Using Hair for a drug test
- Thread starter TeamCaffee
- Start date
purgoose10
Veteran Expediter
I got one question!!!
If your bald where does the hair come from??????????
If your bald where does the hair come from??????????
Brisco
Expert Expediter
I got one question!!!
If your bald where does the hair come from??????????
Omega Laboratories*-*Hair Testing FAQ
I hate to know what they mean by "Body Hair", know what I mean.
It may give a whole new meaning to the term/action "Turn your Head to the Left and Cough".
"Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?"
"Have you recently, or not so recently, used an illicit, controlled or otherwise objectionable substance?"
I'll pee in a cup all day long for 'em, but if they want to know what I may have done three months ago, they should have been there to find out. Not for trucking. I'd acquiesce if I were in some uber-highly safety-critical position, but driving a truck ain't one of them. The numbers simply do not support such levels of nunya.
And this is coming from someone who's never done drugs, not even so much as a single hit off a joint, and has never drank.
I might consider a hair test if the person requesting it shows me the lab results of theirs.
"Have you recently, or not so recently, used an illicit, controlled or otherwise objectionable substance?"
I'll pee in a cup all day long for 'em, but if they want to know what I may have done three months ago, they should have been there to find out. Not for trucking. I'd acquiesce if I were in some uber-highly safety-critical position, but driving a truck ain't one of them. The numbers simply do not support such levels of nunya.
And this is coming from someone who's never done drugs, not even so much as a single hit off a joint, and has never drank.
I might consider a hair test if the person requesting it shows me the lab results of theirs.
Deville
Not a Member
Recently I attended an industry event & was speaking to several diffrent operation managers & small courier owners & the subject of drug testing came up. Apparently there are various levels of drug testing in hair. The more intesne you screen it the more expensive it becomes. Most of the people I was talking too use either the basic test kit or one level above. The basic hair test is almost like a urine test, it can be miss certain things.
From what I gathered as I listened the hair screen is more of a deterant. Not many people know how indepth they go. It's just like anything else.
From what I gathered as I listened the hair screen is more of a deterant. Not many people know how indepth they go. It's just like anything else.
You are right Cherri. ALL elected officials SHOULD be subject to random drug testing just as we are. They are, of course, exempt. I would LOVE to do a BUNCH of randoms in the the Congress AND the White House. THAT would be revealing to say the least.
an in addition to all the other b/s around this subject. we love how not all the personnel in our industry are included. i would bet that 50% of the carriers dont make their employees in the office test nor do some of the employees attached to the various departments of the dot. [ your safety and compliance dept. ] the employees at the department of motor vehicles. im sure they test in the event of accident or injury but wtf.
we are all for being safe and sober on the roads but we dont agree with the way policy is enforced at will. not an apples to apples enforcement policy. its kinda the way they look at driving a truck and it being more dangerous to the motoring public than driving a car. we abide by these intrusive rules that go along with the profession we have chosen but we do not agree with them. its just not equal when the general public that use their own personal vehicles to make a living have no requirements forced on them as we do. really there is no difference between them and us and no difference in the safety factor as we all can cause accidents that can potentially be catastrophic.
we also agree that the government should have to abide by this policy and do something to even the testing field for all, oh wait, that means they would have to get involved in something that is for equality and not something that is driven by a political agenda or a citizen protest organization.
final question, do you know if your carrier has a random test policy for their office employees ?
we are all for being safe and sober on the roads but we dont agree with the way policy is enforced at will. not an apples to apples enforcement policy. its kinda the way they look at driving a truck and it being more dangerous to the motoring public than driving a car. we abide by these intrusive rules that go along with the profession we have chosen but we do not agree with them. its just not equal when the general public that use their own personal vehicles to make a living have no requirements forced on them as we do. really there is no difference between them and us and no difference in the safety factor as we all can cause accidents that can potentially be catastrophic.
we also agree that the government should have to abide by this policy and do something to even the testing field for all, oh wait, that means they would have to get involved in something that is for equality and not something that is driven by a political agenda or a citizen protest organization.
final question, do you know if your carrier has a random test policy for their office employees ?
I would much prefer a hair test to urine. The sample is easier and less degrading to provide. Clinics can handle it easier. The test makes it more difficult if not impossible to provide a bogus sample since someone at the clinic would collect it instead of sending you into a private room to provide it.
About cheating a urine test, see this.
It is not a lock of hair that is tested but full strands including the roots. Hair strands are plucked out, not cut off.
The hair test is more comprehensive in that it can detect illegal drug use going back a longer time. I see no need to test both urine and hair from truck drivers. A test that covers a longer term going back but misses the last few days or weeks is more comprehensive than one that covers the last few days or weeks alone.
Where an immediate result is desired, a urine test makes sense where an officer observes behavior that may indicate illegal drug use, and where a mandatory test immediately follows an accident. But for the purpose of random drug testing for which urine is now used, I believe hair tests are the better solution.
A driver who is at a party and decides to get high may take the risk that he or she won't get called in for a random in the next few weeks. But if he or she knew that the test would go back longer than that, the get-high decision may be reconsidered. So too with a driver who may be tempted to use illegal drugs to stay awake to complete a much longer run than is safe to complete without sleep.
