Only in the LSA...

Hair tests are as fallable as any other. Short of full lab screenings, which should be done on any positive, any screen on the maket can mislead.

Ya racist!

FYI...taking Protonix for long periods of time often gives false positive for THC. Just so you'll know...
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Hair tests are as fallable as any other. Short of full lab screenings, which should be done on any positive, any screen on the maket can mislead.

Ya racist!

FYI...taking Protonix for long periods of time often gives false positive for THC. Just so you'll know...
Click to expand...

Here's the rub, though...Hair isn't what's really tested...it's the root of the hair. ;)

Did you know that those 'health products' made with hemp oil also give you a false positive for THC? That's why they are forbidden for military personnel.
 
Since almost all the shaft of hair is dead cells, of course it's the root that's tested.

Rub hemp in your hair, and it kinna stands to reason it might test hot fer pot.

Hair testing is more accurate than urine, harder to defeat, and less likely to yield a false positive from what I have read about it. I know it's tough to accept, but it could be that these chaps are busted legit. Cops do dope too, ya know. Not having ever set foot in Massachusetts by the grace and kindness of a loving God, I have no idea if they are or not. Black, white, yeller or polka dot, if it comes back lab certified, that's good enough for a court of law...and good enough for me. The story did not address that question, so I still don't know and neither do you. Speculation is fun but often fruitless.
 
I'm confused how this quallifies as liberal. Most liberals are against drug testing to begin with.
 
rrfield said:
I'm confused how this quallifies as liberal. Most liberals are against drug testing to begin with.
Click to expand...

Bingo...and when they get caught, they scream that it's racist, sexist, ageist, whateverist, in order to draw attention away from the true reason that they got busted...because they took illegal drugs. Those officers also had an out. They could've submitted for urinalysis, and, if the hair tests were false, this would've cleared them. Instead of following the rule, the rules are *poof* discriminatory. Sounds liberal to me. ;)

The officers’ lawyer, Rheba Rutkowski, who filed the lawsuit on Tuesday in Suffolk Superior Court, said the test results can be skewed by the texture of black people’s hair, and by certain hair-care products.
Click to expand...
 
Sorry, I dont buy that. Drug tests in general are bogus, not for civil libertarian reasons either. I tested positive for PCP once. At the time (and at this time) I was (am) completely clean. Re-test came back negative.
 
rrfield said:
Sorry, I dont buy that. Drug tests in general are bogus, not for civil libertarian reasons either. I tested positive for PCP once. At the time (and at this time) I was (am) completely clean. Re-test came back negative.
Click to expand...

Which is why you get the right of a retest. Nobody gets convicted unless it's at least double-checked. You got a false positive. It happens. Get over it, and be happy that they have to get at least two positives out of you to prosecute you.
 
Fine.

Case study #2. Buddy of mine got arrested for having "stuff" in his car at school. He smoked every day, multiple times a day. I know this to be true because..just because. So he got caught, they took him to the local nut/drug asylum where he was tested. Negative. He took no supplements to clean out his system.

Case study #3. My old vendor got in trouble for vending in a non-vending zone. Made him pee in a cup, came back....ta da! Negative. No supplements.

Case study #4. College roommate like to smoke the wacky tobacky. A lot. Got a job at a department store stocking shelves, subject to a drug test. Took the test. Did it come back positive for weed? Yes. Plus coke. Plus heroin. Never did either. No retest. No job.

I could go on. In my personal experience the tests are generally unreliable. In the experiences of people I know the tests are generally unreliable.
 
rrfield said:
Fine.

Case study #2. Buddy of mine got arrested for having "stuff" in his car at school. He smoked every day, multiple times a day. I know this to be true because..just because. So he got caught, they took him to the local nut/drug asylum where he was tested. Negative. He took no supplements to clean out his system.

Case study #3. My old vendor got in trouble for vending in a non-vending zone. Made him pee in a cup, came back....ta da! Negative. No supplements.

Case study #4. College roommate like to smoke the wacky tobacky. A lot. Got a job at a department store stocking shelves, subject to a drug test. Took the test. Did it come back positive for weed? Yes. Plus coke. Plus heroin. Never did either. No retest. No job.

I could go on. In my personal experience the tests are generally unreliable. In the experiences of people I know the tests are generally unreliable.
Click to expand...

Looks like you have a problem understanding what I wrote. Check my previous post, and tell me what I said...

Also...You cannot base the whole testing regimin on your personal experience. Any decent statistician knows that. You have how many, total bad experiences, and base your findings on the whole industry, and then talk to me about your decision that all testing is bad.
 
You said...

Gato_Solo said:
Which is why you get the right of a retest. Nobody gets convicted unless it's at least double-checked. You got a false positive. It happens. Get over it, and be happy that they have to get at least two positives out of you to prosecute you.
Click to expand...

I got a retest. Not everyone does. False positives happen. A lot. I got over it, doesn't mean I forgot it.

I know my own experiences don't a pattern make, but when you hear story after story after story...a pattern does start to appear.

How about a link? Not from NORML or the "Green" party or the Libertarians...but from a drug testing lab.

http://www.drugdetection.net/drug.htm

A sample

Hair testing currently is not recommended due to scientific reliability problems with "positive" tests. Hair testing is plagued with problems of reliable and reproducible techniques for washing potential environmental contamination from the hair, which makes "positive" tests inconclusive.

Laboratories that perform hair testing do not currently have peer review or proficiency testing available to independently confirm the reliability and accuracy of testing performed on hair samples. This results in a precarious legal position for defending hair test results in court.
Click to expand...

So back to the original story...a hair test was used. Ever consider that the cops consulted a lawyer who urged them to stay away from the second test since the first probably won't hold up in court?
 
rrfield said:
You said...



I got a retest. Not everyone does. False positives happen. A lot. I got over it, doesn't mean I forgot it.

I know my own experiences don't a pattern make, but when you hear story after story after story...a pattern does start to appear.

How about a link? Not from NORML or the "Green" party or the Libertarians...but from a drug testing lab.

http://www.drugdetection.net/drug.htm

A sample



So back to the original story...a hair test was used. Ever consider that the cops consulted a lawyer who urged them to stay away from the second test since the first probably won't hold up in court?
Click to expand...

Which is why the second test is urinalysis...which does stand up in court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top