Drug Tests

[Flyndaran]

Yes, because ecstasy is so safe that any law prohibiting it is definitely useless. I especially liked this part.



I agree that the war on drugs is trite, overworked and completely ineffective. But that doesn't mean that all drugs are good, either. And I especially wouldn't want someone using ecstasy working for me.

Most of that site was guilt by association and not science. So it's similar in structure to X, so it must have X's properties? Salt is sodium chloride is made up of two poisonous chemicals, so it must be bad too, right?

So many studies are absurdly flawed and backed by anti-drug propaganda. One famous study of extasy later turned out to be pure meth... no wonder they "proved" it to be dangerous.

My social phobia and anxiety are severe enough that I would risk quite a lot just to have one day a month free from them.

[Slytovhand]

I'm sure people have inferred this but haven't said it outright... what if some client/customer has a bad run and decides to sue? For whatever reason, blame needs to be laid somewhere.. and it happens to be with someone who has drugs in their system??? I presume that would be a very bad scenario for that person....

What I do find ridiculous about these laws though (at least in places I've worked) is the hypocrisy! It's those in high management who are doing the drugs the most - such as cocaine and the likes... too bad there's not a lot that I, as the mere peon, can't do a hell of a lot about it. (ah... what I heard going down at the annual staff big pissup party at the end of the year...)

[the_std]

Yes, because ecstasy is so safe that any law prohibiting it is definitely useless. I especially liked this part.

Recent research findings also link MDMA use to long-term damage to those parts of the brain critical to thought and memory. It is thought that the drug causes damage to the neurons that use the chemical serotonin to communicate with other neurons. In monkeys, exposure to MDMA for 4 days caused brain damage that was evident 6 to 7 years later. This study provides further evidence that people who take MDMA may be risking permanent brain damage.

I agree that the war on drugs is trite, overworked and completely ineffective. But that doesn't mean that all drugs are good, either. And I especially wouldn't want someone using ecstasy working for me.

[Flyndaran]

...
Certain completely legal substances have been known to flag as a false positive. That's what bothers me, that if someone knows that a positive result is false they cannot (to my knowledge) demand a retest.

Recnetly, some professional sports player had his ban overturned, because it was determined that his excuse had merit. He apparently ingested a very tiny amount of cocaine by kissing some skank in a bar.
I often wonder if marijuana would help my anxiety and social phobia. The fact that my immediate family is highly allergic make this unlikely.
All things considered I bet extasy would be perfect. But how am I to score any if my anxiety and social phobia keep me from leaving the apartment let alone attending raves?
Balsted useless harmful laws.

[anriana]

Yes, I have had jobs where they do random breath testing as well as drug tests, it's not really controversial because being at work drunk is still illegal, however alcohol is legal, pot isn't, didums if you think it should be, the fact is that right now it isn't, so if you're going to get fired for doing something illegal, then don't do it.

Since the thread was more about pre-hire tests, that's what I was referring to. I know it's not legal to be drunk at work. My point was that regular heavy alcoholness is, imo, more damaging to productivity than regular pot use.

[Nyoibo]

Is there just not a way to test for alcohol? Would there be too much of a controversy with that since it's legal in most places?

Yes, I have had jobs where they do random breath testing as well as drug tests, it's not really controversial because being at work drunk is still illegal, however alcohol is legal, pot isn't, didums if you think it should be, the fact is that right now it isn't, so if you're going to get fired for doing something illegal, then don't do it.

And the example of not getting a job to feed your family because you smoke pot, stop smoking and use the money to feed your family, what, you can't afford to eat but you can afford to get high?

[tabbyblack13]

All I know that at my company if the quick test shows anything positive no matter what, you get payed leave until they send the sample into a lab to see what you have taken. There is another test that can be done to see the history of your intake. It requires a hair sample. What ever you have taken gets absorbed into your hair root. As it grows out your drug record is locked into each individual hair. That test is for some of the major oil companies due to the amount of drug abuse of the riggers.

As for sobering up. I think alcohol is the quickest but other drugs stay in your system longer even when your are not feeling the effect.

[MaggieTheCat]

I was telling my boyfriend about this thread and he gave me some interesting information that I thought I'd pass along, since it hasn't been mentioned here.

