Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

is DNA present in a urine sample?

47 replies

normanprice · 28/03/2006 18:02

Answers please

OP posts:

tamum · 28/03/2006 18:23

Not a terribly good cover story though, is it?

Original poster

normanprice · 28/03/2006 18:23

Sorry it's so boring and no spies involved

OP posts:

NomDePlume · 28/03/2006 18:23

surely she can just lay off whatever it is she thinks they might find in her pee for however long it takes for the 'substance' to go through her system and become undetectable on normal tests

tamum · 28/03/2006 18:27

Or just say "no thank you I don't need to go at the moment" :o

Original poster

normanprice · 28/03/2006 18:32

How long does it take to long the test is on Friday and she has only found out today !
Some people may judge her and yes she is breaking the law enjoying a bit of green in the evening, but it is a lot less harmful than alchol can be.
The work is not dangerous has no moving parts etc her work colleauges often go to the pub at lunch time and come back the worst for wear.
My friends recreational use does not affect her job in the slightest and it seems unfair that she would lose her job if a positive test came back.

OP posts:

NotQuiteCockney · 28/03/2006 18:58

hijacking, sorry: tamum, can you look at \link{http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk?topicid=2280&threadid=158147&stamp=060327192032\this} again? I need to sanity-check a new knitting plan ...

NotQuiteCockney · 28/03/2006 19:02

Oh, just read the thread, annoyingly pot stays in the system for a long time.

There are a few ways to "throw" the tests, from what I know. The simplest is to make sure to be well-hydrated, so there's lots of water in the system.

(I don't smoke pot any more. I've never had a urine test for a job - one place required it I think, but I just never showed up. Amazing how inept these places are. Wasn't doing drugs at the time, just objected to being obliged to provide bodily fluids.)

Anyway, "I don't think this sort of test is moral" is a better answer, I think. She might not lose her job for a positive marijuana test, is she in the UK?

pooka · 29/03/2006 08:22

The problem with getting super hdydrated to dodge a positive test is that excessively weak urine is a give-away. A friend was in the army, with random testing, and he drank about 3 litres of water as soon as the tsters arrived. Was called in with an anomalous result but given the benefit of the doubt.

thewomanwhothoughtshewasahat · 29/03/2006 08:28

even if the DNA is present they are clearly not going to look at it - a. because if they wanted to do a DNA test they would use the standard procedure. and b. because they can't do it without explicit permission and c. because employer health checks don;t include dna tests. N

NotQuiteCockney · 29/03/2006 13:29

I know, pooka, but it's less dodgy than the stuff you can buy online to prevent positives, I think.

I guess if you didn't have that much dope in your system, you could try for moderately hydrated, not hydrated enough to raise alarm bells?

What sort of company does she work for? I didn't think UK firms did this?

Original poster

normanprice · 29/03/2006 16:58

She works in the uk for a company that used to be conected to british rail (a long time ago) it was their policy to drug test everyone, and this custom seems to have stayed although they no longer make things for the railway. I think she will refuse the test on the grounds that she doesn't agree with giving a urine sample and they can contact her GP if they want to. I think shes dammed if she does and dammed if she doesn't as failure to give a test can result in dismisal

OP posts:

NotQuiteCockney · 29/03/2006 17:08

Ah, I've found one interesting option for her, if she has to take the test. Take some iboprofen, and list it as a drug taken, when she takes the test. Apparently iboprofen can cause a "false positive" for cannabis. I'm getting my info from \link{http://www.ukcia.org/culture/pisstest.php\this} website, which looks good, but might of course be rubbish.

Blandmum · 29/03/2006 17:44

I used to work for the company that makes ibuprofen in the medical information department and that sounds like a load of old cobblers to me. they two drugs are chemicaly very different and I can't think how it would create a positive result. I worked for the company over a period of 5 years and never came across this in the literature

Blandmum · 29/03/2006 17:47

I stand corrected. However it mentions 'High doses' and I would recomend that anyone do that because of the risk of gastric ulceration

NotQuiteCockney · 29/03/2006 17:54

Well, I'm not swearing that website is good ... further digging found some people saying that an old form of the EMIT drug test used to give positive results for ibuprofen, but now they've updated it so you'd need to take loads of ibuprofen, which isn't ideal.

zippitippitoes · 29/03/2006 17:57

There are a few companies local to us who do regular drug testing I think one makes car seats and another some sort of controls, so maybe it's engineering factory type environments (also I think US owned companies)

thewomanwhothoughtshewasahat · 29/03/2006 21:48

what is she scared of? or am I being a bit thick? if it is greenery then lay off it. If it's eomthing else then they won;t be looking for it. Lots of employers do this.

NotQuiteCockney · 29/03/2006 21:51

hat, the problem is, from what I know, that pot shows up in drug tests for ages after you last did it. I think for light users, it can show up for a month, for heavy users, it can show up for several months! Lots of much nastier drugs only show up for a little while after use.

I thought pot was legalish here, it's bizarre that people would still be sacked for using it outside work hours.

pooka · 29/03/2006 21:54

Another friend works for London Underground and has random testing. Used to be a heavy partaker but has zlich now - it's just not worth it and is far too scary when the testers turn up.
The army friend ended up using the dope testing as a way out - had the test knowing it'd be positive, held his hands up, chucked straight out. Others go to extreme lengths to try and beat the test but with limited success from what I can gather.

MeerkatsUnite · 30/03/2006 09:25

Hi NQC,

"I thought pot was legalish here".

This is a common misconception. It is still illegal; all the government have done is downgraded it to a Class C drug from a Class B. Therefore you would still be cautioned (though not arrested) for possession of it.

MeerkatsUnite · 30/03/2006 09:27

Some US companies do a TAD test (tobacco, alcohol and drugs). If you are caught with such substances in your body on owrk premises you can be fired!!.

NotQuiteCockney · 30/03/2006 10:32

I can certainly understand companies not wanting employees to be taking anything while working, but these tests seem to test for a bit more than that.

I know some city banks test for liver function, which essentially tests for excessive liquor consumption. They don't fire for a bad test, though, I don't think.

I do know that pot is illegal, but it's hardly the same as more serious drugs, is it?

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread