It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Guess how many welfare recipients tested positive in Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder’s drug test?

page: 17
59
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Most labs take the sample and split it in to four parts. A reserve if the test is in question positive for liability reasons. Three individual tests. Takes two out of the three being positive to be called positive. The individual will be called in, and explain why another sample is needed. Then a better method like a hair sample maybe used.




posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: luthier

Usually lab procedures are developed through independent research then is applied to real world situations. A lab learns the method then it's applied. Then the lab is certified through government and professional organizations by showing applied competency and adhering to that industries testing standards and methods. Clinical test labs don't just wing it and have many layers of oversight. What conflict of interest?


Well since your not in research you may not know this.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
themindunleashed.org...

www.scientificamerican.com...
www.theatlantic.com...

There are also NEJM articles and generally a consensus the conflict of interest are destroying scientific peer review.

They even higher ghost writers to work for journals and newspapers.

I don't expect you to care though what the data is showing



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

A hair sample that could say you did drugs 4 years ago?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

There are people that "proved" the earth is flat and man has never been to space. And what does peer review have to do with proven lab methods accepted by government and industry organizations. Again layers of protection. Peer review, passes clinical trials, accepted by the medical associations, and approved by government oversight FDA. All have conflict of interest? Back to conspiracy at many levels.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Wow you have a knack for making up arguements.

Should I provide the fda articles showing that the drug trials be re tested show that drugs they approved don't work or the dangers were hidden? You have no idea what your talking about and are waffling

My wife is a research professor. This is something she has been going to conferences about for the last 3 years

Clinical trials are being fabricated and passed through the fda.

Any way my point was in science it's a conflict of interest when the company that would benefit from the findings are the ones doing or paying for the studies.

So when quest labs gives a report saying drug testing does x y and z to benefit your company and provide the service it's a definite conflict of interest when they provide their own studies to report the findings

To play your story. Just like when I grew up and the paper mills showed their studies which said the dioxin wasn't causing the town's breast cancer problem or inordinate number of kids with down syndrom.

This is the very same thing. IfYou use independent studies it shown drug testing does not stop drug use.

In some fields it may be different where people are very concerned about the dangers presented to the general public. However that doesn't stop the guy going through his divorce from getting hammered and hitting the wrong switch. Which is why the trends are moving in a different direction. To be able to help the people.

Sure if your finger is on the button screen em.

If your flooding the market with tests just to test it makes no sense.

You are standing up for a system that checks grocery store check out clerks.

Do you think Quest labs is going to produce a study that says 45 percent of its drug tests are useless?
edit on 26-6-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Then you are saying the system from the FDA down has failed. Is it all procedures. The most common procedures. Just one method? Particular lab equipment. Particular lab chemicals. A certain supplier of lab equipment. Certified labs. Uncertified labs? Not using certified lab equipment retailers? Research from one college? All colleges. Failure of all research companies. Failure of certification organizations? Again failure at all levels.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Did you red any of the links. Including g the government one?

Yes it's a total fail and it's on purpose in many cases by the researchers under pressure to support the grants they are given, or the amount of money put into researching a drug.

Stuff like this
www.fda.gov...

People faking test results and fabricating data.

Or the fda burying what it found like this.

www.fda.gov...


And for good measure.
archinte.jamanetwork.com...

Notice the sources I am providing. Not tabloid stuff here.

edit on 26-6-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Again, is it all certified sample methods or just one. All certified labs or uncertified labs. From all researchers, or just one. Very simple questions. If the FDA is on it, oversight is working.

VW got caught cheating on their emission testing? All car companies cheat? Back to probable cause?

Finally, are you saying the test methods are flawed or results. Proving a new method is good is under peer review. Saying labs are making mistakes using approved lab methods is a quality control issue. To entirely different matters.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

If you read the plain English I am writing I am saying that the studies showing and promoting how effective drug testing is for employers has been done by the people doing the tests until recently.

The problem with testing is a seperate issue.



