Comments on: Random Drug Testing – International Laws

By: Mike Grosh

Mike Grosh — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 00:35:49 +0000

Pcholakis – How is that possible? The individual is notified that they must report. They have until the end of the day to present to a clinic where the give an observed specimen. The technician places a seal over the specimen container and the individual initials the seal. There is no opportunity to adulterate the specimen with that procedure. They may try to consume lots of fluids or take one of the products available on the net but if the collection and lab procedure check creatinine levels, specific gravity, and employ other procedure any attempt to dilute or alter the specimen will be discovered and reported. Most courts will interpret such alteration as tantamount to a positive result.

By: pcholakis

pcholakis — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 00:20:00 +0000

The above is not an example of a robust random testing program since the donor has the ability to adulterate the specimen during the interim period between notification and reporting to the drug testing site.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:12:16 +0000

True, random drug testing can be a strong monitoring tool as well as a deterrent to drug abuse. That is, if the program is properly designed and administrated. Most random programs used for monitoring require the individual to call in on a specified schedule to hear a message with some kind of letter, number or color code, and then give a specimine at a pre-determined location when their particular code is announced. The problem with such a system is there is no documentation of the call and therefor no information available about call history. Which candidate is compliant, the person who call intermittently, doesn’t call for a week, calls back and happens to hear a “go” code, or the person who calls every day as required. Of course, as with any drug screening program, the technology, collection methodology and other factors will determine the ultimate effectiveness of the program.