drug & booze testing

[tinpis]

And all you boys dropping meds for high BP watch out as well
And mad pills for depression

[compressor stall]

Box 3: An unexpected positive amphetamine result

A 53-year-old man provided a urine sample for drug screening, according to that company's policy. He indicated that he was not taking any medications.

His specimen returned a positive result in the screening test for “amphetamine-type drugs” at an accredited laboratory. Confronted with the result on the next day, he denied amphetamine use.

Convinced that the result was wrong, he provided a second sample. This also tested positive on the screening test. Both samples were subjected to confirmatory testing in the laboratory.

Both samples contained bupropion, the active ingredient in the anti-smoking drug Zyban. The man had overlooked the Zyban when he indicated that he was not taking medications.

This case shows that the original screening test is satisfactory for negative samples (assuming that adulteration and tampering have been reasonably excluded), but it may give positive results from normal every day medicines. Positive results on initial tests therefore have to be confirmed.

Other drugs that can give false positives for amphetamines in both laboratory-based and urine strip tests include some cold and flu tablets and the anti-ulcer drug, Zantac.

Box 4: Another unexpected positive result: true positive, but not from drug abuse

A senior manager of a large company provided a sample during random testing and returned a positive initial screen for opiate drugs (heroin, morphine and similar).

Confirmatory testing proved that morphine was present in the urine at a concentration that exceeded the Australian Standard AS4308. Codeine, which is transformed into morphine in the body, was not detected at a concentration above the standard, meaning that the morphine had not come from a dose of a codeine-containing painkiller. Heroin use or morphine use remained potential explanations.

The company's safety and health advisor investigated. Equipped with advice from the laboratory about alternative sources of morphine, he asked about recent diet.

The source of the morphine was quickly tracked to poppy seed and orange cake consumed for morning tea on the day of testing.

A sample of the poppy seeds used to make the cake was sent to the laboratory for analysis and returned a morphine concentration of 330 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and codeine of 20 mg/kg (same as grams per tonne, put into mining terms). High morphine concentrations in urine can be found after eating a quantity of poppy seeds.

http://www.ferret.com.au/n/Drug-and-...orking-n726009

Maybe we should be keeping medicine log and food logs?

[Zhaadum]

This is all BS. I always take Panadine or similar when I have any pain or headache etc. I find Panadol with no codine too weak to stop the pain.

I personally have no ill effects from it, never get sleepy after taking it.
The pain is just gone.

I for one will be refusing to stop work if they test me and it comes up false positive. STUFF EM!

First we are all terroists if you are a pilot (ASIC/AVID), and now we are all druggies too! AAARRGGGHH!!

[dodgybrothers]

clarrie hit the nail on the head. Feel some pain? A bit crook need some panadeine? Having a barbie with a few mates and might have a few beers?Then just take a sickie. When the sickie rates go up, things may change, until then, use 'em.

[shooter]

Zhaadum - Good post, it is not illegal to take codine and fly so tell them to F**k off and that you have done nothing wrong and you will be going flying.
As I said before, they have admited the tests give false positives and that substances other than illegal drugs give a positive result so under the australian constitution they have no legal standing whatsoever!

[Stationair8]

So what happens when the officially designated CASA piss tester says to you "can you provide me with a sample of your urine", and you reply "sorry just been to the toilet, can you wait for a few hours?"

[Rawrawhammer]

who says it will be urine testing?
wouldn't that be a tad too unprofessional?you can't just expect to be asked to piss in a cup at random by some stranger!
Tounge swipe testing like the one used on the roads would seem more appropriate/relevant as it's much cleaner and only returns positives if drugs have been taken within 24hrs or so for most substances.

[Pinky the pilot]

I have it from a 'reliable source' that as it currently stands, if someone from CASA stops you on the tarmac and asks you to submit to a drug/alcohol test you are not under any obligation to do so!!

Indeed, you may even invite the person requesting you to do the test to take a long walk off a short jetty, or whatever other form of refusal tickles your fancy.

And an official from your company is in the same position,unless the provision to apply these random tests is written into your employment contract and you have signed it.

Legislation to permit CASA to undertake these tests and require a pilot to submit to the test must be passed by Federal Parliament and then, as I understand it, only those CASA officials authorised by the legislation will be permitted to carry out the testing.

[Silent T]

The RAAF has been randomly drug and alcohol testing for a couple of years now. I've been tested a couple of times myself. I know that it won't necessarily be the same, but it was all pretty well explained at the time.
Basically go with the official, pee in a bottle. The pee is measured for temperature to make sure you haven't brought someone elses with you. Then they drip a bit on a couple of testing strips. You wait a couple of minutes and then lines appear on the tester. Apparently very similar to a pregnancy test. Took about ten minutes.

