Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unccvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!mcnc!unccvax!dsi From: dsi@unccvax.UUCP (Dataspan Inc) Newsgroups: net.med,net.flame Subject: Drug testing (long) Message-ID: <305@unccvax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 19:10:27 EDT Article-I.D.: unccvax.305 Posted: Thu Oct 3 19:10:27 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 5-Oct-85 14:54:40 EDT Organization: UNC-Charlotte Lines: 108 Xref: watmath net.med:2517 net.flame:12186 Not that my employer is involved in this (and I wouldn't care if it were) but this business about urinalysis for drugs is getting out of hand. There have been recent reports of job applicants who have been rejected "for reasons so confidential we can't tell the applicant." Horse-hockey!!! I can see it now. Let's screen people for: Phenothiazines - obviously, this person is mentally deranged. People who take Compazine, Stelazine, or (for that matter) ethical pain medication containing a phenothiazine - these persons obviously are under medical care for severe mental illness. Although YOU might use Compazine suppositories for nausea or motion sickness, employers can't take the chance... Butyropheonones -(drugs such as haloperidol or droperidol) - well, you go to outpatient surgery for having your oral cysts removed, and you have Innovar (droperidol- fentanyl) as an adjunct to anaesthesia. But, not only do you get a positive for opiates, but for these as well. You must be a really crazy drug addict!! (haloperidol is used in psychotic management and Tourette syndrome, and is very similar to droperidol) Iminostilbines - (I'm not sure of the class here - drugs of the class of imipramine) - well, you must be either a bed-wetter or depressed. There are some non- steroidal anti-inflammatory agents which are chemically related to imipramine. But, your employer gives you the boot because we can't take the chance that your naproxen prescription is **really** what raised the imipramine flag.. Carbamazepine - you must have non-grand-mal epilepsy. Never mind that people take this for severe, debilitating facial pain (I can state from experience that no one would take this for fun. The side effects really are very bad indeed) Barbituates - a sure sign of a downers addict. Of course, people who take Mysoline (which is changed to one of the barbaturic acid derivatives by the liver) and/or innocuous things such as Donnatal for gastric hypermotility get snared here. Opiates - Well, do you have ulcerative colitis, and use Lomotil? Just been to the dentist? To heck with you! ! Diazepam, etc. - (including oxzepam,clonazepam,chlordiazepoxide, flurazepam,alzropam[sp]) - you can't handle stress young man! Yeah, yeah, we hear you about your gall bladder cramps and diarrhoea, and you need Librax (yet another GI medication)..... Phenytoin - (and their analogues)-you're an epileptic, thus, are dangerous to you and everyone else. Some neuro surgeons give this as a measure after head injury to PREVENT injury-induced seizure activity. Mannitol - Did people ever consider that this is used as an *antihypertensive*, sometimes during kidney dialysis? Despite the popular use as a coke cut, I can see overzealous people substituting coke cuts for the real item. 5-fluorouracil - an antineoplastic. But, we can't hire you, you have cancer and a short life expectancy. I could think of a zillion more scenarios. When someone says "we can't tell a prospective employee why we can't hire them because of their drug screen" instead of "We found enough cocaine in this person's urine to start a Revco franchise..." this is a problem. Any first year med student can come up with at least 1000 "undersirable" cross-correlations between the drugs one takes and the possible indications. The attitude of most employers doing drug screening is that "a positive find is prima facie evidence of a drughead, and sufficient grounds to fire or not hire", and I can certainly see how a prejudiced and bigoted individual could bend the drug screening game to eliminate all kinds of people. Who is to say that racial motivations could "bend" a borderline drug screen. Before anyone is fired or refused to be hired due to the results of a drug screen, they had better damned sure be sure of the facts. Many people aren't going to do electron-capture or HPLC studies, and instead, are relying on "quickie" tests ordinarily reserved for management of OD victims. Let's see, now, why not pick people at random and give them a big, fat shot of naloxone (a narcotic antagonist).. if they get irritable, throw up, and sweat, they're druggies, right? Why not give Antabuse (disulfriam) as a condition of employment... to see if these people are boozers! (a very, very small BAC, in combination with Antabuse, results in quite a profound change in one's well being!!!) I'd be interested in comments and corrections to the list (it hasen't been adequately researched). In my opinion, if someone has honest to god heroin, or cocaine, or LSD in their urine or blood, you've a problem which reduces to the old "invasion of privacy" issue. However, things sure look as if screens are used not to look for drug ABUSE, but rather simple drug USE, and matching their disease to some undesirable characteristic. What is next, brain biopsies and spinal taps? David Anthony CDE DataSpan, Inc. . . Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com