Hair follicle testing?? | allnurses

Hair follicle testing??

  1. 0 Hi! I was wondering if anyone out there knows how far back they test your hair follicles for the IPN evaluation (initial drug testing), if they even do a hair test at all? I'm not sure if they only do a urine screen, but if they happen to test my hair I wanna be prepared. Currently not taking any of my medications, but about 30 days ago or so I did take something for a severe migraine. If the hair test only tests within the past 30 days I should be fine. Please help. (Ps, it was a med that I am prescribed btw). I am in Orlando, FL.
  2. Visit  NurseNeedsHelpPlease profile page

    About NurseNeedsHelpPlease

    Joined Jan '13; Posts: 3.

    12 Comments so far...

  3. Visit  wish_me_luck profile page
    0
    Hair follicle testing goes back 3 months.
  4. Visit  somenurse profile page
    0
    Seems like if this med was prescribed, bring along the prescription or bottle, wouldn't that be okay? If you had prescription for this med? but, what i do know. sorry.

    Also, saliva testing is getting popular now, cuz it's so cheap. It costs like a few dimes to test someone for drugs using saliva tests. but, that tends to only reflect recent meds, and saliva testing is not always real sensitive to detect marijuana... others drugs, yes, but pot? not so much. (i have pot smoker pal that i often do research for him, to help him pass his employee drug tests).
  5. Visit  MichelleRN34 profile page
    0
    I personally havent had to take any type of drug test other then urine. It may depend on the state you live in. If the drug is prescribed and you provide the current prescription when you are tested then it would not count as a positive drug screen i believe. But that also may very in different states.
  6. Visit  SouthernPoint profile page
    1
    Quote from Jean Marie46514
    (i have pot smoker pal that i often do research for him, to help him pass his employee drug tests).
    WOW. What a friend you are. You claim you are "Helping" him. You are not "Helping" him, you are enabling him. You are basically just as guilty as he is. You are finding ways for him to lie, cheat and just be totally dishonest with his employer. I don't care if he works in health care or not.
    Kandy83 likes this.
  7. Visit  SouthernPoint profile page
    0
    Quote from NurseNeedsHelpPlease
    Hi! I was wondering if anyone out there knows how far back they test your hair follicles for the IPN evaluation (initial drug testing), if they even do a hair test at all? I'm not sure if they only do a urine screen, but if they happen to test my hair I wanna be prepared. Currently not taking any of my medications, but about 30 days ago or so I did take something for a severe migraine. If the hair test only tests within the past 30 days I should be fine. Please help. (Ps, it was a med that I am prescribed btw). I am in Orlando, FL.
    I have done the hair test for IPN. The hair test looks back at a 3 month period or longer. Depends on your hair length. Since mine is long and I don't mess with chemicals in my hair. My test showed almost 4.5 months.

    As for the IPN evaluation. I never was drug tested at any of them. Just talked with someone and took a bunch of tests.

    As for the evaluation. Just be 100% honest. There is no need to be "Prepared". There really isn't anything to be "Prepared" for. You tell your story to the evaluator and they will write their report to IPN and you might end up getting a contract in the mail to sign and return to IPN. Pretty simple.

    PM me if you have more questions.

    SP
  8. Visit  somenurse profile page
    0
    Quote from SouthernPoint
    WOW. What a friend you are. You claim you are "Helping" him. You are not "Helping" him, you are enabling him. You are basically just as guilty as he is. You are finding ways for him to lie, cheat and just be totally dishonest with his employer. I don't care if he works in health care or not.
    He does not work in healthcare, nor does he have a problem. I really believe it is the laws against pot smoking that are wrong, not the smoking of pot.
    Some people use a martini to have fun on a Friday night, this man, an otherwise law-abiding citizen and very moral, responsible person, has a few puffs of a joint instead. I feel the few puffs
    are far less harmful, than the legal martini, or legal prozac, or legal valium, are. Pot has WAyyyy less side effects. No one has overdosed on pot, no one has ever died from pot...but, they can occasionally end up eating cookie dough, or drive too slow,
    but, otherwise,
    pretty safe drug.

    I have no moral qualms whatsoever about helping him, or even enabling him, to continue to be employed, while enjoying the occasional pot cigarette. Zero moral qualms whatsoever. I do not always use civil laws as my moral compass,
    but you are free to do that if that is how you decide right and wrong. It is not always how i make that decision, of right and wrong.

    My own inner moral compass guides me, and i have thought about this, and have no qualms whatsoever in supplying my clean, drug-free urine to this person to use. The law is wrong, not my friend's pot-smoking.

    If you personally feel smoking pot is morally wrong, that is your choice to feel that way, but, i don't. I myself don't smoke pot, although i did when i was younger. Only reason i don't smoke pot, is, i don't like how it feels now, for me, although it does have fine effect on others, for me, not so much. This guy actually uses MY urine to pass his employment drug tests, trick is, to keep it at correct temperature. (only police urine tests can be witnessed, employee urine tests can not legally be directly watched, so, he can keep small vial of my urine in his crotch to use for his employee drug tests, cuz i do not smoke pot nor take any drugs).