He works for a company that does random drug testing. This company also deals with a lot of confidential, government-related issues. So, the main reason they do the drug testing is so that their employees can't get blackmailed. Apparently it has been an issue, or at least they are afraid it would be an issue, if an employee was doing pot, or anything else, and someone outside the company said, "Hey, give me the confidential information for the project you're working on, or I'll tell your boss/the cops/whoever that you're doing pot." Confidentiality is a huge issue with this company, so they can't have that risk factor.

[BroomJockey]

Is there just not a way to test for alcohol? Would there be too much of a controversy with that since it's legal in most places?

Might be controversy, but honestly, once you're sober, there's nothing left in your system. The only way would be to check for long-term signs of alcohol abuse. And that would require liver function tests and such. WAY more expensive.

[joe hx]

The only company I've worked for that required a drug test didn't care if you did drugs or not - the testing was a requirement with their insurance company.

[anriana]

Considering that my workplace gave someone time off to go to a meth clinic, I'm not sure why they bother screening people for pot in the first place. That said, I understand why companies screen people for drugs but I think it's stupid that some drugs (especially pot) are illegal, and that some drugs (again, especially pot) would have an effect on someone's employment prospects. Having raided with casual and hardcore users of pot and alcohol, I'd much rather hire/work with a pothead than an alcoholic. Is there just not a way to test for alcohol? Would there be too much of a controversy with that since it's legal in most places?

[Greenday]

While some legal drugs do show up as illegal there is also further testing for that. A good company will send the sample in for further testing to make sure of the test result. I know Codine (sp?) will show up as an opiate and one type of blood pressure medication will show up as Pot. Also before they test you they will ask if what you are taking for meds and over the counter drugs. Vitamins will also skew the result.

Codeine shows up as an opiate as it is an opiate.

Not sure which tests you are talking about. There are basically two kinds of tests. Quick but okay accurate, and longer but EXTREMELY accurate. A run on a GC/MS won't take drastically long (depending on the range of mass fragments being looked at, 20 minutes the most) and I'll tell you what it is you've been taking.

[tabbyblack13]

I also believe that drug tests are a good thing too. I work in a open pit mine and its about safety of others. What if someone was doing pot while driving a haul truck loaded with 300 tons of material? What could happen? Someone could be injured, disabled for the rest of their life, or die. I know that its just a chance but, do you want to take that chance. What about drugs that give you hallucinations or make you hyperactive? What risks are you exposing to the rest of the workforce.

There is also this. There have been workers that hid alcohol in the haul trucks and been busted for it. Busted by drug testing or visual confirmation of the bottles. While some wouldn't do drugs at work, others will.

I do support medical use for those who are suffering from cancer, sever pain, and other conditions. If you have those conditions a person should be on disabilities and not be in the workforce. They need to focus on recovering and getting healthier.

While some legal drugs do show up as illegal there is also further testing for that. A good company will send the sample in for further testing to make sure of the test result. I know Codine (sp?) will show up as an opiate and one type of blood pressure medication will show up as Pot. Also before they test you they will ask if what you are taking for meds and over the counter drugs. Vitamins will also skew the result.

[Greenday]

Drug tests by companies are a good thing. It will give me a job when I finish college (future forensic chemist for those who don't know).

But yea, I don't see anything wrong with wanting a drugfree workforce at your company. Drugs, whether it is coke, heroin, extacy, weed, etc. prevents you from reaching your max capacity to do work to your fullest ability. Yes, even weed. Denying that weed has any effect on your ability to function is ignoring facts. It does whether you want to believe it or not.

Drug use also proves you are willing to break the law. And if you are willing to break the law now, maybe you'll be willing to break the law later and screw the company over.

[Dreamstalker]

I wish that silly myth that pot kills brain cells would just die. The only risk from smoking pot is lung cancer.

Well, there is some sort of genetic quirk in a segment of the population that can trigger a schizophrenic break if someone with that mutation (I'm not entirely sure what it is) uses marijuana.

Certain completely legal substances have been known to flag as a false positive. That's what bothers me, that if someone knows that a positive result is false they cannot (to my knowledge) demand a retest.