Testing consultants, the
hundred-dollar-an-hour types, loved this angle. They first marketed their
services to rehabilitation clinics as a means of ensuring that patients stay
drug-free. "Establishing the diagnosis of chronic heroin addiction involves
consideration of the patient’s history, physical examination, and results of the
urine test . . . . The earlier the problem is recognized, the easier it is to
reverse," recommended one study. No mention was ever made of test results being
used for other than medical reasons, by the police or employers.
As the drug phobia
intensified, test developers got bolder. They took less trouble discussing the
real uses of the urine test, and eventually dropped all pretense: "Immediate
reliable drug detection has never been this easy," now boasts Syva. Meaning that
within minutes you’d know whom to fire. Or bust. Or ship off to a rehabilitation
program, needed or not.
The strategy paid off. The
employers hungered to know, and the urine experts were more than ready to answer
the call of nature. Almost overnight, hundreds of chemical companies and
laboratories blossomed across America, some equipped with little more than a two
thousand dollar machine, minimum wage specimen handlers, and a Yellow Pages ad.
A billion-dollar industry was born.
In contrast to the
flamboyant and violent history of drug empires, the history of the urine test is
hardly Hollywood material. Despite little bloodshed, though, there are just as
many power struggles and politics. Ultimately the plot reveals the havoc
government and private enterprise can wreak when they work too closely together.
Chemical detection has long
been an intrinsic component of science. In the days of the Roman Empire,
physicians and oracles scanned, sniffed and tasted human by-products on their
way to diagnosis and fortune-telling. Leonardo DaVinci was one of the many
alchemists who studied compounds and excretions in the hope of turning them into
gold. It’s been human nature to torture molecules, forcing them to confess their
secrets of creation. Gradually the process became somewhat standardized.
As we might have expected,
the breakthroughs leading to modern biochemical screening came not from academic
curiosity, but military necessity. When the U. S. Government wanted a
devastating new bomb in the forties, basic physics and chemistry became
important business. Research funds led to particle accelerators, spectrum
analysis, gas chromatography, and radiation identification, all methods of
zeroing in on the basic component of the molecule - - the atom. Along the way,
scientists became good at positively identifying specific molecules as
components of mysterious chemical soups.
At first the War Department
(as it was more honestly named) didn’t consider applying this new science on
people. During World War II the emphasis was on destruction, not detection. Only
a small group of physicians saw its potential, first for forensic applications
and later diagnostic needs. But the equipment was expensive, the domain of
specialized hospitals and research facilities. For a long time, the technology
lay dormant.
Drug testing of healthy
individuals arrived comparatively late. In the sixties America became aware of
"recreational" drug use. It began a counterculture and emerged as a social
explosion. Conservative elements, alarmed over losing Vietnam and possibly a
generation, banded together in an attempt to control "unacceptable social
behavior." One outgrowth was the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), a
Washington money pit responsible for analysis - - clinical and social - - of the
drug scene. NIDA was the institutional force which put the fear of widespread
addiction into the public consciousness.
Paranoia seems inextricably
linked to bureaucracy. The Defense Department was afraid the wide-scale heroin
use among troops in Vietnam would take root in the States when the "grunts" came
home. Behavior tolerated ten thousand miles away simply could not be allowed the
same latitude stateside. Something had to be done. The solution lay in finding
methods of screening GIs for heroin addiction. NIDA, which wanted nothing more
than the chance to develop a testing, found eager allies at the Pentagon. When
NIDA applied for research money, the alliance conjured the nightmare of hordes
of heroin addicts - - bitter, trained to kill, and, of course, black - -
returning to our peaceful shores as an epidemic. Red tape was cut and grant
money guaranteed.
As usual the public knew
little of this. The Pentagon minimized the high level of addiction among
returning veterans, so funding and research were removed from scrutiny, and
always downplayed.
The urine test is as much a product of human persistence as technology. One
of the industry pioneers, the Einstein of urine testing, is Dr. Robert L.
