|
Drug Testing Industry
Tries To Thwart Drug-Test Foilers
While a few
upstarts may be determined to foil drug tests, the giant
drug-testing industry is bent on foiling the foilers. But it isn't
easy.
The industry has
created ways to detect adulterant products in urine samples designed
to hide the signs of drug use. It's starting to use tests based on
hair and oral fluid, supposedly tougher to beat than urine tests.
And it's taken its case to state governments -- several of which
recently banned the marketing and use of drug-test adulterants.
Based on sheer
size, the industry should be quashing its upstart opponents.
Sixty-seven percent of major U.S. firms drug-test employees,
according to a 2001 American Management Association survey, and the
industry expects 2003 revenues to reach an estimated $947 million,
according to Market data.
The drug-test
foilers, meanwhile, are mostly mom-and-pop-type operations that sell
their wares through Web sites and retail stories.
But the behemoth
drug-testing industry is fragmented. With test manufacturers,
testing labs, consultants, employers and the government all playing
a part, it can be hard to put up a united front against inventive
adversaries willing to try anything from simple tablets to
prosthetic penises that serve as hidden sacks of somebody else's
urine.
Plus, ensuring that
samples aren't tampered can be an expensive proposition, one that
some companies aren't willing to bear.
So far, the
industry's best success seems to be tests that detect common
adulterants, such as bleach, in urine. About half of Quest
Diagnostics Inc.'s clients opt for a series of tests called
TestSure, says Barry Sample, director of science and technology at
Quest. TestSure adds an additional $2 to the cost of the drug test,
which can vary from $16 to $28.
HOW MUCH TESTING IS
GOING ON?
Industry
Percentage of
companies that test applicants or employees
|
Industry |
Percentage of companies that test
applicants or employees |
|
Manufacturing |
81% |
|
Finance (banks, insurance and real estate) |
23% |
|
Wholesale and retail trade |
65% |
|
Business and Professional Services* |
44% |
|
Public Administration |
76% |
|
Other Non-Profit |
50% |
|
Other For-Profit |
70% |
|
Total of all
respondents |
67% |
* Includes computer
software, legal, health, social and educational services,
accounting, engineering, auto repair and more. Source: The American
Management Association's 2001 Medical Testing Survey, of more than
1600 companies.
Syva Co., a unit of
diagnostic company Dade Behring based in Deerfield, Ill., says its
adulterant-screening products have seen 50% growth over the past two
years, while Roche Diagnostics, a division of Switzerland's Roche
Holding AG, says sales for its similar Intect 7 test strips have
increased 77% since 1998.
Quest says
oxidants, a common agent in adulterants, are being found less
frequently. Of the approximately 6.3 million tests tracked by
Quest's Drug Testing Index in 2001, a scant 0.54% tested positive
for an oxidizing adulterant, compared with 0.92% in 2000 and 1.7% in
1999.
Government
guidelines due next year would make testing for adulterants
mandatory for federal and safety-sensitive workers, like pilots and
truck drivers.
That could prompt
the private sector to follow suit and use tests for adulterants with
every drug test, says Jim Wright, director of compliance at DISA
Inc., a Houston-based drug-testing advisory firm.
Some in the
industry believe that nonurine tests, such as hair and oral-fluid
tests, will be the winning approach. More companies are using these
tests, such as Cambridge, Mass.-based Psychemedics Corp.'s hair
tests and oral-fluid tests from OraSure Technologies Inc. in
Bethlehem, Pa., which are marketed as impervious to current
adulterants. Hair tests liquefy hair to get at drug traces deposited
in the center of strands over long periods of time, an approach that
is said to defeat foiling shampoos that clean the outside of hair.
Meanwhile, both
tests are administered by or in front of another person -- an
inch-size snip of hair at the root or a swab of saliva --
eliminating private time in a bathroom when urine samples can be
altered. Another option is on-site spot urine sampling devices used,
for example, when a candidate arrives to interview, to minimize risk
of advanced planning to thwart the test.
Finally, the law is
increasingly on the industry's side. In November, North Carolina
joined New Jersey, Texas, Nebraska and Pennsylvania in criminalizing
drug-test foiling; neighboring South Carolina outlawed adulterants
in 1999, imposing fines of up to $5,000 and three years in prison.
Meanwhile, industry
lobbyists are shooting for federal legislation, according to Laura
Shelton, executive director of the Drug and Alcohol Testing
Association. "I think right now it's just a matter of finding out
who's in Congress and what is the right approach as far as
introducing legislation."
WHO'S DOING DRUG
TESTING?
|
Industry |
Share of all testing by industry
|
|
Manufacturing |
62% |
|
Finance (banks, insurance and real estate) |
3% |
|
Wholesale and retail trade |
8% |
|
Business and Professional Services |
6% |
|
Public Administration |
3% |
|
Other Non-Profit |
9% |
|
Other For-Profit |
10% |
he American
Management Association's 2001 Medical Testing Survey, of more than
1600 companies.
Sometimes foiling
the foilers comes down to individual determination. Syed Hussain,
owner of an Examination Management Services Inc. testing branch in
midtown Manhattan, recalls one man who came for a hair test shaved
head to toe -- not once, but twice. The third time, at the client
company's suggestion, Mr. Hussain whipped out a razor and shaved the
stubble on the man's head.
"They cannot beat
the system," Mr. Hussain says.
The Drug Test Menu
|
Test Types* |
Test-Industry Pros |
Test-Industry Cons |
Foiling Products |
|
Urine tests Donor gives sample at testing
center. The test screens for signs of drug usage one to 30 days
prior (window depends primarily on the drug type). |
The industry "gold standard," these tests
have withstood legal challenges and have been around longest.
|
Donor alone in bathroom. The foiling
industry has had years to develop strategies. |
A range of drinks, pills, and urine
additives of varying efficacy. If outdated, the additives can be
detected in the sample. |
|
On-site urine tests Donor gives sample on
the spot, usually without prior warning. The collection devices
themselves, usually cups, can reveal signs of drug usage, one to 30
days prior (window depends primarily on the drug type). |
Donor lacks prior knowledge of test.
Results available in minutes. |
Donor alone in a bathroom. Devices can be
read incorrectly. |
Because detoxifying drinks must be taken
at least 45 minutes ahead of a test, they won't work for surprise
tests. Donor must use urine additives. |
|
Oral-fluid tests Donor sticks a swab in
mouth in front of administrator. The test screens for signs of drug
usage one to three days prior. |
Donor lacks privacy and prior knowledge of
test. |
Not yet fully tested in courts.
|
Detoxifying mouthwashes purport to coat
the mouth with solution and stop saliva flow for 30-40 minutes,
preventing the testing lab from obtaining a positive reading.
|
|
Hair tests Administrator cuts about 60
strands near a donor's scalp (or elsewhere) and liquefies sample to
wash out contaminants. The test screens the wash for signs of drug
usage in the past 90 days. |
Donor lacks privacy. Have withstood legal
challenges. |
Will not detect recent (one-to-seven day)
usage. |
Shampoo products coat the hair with a
compound that is said to destroy traces of illicit drugs released
when the hair specimen is dissolved for testing. |
*All tests detect
at least marijuana (THC), cocaine, opiates, amphetamines and PCP.
Positive samples are often verified, as above tests are screens, by
another test called gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.
Sources: drug-test
manufacturers and adulterant manufacturers
Return to Passing Drug Test
News Menu
Passing Drug Tests With Ready Clean - XXtra Clean - Root
Clean
|