Drug
testing is usually a procedure that involves an examination of
human fluid samples (blood, urine, and saliva) or hair to detect
if they contain any metabolic traces of specified drugs.
The
routine of drug testing in the United States, which became mandatory
for certain professional groups and federal employees, started
in the 1986 as a response to an elevated drug abuse in the country.
The US drug testing programs were largely a fruit of the "war
on drugs", which was declared by the Reagan administration
and continued by the Bush government. The guidelines for obligatory
drug testing were set forth and are controlled by the organization
called SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration).
Following the governmental guidelines, drug testing rapidly spread
from the federal onto the private sector, too. In accordance with
the statistics, up to a half of all American federal employees
currently undergo mandatory drug testing, and more than one forth
of the largest 500 American corporations plan to fire their employees
because of positive drug tests. Presently required types of drug
tests applied in the USA can include pre-employment drug
testing (used by many businesses and governmental agencies),
random drug testing (mandatory by the department
of transportation and extensively used in many corporations, the
military, fire and police departments, prisons, rehab
centers, and even in schools), and post-incident drug
testing.
As
the drug testing guidelines were established many years ago, they
only include a certain number of drug groups (cocaine, cannabioids,
such as hashish and marijuana, amphetamines, phencyclidine, and
opiates, such as codeine, heroin and morphine) and do not include
semi-synthetic opioids and other drugs which are currently on
the rise of popularity in the USA (synthetic painkillers, benzodiazepines,
barbiturates, and others). Testing for those modern drugs is usually
offered by independent laboratories that are less rigid and therefore
are able to provide services to detect a wide array of drugs which
are a part of the current abuse pattern, such as GHB or Ketamire.
Drugs that are not likely to be tested for include traditional
shamanic hallucinogens of a rare modern use, contained in some
species of mushrooms (psilocybin) and cactuses (mescaline).
The
most frequently used type of drug testing is an examination of
urine, or urinalysis. Immediate results can be
obtained by submerging a special test card into the urine sample,
or, for more exact data on traces of different drugs, the sample
is sent to a lab to undergo such procedures as EMIT (enzyme multiplied
immunoassay technique) GC/MS (gas chromatography & mass spectrometry),
and liquid chromatography. EMIT is the cheapest form of urine
drug test, which may cost up to $25, but its accuracy is often
questioned as about one fourth of its results can come out incorrect.
EMIT could also mistakenly detect a presence of illicit drugs
after an individual has consumed a cold medication, herbal tea,
or poppy seeds. GC/MS costs more, between $100 - $200, but it
is the most reliable and definite urine drug test. It is also
used to confirm positive results of GC/MS.
Now,
due to a number of factors, urinalysis is considered a highly
controversial type of drug testing. First of all, it is unable
to detect drugs if they were used within the latest 6–8
hours. Second, the results of the test can be easily adulterated.
Some of popular forms to distort a possible drug detection in
an urine sample include using synthetic urine from artificial
penises (even direct supervision often fails to notice the trick)
and various forms of masking of a urine drug presence, such as
drinking of large amounts of water, coffee, niacin, synthetic
diuretics, or other "detox
products". Another strong concern is that urine samples
can be used by employers for genetic screening of workers to detect
those with undesirable health conditions, like epilepsy or schizophrenia,
which might open the door to underground discrimination.
In
contract, a hair examination to detect drug abuse
is fairly accurate and, in most cases, can trace banned agents
that have been used since the latest haircut of the individual.
For hair drug testing, the procedures of mass spectrometry and
radioimmunoassay technology are applied. Some people manage to
avoid the test by shaving their scalps, but in such a case body
hairs can be sampled to detect any abused substances. It is interesting
to note that a hair analysis is very popular in the USA as a pre-employment
type of drug testing, and if an individual refuses to give his
or her hair sample for the test, or if hair is unavailable, that
could be considered as grounds for not hiring. However, although
hair screening is being strongly promoted in the USA, especially
in a private sector and even in private schools, because the test
might be more reliable and less intrusive than urinalysis, it
has its own drawbacks. Firstly, the results could be skewed if
hair has been dyed, bleached, or undergone other chemical manipulations.