DuPont, Jr. In 1971 DuPont started a seven year stewardship as the first head of
NIDA, and later as Director of the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse
Prevention. Right off he began a crusade to elevate drug abuse to the top
echelon of governmental concern. In the mid-seventies, he emphasized honest drug
education. NIDA even sponsored research into beneficial usage’s of illicit
substances. With Carter as President, the nation developed a more relaxed,
albeit cautious, attitude toward drugs. DuPont adapted to this style, even
conferring with NORML, about the possibility of marijuana decriminalization. The
nation’s real drug problems, he said publicly, were alcohol and tobacco.
Commission reports and studies sponsored by NIDA just ten years ago would be
considered overly permissive, even radical by today’s standards.
But DuPont, at heart a
conservative, was preparing for a clamp down. While many states were
decriminalizing possession of marijuana, NIDA quietly urged selected companies
to improve methods of detecting individual drug use. Syntex had researched
biochemical testing through its Syva division as early ads 1966 but had lost
interest in the field until NIDA opened the door to government money.
The first joint success was
the immunoassay, a complex test procedure utilizing chemical binders for illegal
substances. "Working togeïùãù through the seventies, NIDA and Syva developed
neat little EMIT urine tests for heroin, cocaine, speed and PCP that are still
used," noted Dean Lattimer, a general in the War on Urine Testing for High Times
Magazine. The immunoassay met all NIDA’s requirements: It provided sensitivity
to very low concentrations of drugs; it was a procedure that could be easily
taught and performed; and it was relatively inexpensive. The mere fact that it
wasn’t particularly accurate didn’t seem to bother anybody. Roche Diagnostics
developed a competitive, equally flawed, screen - - Abuscreen - - alongside
Syva.,
NIDA’s role in promoting the
immunoassay became a prestigious and eventually a financial coup for DuPont. At
first, like the test developers, he intimated that the procedures would be
confined to medical applications. In his preface to a 1973 Urine Testing Guide,
he wrote: "Urine screening for drugs of abuse has become a necessary adjunct to
treatment (of addiction)." When it later became apparent that Regan was about to
trounce Carter in the 1980 election, Carter administration appointees hoping to
survive shifted to the right. It was no longer healthy to confer with NORML. In
urine testing, diagnosis took a back seat to the possibility of mass
surveillance. The repercussions of Watergate wore thin, and tight restrictions
on FBI, CIA, DEA, and other intelligence gathering agencies were loosened. Open
vials of cocaine, which had once enjoyed high status in Washington, were now
kept out of sight. The atmosphere changed rapidly.
DuPont, despite a basic
anti-drug attitude, was guilty by association with the trend toward
liberalization. And at the time, he could find no niche in the New Order. He
seemed to be soft on drugs and resigned (read: was squeezed out) from NIDA. He
quickly signed on as head of the American Council on Marijuana (ACM, later the
American Council on Drug Education), a quasi-scientific fear-mongering group.
Outlasting three Presidents,
DuPont had developed survival instincts and a keen nose for shifting political
winds. His "born-again" zeal on the dangers of drugs restored his hard-line
image and caught the attention of the White House. The Reagans welcomed him back
and urged him to resurrect the tests that he had helped create. He could be
tough on drugs and gain power at the same time. What was once considered a
conflict of interest had among the supply-siders become good efficient
government.
DuPont forged the link
between government, private agencies, and industry. The combination of large
scale funding, new technology, and propaganda precipitated the rapid growth of
the Testing Mentality. Speculative equipment houses and laboratories began
training personnel and opening satellite facilities, some before the urine tests
were even commercially available.
Ironically, the most
prevalent of the illegal drugs - - marijuana - - proved to be the most elusive
in terms of immunoassay delectability. Without a pot screen, EMIT had as much of
a chance in the market as a breathalyzer that couldn’t recognize alcohol. The
reason was obvious: marijuana, although relatively benign, had millions of
users. It was really the symbol of the sixties counterculture and, through the
decriminalization movement, gained dangerous widespread support. Alaska made
possession of up to four ounces of pot legal in the confines of one’s home. Head
shops were legitimate businesses. Cheech and Chong "pot" movies were big box
office. But one of the hard-core tenets of the National Party Line is that pot
leads to harder, more dangerous drugs. Therefore, stop pot and you nip drug
abuse in the bud. The detection of marijuana usage became the primary focus of
all research. Estimates are that fully ninety percent of all positive test
results occurring today across the nation are for marijuana.
