Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ll-xn!cit-vax!amdahl!proper!elric
From: elric@proper.UUCP (Elric of Imrryr)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Urinalysis...Lie Detectors...all th
Message-ID: <288@proper.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Jun-86 03:31:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: proper.288
Posted: Tue Jun 10 03:31:54 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Jun-86 02:26:32 EDT
References: <402@bu-cs.UUCP> <108@gumby.UUCP> <1239@dual.UUCP>
Reply-To: elric@proper.UUCP (Elric of Imrryr)
Distribution: net
Organization: Lunatic Laboratories Unltd.
Lines: 17

In article <168@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> mmar@sphinx.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) writes:
>In article <188@mit-amt.MIT.EDU> gerber@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Andrew S. Gerber) writes:
>>Also, any of the tests can be foiled by the addition of 5 grams of
>>salt to your urine sample, or an even smaller amount of bleach or
>>drano.  The test for THC is a simple yes/no assay, and if you taint
>>the urine sample enough, the test cannot even assay it as urine, and
>>returns a "no" result.  
>>
>
>Tampering with samples is something that the people who like to give these
>tests are well aware of.  That's why the proposals or contracts calling for
>drug testing like to specify *supervised* urine samples.   
> When's the last
>time you tried to urinate into a beaker under supervision?  
I think I would be so nervious I would probaly end up urinating on the 
supervisor...... :> (Evil Grin)
>