They did mention what they were testing for, and it was the standard 'cocaine, barbituates etc etc' and alcohol. I asked about over the counter drugs and the tester mentioned something about it depends on the concentration in the pee. From what I gathered the test they gave only showed a positve result if it was over some sort of concentration which would indicate a particular sort of drug.

[ernie blackhander]

If i understand correctly this testing will affect everyone who even goes near an aircraft, pilots, loaders, engineers and probably even the cleaners too(if your lucky enough to have them) Fair enough for on the spot testing i support it(dont hate me yet read on), however if you are to test a pilot for example it should be at around the pre flight time in the office not in full public view. Basically just a rbt only looking for alcahol, take a drug swab as mentioned in a previous post and send it to a lab in town. Pilot flys away if no alcahol found and can answer later if drug swab comes back pos. Same applies for everyone else. Now the real problem comes in, you return a pos for dope. You smoked a joint at a party 4 nights ago and have not flown until today when you were tested. Were you impared in your duties 4 days after said joint, i would have to say no. This is where i have my problem with the whole d&a testing. At what point do the testers become the moral police because i'm sure most of the people here know at least one or two people that use recreational drugs (yes i know they are illegal) and even though they may have a smoke at a bbq or on the weekend the vast majority would not even dare turning up to work still high. The test has to be one that only picks up on what has been consumed and is affecting you at the time of testing. end rant

[Reeltime]

The important thing to remember about over the counter medications, that contain something 'contra-indicated' for pilots, is that they are quite legal...you just can't fly having taken them.

If you do take them, you call in sick. I don't think CASA or individual companies have been given the power to say what legal medications their employees can take, to treat minor illnesses.

Sure sick leave rates will climb, but that's the price business will have to pay to operate in an over-regulated society.

[Sunfish]

Can some one tell me what Sudafed is classed as? I don't know where it fits in the DAME handbook.

I'm taking cold and flu tablets for a sore throat (typical winter illness) and I'll probably have to cancel a lesson on Monday unless I feel much better, but under the new regime, I'm not sure I can even present myself at the airport and maybe help in the hangar.

I'm also concerned about the rationale for the testing. Are they testing for actual impairment or are they testing for illegal drug use?

My enthusiasm for holding a PPL is gradually being whittled away by bureaucrats. I'm already up for a new ASIC as well.

[Launch_code_Harry]

The truth is out there

Finally the the truth is found, in the actual standard, available to be yours for only $78.

S E CT I ON 1 S COP E AND G E N ERAL
1.1 SCOPE
This Standard sets out procedures for the sample collection and the detection and
quantitation of drugs of abuse in human urine. The method is intended for workplace,
medicolegal or court directed detection of any or all of the following classes of drugs:
(a) Opiates.
(b) Sympathomimetic amines.
(c) Cannabis metabolites.
(d) Cocaine metabolites.
(e) Benzodiazepines.
NOTE: The detection and reporting of drug classes other than those listed above is not precluded.
See Clause 6.1(g).
Aspects of this Standard have relevance to testing for drugs of abuse in urine; however,
clinical testing is outside the scope of this Standard. This Standard does not cover the
testing of urine samples following excessive intake of therapeutic drugs or vitamins,
exogenous hormone intake or ingestion of performance-enhancing drugs which may be used
by sports participants.
Procedures for initial testing are set out in Section 4. Procedures for confirmatory testing
are set out in Section 5.

Source: 4308:2001 - Standards Australia (viewed using the "Preview" link)
Note This standard has been superseded by 4308:2008

It would appear that CASA are testing for drugs of abuse, plain & simple. Zero tolerance is to be applied, the central assumption appears to be the presence of any of these compounds at orders of magnitude below impairment levels indicates a "drug abuser".

Sunfish, Sudafed contains Pseudoephedrine a Sympathomimetic amines, a potential drug of abuse, detection period 2 days.

[Sunfish]

But is sudafed and medicines like codral cold and flu tablets safe to take? Both from the point of view of impairment as well as a false positive indication of drug abuse?

While I fly for the heck of it, I have been stuck in an out of the way place (it always seems to happen on the start of a holiday flying trip) and developed the beginnings of a cold - I know the symptoms. Usually a quick trip to the local doc and some precautionary antibiotics and cold and flu tablets nip it in the bud. But what happens next day when, feeling much better, I rock up to the mighty Cessna and get confronted by Mr. Plod asking for a sample? (I assume they will visit regional airports).

At some stage this is exactly what is going to happen.