Researchers pursued the
complex metabolic path of cannabis with the gusto of small-town dogcatchers, but
even unlimited grant dollars couldn’t expedite an accurate test. Finally a
compromise was reached. Instead of search for a primary THC metabolite - - the
one responsible for the high - - an assay would look for a more accessible but
inert chemical. Called THC carboxylic acid, it doesn’t produce the high, but
remains in the body for weeks after exposure to the drug. The accuracy would
suffer, but tests for the presence of marijuana, however old, were enough to
satisfy the developers.
This logic paralleled that
of drug detection in the thirties, when opiate testing was based not on finding
opium but the more easily detected quinine, the most common "cut" for heroin.
Screening for THC carboxylic acid means the equipment is not searching for the
chemical that impairs job perf9ormance. As we shall alter see, it is mistaken
for metabolites of other substances, which are quite legal.
Whatever scientific
objections were raised got shouted down by the sales division. In 1980 excited
public relations staffers at ACM and Syva revealed the EMIT cannaboid test. The
Bladder Cops were now armed and dangerous. For the first time, the power brokers
took notice. And they smiled. The EMIT assays, conceived as an adjunct to
medical practice, were now being pedaled as the ultimate snitch.
What followed seemed more
like a circus than the workings of responsible government. The ACM and NIDA,
hand in hand, hawked the immunoassay as the final solution to the Drug Menace,
which itself was being touted as the chief threat to "traditional social values.
This symbiotic relationship between the urine test and the chief social evil
allowed one to feed off the other. In a more rational era, all this would have
been laughed off as pseudo-science. According to Dr. Oscar Janiger, a noted Los
Angeles psychiatrist who has worked with drugs and addiction for over fifty
years, "No respected scientist regards the urine test as anything more than
quackery."
Enter the three-martini
lunch. Lavish banquet5s and conventions were instrumental in selling EMIT, in
getting potential buyers hooked. Chemical cheerleaders wined and dined PTA
groups, prison boards, corporation executives, rehabilitation counselors, and,
of course, the military. Very few were in a position to question the basic
science involved. Conferences took on the flavor of pep rallies. Can do, gung
ho, U. S. A. all the way! A light to cast on the darkest evil scourge had been
found.
Eureka! It worked!
The entire medical
diagnostic market by 1986 had total sales of $2 billion, six years after the THC
test was launches. This includes all types of equipment, from CAT scans to
microscope slides. Urine-screening devices, the youngest segment of that market,
is easily the fastest-growing, representing sales of over $100 million. Wall
street analysts predict a potential market in excess of $250 million annually by
1990. The Washington Post estimates sales of ancillary drug-testing
paraphernalia could add another $150 million. And these are conservative
estimates, made before Reagan announced his drug-free workplace in September
1986. Since then, as testing skyrocketed, analysts have doubled these
projections.
Syva’s EMIT is currently the
industry leader. An aggressive marketing staff and favorable political climate
helped it ring up over $40 million sales in 1985, and almost $60 million in
1986. All this despite persistent negative evaluations by respected scientists.
All this despite persistent negative evaluations by respected scientists.
Hoffmann-LaRoche is second. Its Roche Diagnostic sold $20 million worth of
abuscreen, its radioimmunoassay. A company spokesman predicts they will triple
business by 1990.
But some folks are never
satisfied. In an effort to boost sales, Syva established a consulting arm,
called Performance Diagnostics. Armed with Syva’s client list, the division was
"formed to help companies evaluate the presence or extent of the drug and
alcohol problem in the workplace." But it was really a front, another way to
push the product." But it was really a front, another way to push the product.
Dr. John Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology and Medicine at Mt. Sinai Medical
School, observed, "This service by Performance Diagnostics often included the
recommendation of EMIT testing" (Morgan, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 10/84).
To the surprise of no one.
