine in the hair of Egyptian mummies from 3000+ years ago. The problem is: Cocaine is only found in South America!

Botanists can show no evidence for coc aine being grown in that hemisphere.
Even if international trade was possible, how could it be that the reed boats of the time could traverse an ocean and load up with several ton of cocoa leaf?

One of the original articles is posted here:
American Drugs Found In Egyptian Mummies

In addition to coc aine, nicotine was also found. However, that can be found in ethiopea but not in the concentrations found in the mummy. That is indicative only of the tobacco plant.

Text Red the ancients as well as modern tribes in South and Central America, chew on Cocoa leaves which is known to have coc aine qualities in the system...if a boat travelled by sea in ancient times, it is possible for the plant to have been brought to Europe and other places in the world. If the ancients realized it's properties, wouldn't it be possible for ships that flew to transport such things?

Originally posted by carlwfbird
I don't necessarily think it's because of a lack of an interest to publish information on Type I errors by the Germans.

What surprises me is the apparent lack of other institutes to apparently pick up on the idea and test their own mummies.

They did.

(scroll down to the last two paragraphs to see the report... "no coc aine"... www.scielo.cl... - and this was one of several such studies.)

Ancient cross atlantic trade...

It would be more likely that traders would have went more around the Atlantic then across it.

Instead of sailing out into the open Atlantic and heading west C.C. like, they would have went north to the Uk > Iceland > Greenland > Newfoundland (viking like) and down the coast there. (thats a simplified route, it's a bit more complicated) which also opens up trade with anyone along the way.
Apparently the theory is that you can take that route and never lose sight of land from the mast of a moderate sized boat. As one peice of land faded from sight the new one appeared.