Secondly, the results of a hair drug analysis could be unfairly
turned against people with thick, coarse, and dark hair that contains
more melanin and might show a more concentrated amount of substances
than blond hair - in other words, the test could give grounds
to discriminate against people belonging to visible minorities.
Another consideration is the price of a hair drug test, which
might be three times more expensive than that of a urine test.
A
saliva drug test or an oral fluid-based
test are applied to detect a presence of substances,
used within a few days, in oral fluids. A saliva drug screen can
be performed on site and its level of accuracy is usually compared
with that of urinalysis. That is a very convenient drug screen,
which is employed now more and more often, especially in post
accidental situations and for determining impairment and a current
use.
Previously,
sweat screen was also a popular type of drug
testing, often used in parole departments or as a child protective
measure. In order to obtain results, special patches with security
features were attached to the individual's skin for a duration
of 10 - 14 days, which detected possible drug abuse over a prolonged
period of time. Currently, sweat drug screen is out of fashion
with governmental departments, as it is incapable to detect abuse
of many modern drugs.
A
blood test is the most invasive type of drug
screening, but it also gives the most accurate results and can
be used to detect a presence of many synthetic modern agents.
Recently,
one more drug detection method, targeted at employers and worried
parents, has been launched in the United States. A "Drug
Alert" kit for a home or office use includes a special
damp cloth that can be wiped against any surface to detect traces
of up to 30 kinds of banned drugs. The cloth is placed into a
secure envelope and forwarded to a drug lab that soon sends back
the results of the drug test. Although this types of drug screening
might seem less invasive than any other, what about the protection
of people against surveillance and being spied upon?
Various
types of mandatory drug testing are used not only in the USA,
but also in other countries, like Canada or the Great Britain,
but less extensively. In many European countries, the privacy
of an individual is protected by the Human Rights Act of 1998
and the European Convention of Human Rights, which allow people
to reject drug tests and even sue against those structures which
impose drug testing on them.
Current
news from Canada in the fields of drug testing include the report
of September 12, 2007 on positive testing of numerous Canadian
military personal for marihuana and hard drugs, such as amphetamines
and cocaine. More than 250 soldiers were tested positively and,
therefore, were not allowed to serve in the combat mission in
Afghanistan, which certainly reflects the situation with an elevated
drug abuse in the entire Northern American society. In has to
be mentioned that in Canada only military personnel pegged for
deployment is legally allowed to undergo mandatory drug testing.
Compulsory
drug testing in sports has been widely used since 1986, when the
testing program was launched by NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic
Association). Since 1990, the Association has been employing an
on-campus, year-round drug testing for stimulants, steroids, street
drugs, and other banned substances. In 2004 - 2005, more than
a thousand and a half random tests were performed among athletes
by the NCAA, with 38 of them to have come up positive, mostly
for amphetamines and marijuana. In accordance with the rules established
by the Association, a first-time drug offender is punished with
a one-year competition suspension, and, if an athlete refuses
to undergo a drug test, he or she is considered to have a positive
result. If to take into consideration that many over-the-counter
dietary supplements can contain small amounts of banned agents,
athletes literary live under a constant stress from the embarrassment
that might accompany mandatory drug testing. A recent concern
among female athletes is that birth control pills, as well as
such innocent products as salt and vinegar, could be involved
in showing positive results during drug tests. Just like many
employees and public servants in the USA, athletes often speak
about the controversy and awkwardness of imposed drug testing
in its relation to human rights. On the other hand, this might
be a necessary, although not very popular, measure to both ensure
proper discipline among workers and prevent cheating among athletes.
2007
© nafdacnigeria.org
|