Corporate giants are often
successful in new markets if they go in with enough money, but urine testing
isn’t just the domain of the big boys. It has attracted more than its fair share
of entrepreneurs. After Reagan declared war on drugs, it seemed that everyone
with a semester of high school chemistry was cashing in. Many have found
success. The American Institute of Drug Detection in Rosemont, Illinois (which
despite an academic-sounding name is a for-profit company), was founded in 1983
on a shoestring budget. Two years later it has tested over 100,000 specimens for
major firms, including Exxon, General Mills, and my old jogging partners at the
Chicago Police Department. This one small company experienced a 1985 sales
increase of 450 percent over 1984. Profits for 1986 were expected to rise even
higher. Keystone Medical Corporation, a subsidiary of Medical Diagnostics, sold
nearly one million urine tests in its first year of operation, earning $4
million. And there are scores of others. Urine has literally and figuratively
become the Gold Rush of the eighties.
Big money was made while
researching urine testing, a lot of it off the taxpayers. During four
administrations NIDA pumped millions in Syva and similar research programs. But
the ones who really profited, both financially and in experience, were those in
on the early development. Like Michael Deaver, who allegedly made millions on
his friendships in the Oval Office, so too is the urine-testing industry
saturated with influence selling.
Dr. Robert E. Willette was
NIDA’s head of Clinical Research Technology. As a chemist, he oversaw
development of EMIT from 1974 to 1981. When EMIT was on the brink of commercial
success, Willette left the public sector and started his own consulting company
- - Duo Research in Annapolis, Maryland. Duo specializes in laboratory
inspection and performance evaluation. For a sizable fee, a Duo team recommends
improvements in technique, accuracy, publicity, and profitability. Above all,
Willette exaggerates urine-test accuracy: "Chemical testing can be as close to
100% reliable as science permits." Maybe someday, but not now, not with these
tests.
Peter B. Bensinger, former
director of the Department of Drug Enforcement, formed a partnership with Robert
DuPont with the creative name B and D Associates. Together they effectively
counsel corporations into establishing get-tough drug policies. Business is
booming. Bensinger is probably the most outspoken proponent of mass testing. He
has appeared on the Today show, and his articles appear regularly in national
op/ed pages. The media regard him as the unofficial industry spokesman. Question
on urine? Call Bensinger. It will be his job to destroy the premises of this
book.
Robert T. Angarola, former
general counsel to the White House Office of Drug Abuse Policy, is an attorney
with the Washington firm of Hyman, Phelps & McNamara. He is also a urinalysis
consultant. Angarola carried the Administration’s hardball approach to his
private-sector clients: "The constitutional right to privacy protects people
only against government (emphasis added) intrusion. Individuals acting as
private citizens are not bound by these constitutional restrains. And this
applies to private employers." Sounds like Edwin Meese? Talk of giving such free
reign to employers appeals to Angarola’s clients. These include Syva and Kidder
Peabody, a brokerage house that started its drug-testing program in late 1985.
Angarola’s job is to head off lawsuits by disgruntled employees. To avoid them,
he urges workplace candor; a worker who knows about his company’s drug policy
won’t mind having his privacy violated. So if you understand how the guillotine
works, you won’t mind putting your head on the block.
In the small world of drug
testing, these four - - Angarola, Bensinger, DuPont and Willette - - are
affectionately referred to as the Gang of Four. Dr. John Morgan explains, "They
are the ones responsible for a good deal of testing’s success, and some of
the fear that goes along with it. Remember these names. These men are among the
most competent and knowledgeable about testing - - scientifically and
politically. They are well-informed: they have to be. Their livelihoods depend
upon their credibility. Unfortunately their expertise represents the greatest
threat to the civil liberties we seek to protect. Know your enemy.
(Taken from Steal This Urine Test -
Fighting Drug Hysteria In America)
A Shameless 10% Discount For You.
Like all websites, we are here to provide
products to the marketplace. Should you decide to
purchase products from this web site insert the phrase "webdiscount"
in the coupon field during the checkout process and
receive a 10% discount on any products you might
purchase. This discount does not include shipping
costs and we do not charge those packaging or handling
charges. They irritate us too!
Also, please pass this discount on to
friends, neighbors or relatives. It's good for
everybody and this discount is good forever.
The Legal Issues
The
best way for passing saliva testing is
not to do drugs at all or at the very least lay off them for awhile.
There are many
legal ramifications one must consider and
any information provided here is not intended to interpret the law or give legal
advice, so please see an
attorney for legal services. We also must present you with our legal disclaimer which is
very important. We take this legality discussion very seriously, so
please read our disclaimer.