This is probably a moot discussion anyway. With the instinct to regulate that the government has and the availability of increasingly inexpensive technology, it is only a matter of time before breath and blood testers are standard equipment installed in the cabs of commercial vehicles.
About cheating a urine test, see this.
It is not a lock of hair that is tested but full strands including the roots. Hair strands are plucked out, not cut off.
The hair test is more comprehensive in that it can detect illegal drug use going back a longer time. I see no need to test both urine and hair from truck drivers. A test that covers a longer term going back but misses the last few days or weeks is more comprehensive than one that covers the last few days or weeks alone.
Where an immediate result is desired, a urine test makes sense where an officer observes behavior that may indicate illegal drug use, and where a mandatory test immediately follows an accident. But for the purpose of random drug testing for which urine is now used, I believe hair tests are the better solution.
A driver who is at a party and decides to get high may take the risk that he or she won't get called in for a random in the next few weeks. But if he or she knew that the test would go back longer than that, the get-high decision may be reconsidered. So too with a driver who may be tempted to use illegal drugs to stay awake to complete a much longer run than is safe to complete without sleep.
This is probably a moot discussion anyway. With the instinct to regulate that the government has and the availability of increasingly inexpensive technology, it is only a matter of time before breath and blood testers are standard equipment installed in the cabs of commercial vehicles.
Last edited:
Yesteryear
Expert Expediter
Ditto! I also would rather they use my hair. It is really embarrassing to have to pee in a cup. Actually it is much better to use hair to weed out the druggies! A urine test tells what the donner has done over the past 7 to 30 days. A hair folicle tells what the donner has done over the lifetime of the hair. Guess the druggies would pretty much have to keep their heads shaved to beat that one. lol Be kind of funny to see these druggies walking around bald. hmmmmm
Ditto! I also would rather they use my hair. It is really embarrassing to have to pee in a cup. Actually it is much better to use hair to weed out the druggies! A urine test tells what the donner has done over the past 7 to 30 days. A hair folicle tells what the donner has done over the lifetime of the hair. Guess the druggies would pretty much have to keep their heads shaved to beat that one. lol Be kind of funny to see these druggies walking around bald. hmmmmm
NO testing without probable cause.
Yesteryear
Expert Expediter
Omega Laboratories*-*Hair Testing FAQ
I hate to know what they mean by "Body Hair", know what I mean.
It may give a whole new meaning to the term/action "Turn your Head to the Left and Cough".
ROFLMAO BIGTImE! LOL Guess they will have to keep EVERYWHERE shave to beat the test!
Yesteryear
Expert Expediter
I agree with that! I have been drug tested twice in the last year (with-in 6 weeks apart) and I don't only not do drugs but I don't even drink or smoke! (Nothing against those that do I just personally don't like the habits, think smoking is nasty and disgusting and never developed a taste for alcohol.) So actually was offended that I was sent for a drug/alcohol test. Not because I couldn't pass the test but because it made me feel like someone else thought I couldn't, kind of criminalistic and I found it very embarrassing to go into a clinic to BE drug tested. Very humiliating yes very very humiliating!
I agree with that! I have been drug tested twice in the last year (with-in 6 weeks apart) and I don't only not do drugs but I don't even drink or smoke! (Nothing against those that do I just personally don't like the habits, think smoking is nasty and disgusting and never developed a taste for alcohol.) So actually was offended that I was sent for a drug/alcohol test. Not because I couldn't pass the test but because it made me feel like someone else thought I couldn't, kind of criminalistic and I found it very embarrassing to go into a clinic to BE drug tested. Very humiliating yes very very humiliating!
Yep, it IS humiliating. There should HAVE to be a warrant AND probable cause. Can you imagine Obama bald? LOL!! Imagine the "baldies" in government IF THEY were required to take randoms! Nancy, or Harry, or Boehner? They ALL have to be on drugs to do what they are doing!
Don't forget Bill. Remember, he didn't inhale.
Yeah, no comment on that one.
If I were to comment I would be kicked of the site!! LOL!!
That's kind of my point, though. If someone gets high at a party, but is not under the influence at all when they next report for work, then what they did on their own time is nunya. What if someone is OOS and on vacation for three or four weeks and gets high once or twice that first week? A hair test will cost them their job.
The reason for drug testing is to deter and prevent people from driving while under the influence so as to protect the public. What someone does on their own time is nunya as long as it doesn't effect what they do while in-service. Like LOS said, no testing without probable cause. If there is probable cause to believe that someone operated a CMV while under the influence, and that cause can be articulated, then a hair test is fine. Otherwise, it's a gross intrusion into privacy, a witch hunt for your past.
and that turtle my friend is the truth and nothin but the truth.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
Over 3 yrs out here and I have never been called for a ramdom....
Hi thiss is Vince from safety...Hi Vince...what time? where at??
Now where is that Whizzinator and the WhizzKit...
Whizzinator.com -The Official Site of the Whizzinator - As seen in Hight Times - Get your Whizzinator Refills here!
Hi thiss is Vince from safety...Hi Vince...what time? where at??
Now where is that Whizzinator and the WhizzKit...
Whizzinator.com -The Official Site of the Whizzinator - As seen in Hight Times - Get your Whizzinator Refills here!