![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Morgans wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote Glad I could add a data point for you. My personal feelings would be legalize pot. Though I'd apply the same workplace and driving rules on it that are in place for alcohol. IF you did that, are tests accurate to tell you if the person smoked last night, or if he had a small amount before he came to work that morning, and got tested two hours after he got to work that morning? It just seems like it would be tough to impossible to enforce, to me. Nope they are not and you are right it is would be a problem. My bet though is that a mouth swab or some other sort of test to check for estimated time of use could be developed. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... Morgans wrote: "Gig 601XL Builder" wrote Glad I could add a data point for you. My personal feelings would be legalize pot. Though I'd apply the same workplace and driving rules on it that are in place for alcohol. IF you did that, are tests accurate to tell you if the person smoked last night, or if he had a small amount before he came to work that morning, and got tested two hours after he got to work that morning? It just seems like it would be tough to impossible to enforce, to me. Nope they are not and you are right it is would be a problem. My bet though is that a mouth swab or some other sort of test to check for estimated time of use could be developed. Years ago they were touting a new (at the time) eye movement test, that would indicate such. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... It just seems like it would be tough to impossible to enforce, to me. Nope they are not and you are right it is would be a problem. My bet though is that a mouth swab or some other sort of test to check for estimated time of use could be developed. They do mouth swabs in some situations. Apparently (says an industry source) there's some margin of error; somebody who used that day and would have failed a UA passed the swab test. This woman worked for a company that sold a UA test kit, a masking agent to beat that kit, and about six months after they released thta they released an advanced UA test kit that detected the masking agent. Interesting racket. -c |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gatt wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... It just seems like it would be tough to impossible to enforce, to me. Nope they are not and you are right it is would be a problem. My bet though is that a mouth swab or some other sort of test to check for estimated time of use could be developed. They do mouth swabs in some situations. Apparently (says an industry source) there's some margin of error; somebody who used that day and would have failed a UA passed the swab test. This woman worked for a company that sold a UA test kit, a masking agent to beat that kit, and about six months after they released thta they released an advanced UA test kit that detected the masking agent. Interesting racket. -c Here's a tip for everyone. NEVER accept one of the quickie tests that the results show up on the panel on the cup. They are worst than useless. Both false positives and negatives at about a 30% rate. I bring this up because of the comments about masking agents like URinLuck. (Gotta love that name.) A test sent to a proper lab will send back an "adulterated" result almost everytime. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Slightly off topic: A neurologist at our hospital had a vendetta
against the head of the pathology department... He decided to prove that our hospital pathology lab was incompetent and by inference the chief also and obtained urine from his dog and sent it in as speciment for a patient with some obscure kidney disease diagnosis... Well, the automated testing machine flagged it as an abnormal, the tech looked at the print out and couldn't figure a diagnosis and took it to the chief to make a diagnosis ... The chief took one look at the results and said that is not human urine... The brown stuff proceeded to hit the fan from there... We can tell a lot from urine... We can especially tell when ur in trouble... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
3rd class medical urinalysis? | Finn | Piloting | 65 | April 20th 07 10:47 AM |
Denied medical / Alcohol & Drug Rehab | Happy Dog | Piloting | 46 | July 29th 05 05:41 AM |
o2 drug of choice?? | houstondan | Piloting | 10 | February 7th 05 12:40 AM |
Approved Drug List | Carl J. Hixon | Piloting | 13 | December 2nd 04 01:00 PM |
Drug Treatment - Pilot's License | Julia | Piloting | 5 | March 18th 04 02:03 AM |