The problem with testing is drug users are faking the tests by using either synthetic urine, some else's urine, or a masking agent that makes the test inconclusive . Second random testing is seldom done any more.
Third employers are finding that having a policy where employees can ask for help is working better than randomly testing, fourth there is already a question about civil liberty violations. For instance employers get sued if they drug test before offering a job.

The reason European workers don't get tested is they have stronger workers rights protecting civil liberty.

When. They do drug test in fields that are major risks it's in conjuction with a dr who can interpret if the guy was at a school reunion and smoked a joint or is a crack head. The companies themselves don't get the results.

Don't act like there is no arguement for protecting civil liberties. This country is founded on individual rights. You can make me sound selfish but if I were I wouldnt care at all about other people. I don't get drug tested nor would I fail.

And if you bothered to read anything I provided it shows 50 percent of research studies across the board are false. 1/3 purposely.

By the way your dr reads these studies in medical journals.


For instance Dr's started diagnosing bipolar disorder in young children (as young as 4) and started prescribing drug cocktails recommended in a NEJM articel. The whole study turned out to be BS.
edit on 26-6-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

You were trying to say the actual test method was flawed. People cheating is not an indication of bad lab procedures. It shows people can introduce accuracy problems by doing something abnormal. The people oversight should be catching.

And you never answered my question. If I trust a pilot to fly me across the ocean, I don't have the expectation and right to know they are not on illegal drugs? Not criminals. Are mentally and physically up to the task.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Any chemical sample can be ruined by unknown contaminants or dilutions. Does that mean the science of a test method is flawed?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Can you point out where I said the test method was flawed?

The use of the test and it's effectiveness at what it's designed to do is flawed. Rather the repurposing of drug testing as mass employment screening is flawed.

And my biggest arguement it's a fourth amendment issue.

You are seriously either not capable of reading or so infused in your own arguement you don't even care to.

I gave you articles from the fda, from JAMMA, from the NCIB, from the chief editor of the NEJM and you are too busy with your arguement to read them.

My arguements against the test are of personal liberty.

And no you have no right to know a thing about your pilot. That would be protected by HIPPA.

Is there something wrong with a dr interpretting the test, assessing the patient as an expert, and communicating with the employee about the employee?

You have made strawmans of every arguement so far.
edit on 26-6-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-6-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Whole families trust their lives to a pilots and they have no right of reassurance the pilot is in good mental and physical health and illegal drug free. I bet if a high pilot csused a crash, the company would be found liable for allowing an impaired pilot on duty. If you were the owner, I bet you would start doing what that EU board recommend and start testing. Positions of public trust call for more stringent requirements.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I have told you what is done in the USA manufacturing chemical industries and why. I even proved drug testing cost is not a factor. Because you're logic is flawed doesn't make me wrong.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Your real stuck having this arguement with yourself.

Did you happen to read where I asked what's wrong with a dr getting the test at the time of the physical and telling the employer if he thinks the person is fit for the job?

Also your real stuck on pilots and industrial chemical workers. Do I need to provide a chart that shows how much of the labor sector that is? Why don't you take a guess ?

Do you think it's 57 percent of the total us job market?

Or are they testing people for jobs that obviously don't require drug testing. Like bagging groceries.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

What logic is flawed? That those industries don't even account for 10 percent of the jobs in the us yet they test 57 percent of them.

That spending money testing a grocery store bagger is ludicrous and an invasion of privacy.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

If the company wants to spend the money, more power to them.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

What grocery chain drug tests by the way?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Wow. Good for you. Give up your rights for your masters.

Ready for those cameras yet? Surely its no big deal if your not doing anything wrong.

It's funny that two countries that drastically control the ability for employers to exert force over private life choices, also give those peopke more vacation time, and are more productive per hour.

Its ironic a country founded on individual liberty has fallen behind socialist countries in personal liberty in many areas.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: luthier

What grocery chain drug tests by the way?


Most of them.

Kroger and HEB to name a couple big ones.



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join