[Launch_code_Harry]

the initiative will affect all safety sensitive personnel, that is, anyone who is airside and not a passenger

casa.gov.au/aod

Sunfish, impairment is dose related. If you have taken a medicine containing psuedoephidrine and you are airside, I repeat airside & washing your aircraft or minding your own business you can be asked to submit to a random test. If it is positive, you are a potential drug abuser & have to justify yourself to a DAMP.
You cannot be airside or perform any safety related functions with any of these substance above the cut-off thresholds, impaired or not.

[Pinky the pilot]

The way I see the whole issue described in the posts comprising this thread can be described thus;
Unless the Regulating Authority think this whole thing through very very carefully, and compose and enact the legislation with the greatest care and then apply the testing with the same care, I predict that nothing but a huge amount of grief, trouble and strife will come of it!

I leave it to individual Ppruners to make up their own minds what 'grief, trouble and strife' will represent.

I really don't want to think about it!

[flying-spike]

Worthwhile reading

The following link : http://www.casa.gov.au/newrules/part...PRM0703SSA.pdf

covers the intent of the proposed legislation and I would suggest reading it. It should be noted that the testing is to be administered by the employee'sorganisation and that random testing is not a arequirement for an organisation with its own Drug and Alcohol Management Program. That will be a CASA domain. D and A testing is not a new thing. If you have nothing to hide , you have nothing to fear. Like your renewal, licence test or first solo. If you have the right level of knowledge and you act appropriately, there is no problem.

[Launch_code_Harry]

If you have nothing to hide , you have nothing to fear.

The problem is that many OTC & prescription medicines also contain drugs of abuse. Next problem is the sensitivity of the testing - these test are exceedingly sensitive. You may be surprised to know that codeine is metabolised to morphine in the body INTOX. The test may show positive to "opiates" for up to 5 days after use - This would be an extreme case, however it is clear that many do not understand this. How many people have taken a headache tablet, Sudophed or cough medicine & closely examined the label? Now if you are airside, having taken one of these medicines in previous few days you may well being positive for the tox screen.
Which leads into you next comment:

If you have the right level of knowledge and you act appropriately, there is no problem

Where is the knowledge? Where is the detailed explanation of all this from CASA? Show us a list of exactly which OTC codeine preparations can be taken at the recommended does & a typical detection time.
CASA should provide a real-world example, eg John takes 3 panadeine tablets in a 24 hour period for a sore tooth, how long would before he would pass an an opiates tox screen. What should John do? How long should he abstain from safety related work?
CASA has provided guidelines & motherhood statements, but no practical information.
I am in no way arguing for the impaired or drug abusers to perform safety related functions. Rather I forsee problems with OTC medicines, at recommended doses and the extreme senstivity of the tests for substances, orders of mangnitude below thereputic/impairment levels.

[Capt Wally]

gotta love official Govt doc's, the first full page, "intentionally left blank" & the last page "intentionally left blank", that about sums it all up !
Will be vey interesting to see the first 'test' case hit the courts if it gets that far.


CW

[flying-spike]

Hope this helps

I don't want be seen as just attacking Launch Code Harry's post but maybe if I try and address each of his points it might help.

"The problem is that many OTC & prescription medicines also contain drugs of abuse. Next problem is the sensitivity of the testing - these test are exceedingly sensitive."

1. Declare over the counter and prescription meds when reporting for duty
2. Check with your doctor/DAME when they are prescribed if they could effect your ability to function
3. The standards specify the level of sensitivity. Remember they are not testing for impairment, just the presence of the drug. Unless you are professionally qualified in the appropriate medical discipline I think it is a bit rich to say the level of sensitivity is excessive.

"How many people have taken a headache tablet, Sudophed or cough medicine & closely examined the label? Now if you are airside, having taken one of these medicines in previous few days you may well being positive for the tox screen."

1. You are sticking it in your mouth and you don't know what is in it?
2. If you can get on PPRUNE you can "Google" the contents of the medication
3. Just you have an initial test positive it doesn't necessarily mean you can't fly. After all you did declare the medication didn't you?

"Where is the knowledge? Where is the detailed explanation of all this from CASA? Show us a list of exactly which OTC codeine preparations can be taken at the recommended does & a typical detection time."

1. There's heaps on the net and as I mentioned in an earlier post, the testing procedure is preceeded by an education campaign a month or so prior to the commencement of testing. This is usually a part of the package provided by the the testing organisation (usually subcontracted by the employer) to ensure the employees are given adequate time to "get clean" prior to testing.
2. Again a search of the net will help.

"CASA should provide a real-world example, eg John takes 3 panadeine tablets in a 24 hour period for a sore tooth, how long would before he would pass an an opiates tox screen. What should John do? How long should he abstain from safety related work?"

1. Every body metabolises drugs at different rates so an example may be misleading
2. "John" should see a dentist not a pharmacist
3. If he thinks he is fit for work he should declare the use of the panadeine to his employer