TweetJust bumpin a good sticky

TweetFabulous, it's one of the reasons I oppose drug testing in the workplace and welfare recipients.

As a ex-chemist, I can't stand the cheap immunoassays that also miss many drugs ( false negatives) and the numerous false positives. The standard urine drug screen in emergency rooms miss methadone, xanax and fentanyl...just to name a few. The gas chromatography is much more accurate but now the price goes from 20 dollars to over 300 -500dollars. Going back to the welfare testing, number 1, studies show they are no more likely to abuse drugs than the general population ( my family was on welfare when my DAD was a P.O.W in Vietnam), #2, by the time we train point of care technicians to handle specimens (which is intensive, as a Lab director, I know) and due process for positive tests ( confirmatory with gas or mass spectrometry), we have just spent more money than just allowing the 2% that abuse drugs to continue abusing drugs. ( For the record, my brother was a speech writer in Washington and he can tell you more Senators abuse drugs than welfare recipients, so if we test any government workers, let's test the ones that suck up our tax monies for their eternally expensive retirement and health care plans).

Tweet

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

Fabulous, it's one of the reasons I oppose drug testing in the workplace and welfare recipients.

As a ex-chemist, I can't stand the cheap immunoassays that also miss many drugs ( false negatives) and the numerous false positives. The standard urine drug screen in emergency rooms miss methadone, xanax and fentanyl...just to name a few. The gas chromatography is much more accurate but now the price goes from 20 dollars to over 300 -500dollars. Going back to the welfare testing, number 1, studies show they are no more likely to abuse drugs than the general population ( my family was on welfare when my DAD was a P.O.W in Vietnam), #2, by the time we train point of care technicians to handle specimens (which is intensive, as a Lab director, I know) and due process for positive tests ( confirmatory with gas or mass spectrometry), we have just spent more money than just allowing the 2% that abuse drugs to continue abusing drugs. ( For the record, my brother was a speech writer in Washington and he can tell you more Senators abuse drugs than welfare recipients, so if we test any government workers, let's test the ones that suck up our tax monies for their eternally expensive retirement and health care plans).

Good points and although I do agree with you about politicians their abuse,I have to disagree with you about not testing welfare recipients.I feel if we are going to test than politicians should be included in this as well and should actually be the first to be tested.

Drugs are not the only thing politicians abuse though so that is only a beginning to what needs to be looked at about politicians.