Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!hao!nbires!nose
From: nose@nbires.UUCP (Steve Dunn)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,net.med
Subject: Re: Drug Abuse - True Problem or Media Hype?
Message-ID: <907@nbires.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 29-Sep-86 12:58:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: nbires.907
Posted: Mon Sep 29 12:58:44 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 1-Oct-86 05:54:38 EDT
References: <720@scc.UUCP> <20756@rochester.ARPA> <463@epimass.UUCP> <1313@trwrb.UUCP>
Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO
Lines: 23
Xref: watmath talk.politics.misc:431 net.med:4989
Summary: Oh wow man, air traffic controllers on acid!!!

Drug testing may have some... unanticipated results. Persons whose jobs
depend on passing a drug test who are drug users have several actions. One
of those actions, of course, is to quit taking drugs. Probably a significant
number will do so. 

There may be another option however. If some psycho-active drugs are either
not tested for or cannot be tested for, then the user of drugs that are 
detected by the tests has the option of switching to drugs that are not
detected. My personal experience is that some people seem impelled to use
some sort of drug, if not one than another.

LSD is a fantastically potent drug. The average dose is about 125
micrograms. A microgram is a millionth of a gram. This is speculation,
but I doubt that with a dose this small, enough would show up in the urine
to make it detectable. If I am correct than people like air traffic
controllers who will get fired for (probably offduty) use of pot and coke may
switch to acid. If I'm wrong about acid not being detectable than my argument
will apply to the first drug they don't screen for. If this has worse effects
on job performance then the problem (If there really is one) will get worse
because of drug testing.


           -Steve "Piss bottles for god and country" Dunn