    Now, if my pal was an addict, or on hard drugs which were interfering with his life, his relationships, etc, you'd have just cause to accuse me of being "guilty" of something, as i too, would find that kind of addiction a problem my pal would have to address.
    but pot? nope, *I* DON'T see using pot occasionally as a moral problem.

    but, other drugs, and booze addiction, reeeally scare me, and can do horrific damage to a person, but, pot? Haven't seen it ruining lives. But, other drugs, and booze? and even prescription meds, oh yeah, who hasn't stood witness to seeing someone's life, and the lives of those around them, be ruined?
    Last edit by somenurse on Jan 16, '13
  9. Visit  SouthernPoint profile page
    1
    Quote from Jean Marie46514
    This guy actually uses MY urine to pass his employment drug tests, trick is, to keep it at correct temperature. (only police urine tests can be witnessed, employee urine tests can not legally be directly watched, so, he can keep small vial of my urine in his crotch to use for his employee drug tests, cuz i do not smoke pot nor take any drugs).
    Again. WOW. It is people like you who make it harder for the Recovering Nurse. Just would like to Thank You ahead of time.

    Also, I am not sure where you get your information about "Only police UDS" can only be witnessed and everything else is not legal, because you are 100% WRONG. Employee USD can and normally are witnessed. You might need to get your fact's correct before posting things you honestly have no clue about.

    Anyways. I personally could care a less about your so-called point of views on how to cheat a system and how to defraud people. This is a forum for "Recovering Nurses" and your dishonest comment has no place in this forum in my eyes. This is a forum for support.
    Kandy83 likes this.
  10. Visit  somenurse profile page
    0
    Quote from SouthernPoint
    Again. WOW. It is people like you who make it harder for the Recovering Nurse. Just would like to Thank You ahead of time.

    Also, I am not sure where you get your information about "Only police UDS" can only be witnessed and everything else is not legal, because you are 100% WRONG. Employee USD can and normally are witnessed. You might need to get your fact's correct before posting things you honestly have no clue about.

    Anyways. I personally could care a less about your so-called point of views on how to cheat a system and how to defraud people. This is a forum for "Recovering Nurses" and your dishonest comment has no place in this forum in my eyes. This is a forum for support.

    i am all for people recovering. all the way. I've had some pals who were struggling against alcoholism, or various other addictions, very painful to watch, and i stand humbly in awe of those who do have the courage and strength to tackle that very very difficult issue. I actually do happen to know a lot about that topic, more than i ever wanted to know, actually,
    and i wish them all luck, and do not feel my comments were in any way "dishonest", or less valuable or valid than yours are.

    I just don't think smoking pot is morally wrong, nor do i think helping my pal stay employed is morally wrong either. Again, i do not always use civil law as my moral compass. We've had many a law that was wrong,
    and i think, in the future, the prohibition against smoking pot will someday be viewed as wrong. I feel the fraud is the one being done by the lawmakers and those profiting off of arresting nonviolent pot smokers. LOng list of various people who make a fine profit off of arresting nonviolent pot smokers.



    Yes, i should have stated, "Only court-ordered urine tests" not "police" urine tests (lousy wording) can be visually witnessed. I've administered employee ordered urine tests, given employee urine tests myself, as an employee,
    and have many a pal who have submitted employee urine tests (not court ordered, but your boss ordering it)
    and only court-ordered urine tests can be visually watched.
    Oh, the employee ordered urine tests, we can stand outside the stall, we can shut off the water, we can drop blue dye in the water, but, we can't watch their urine coming out of their urethra while their pants are down---we have to stay on other side of stall door, but, if it is court ordered, THEY can watch the urine exiting the body.

    maybe only a small difference, but, it's true.


    btw, "court ordered" would include urine testing ordered by various programs that the person was sent to, by the court.
    but, pre-employment urine tests, and random urine tests ordered by one's boss, they have to stay on other side of stall door, but, possibly, some are doing it wrong, who knows.
    Last edit by somenurse on Jan 16, '13
  11. Visit  somenurse profile page
    0
    but, i think we both can agree, (be stunned if anyone DISagreed)
    that anyone who is court-ordered to pass a drug free urine test, or anyone who wants to quit smoking pot,
    for whatever reason,
    should strive to stop smoking pot. No disagreement from me whatsoever on that.
  12. Visit  SouthernPoint profile page
    0
    Quote from Jean Marie46514
    Yes, i should have stated, "Only court-ordered urine tests" not "police" urine tests (lousy wording) can be visually witnessed. I've administered employee ordered urine tests, given employee urine tests myself, as an employee,
    and have many a pal who have submitted employee urine tests (not court ordered, but your boss ordering it)
    and only court-ordered urine tests can be visually watched.
    Oh, the employee ordered urine tests, we can stand outside the stall, we can shut off the water, we can drop blue dye in the water, but, we can't watch their urine coming out of their urethra while their pants are down---we have to stay on other side of stall door, but, if it is court ordered, THEY can watch the urine exiting the body.
    Ok, Personally I don't give a dam about whether you think smoking pot is right or wrong. This is not the correct forum to be having that debate.

    Now, I do have a problem with you stating the above that I have quoted. Why is that, because you are wrong. You claim you have all this experience doing this and doing that. Well whatever.

    Urine Drug Screens do NOT have to be court ordered or boss ordered to be witnessed. When I say witnessed I mean "Standing in the room and yes watching the person pee". I know many friend and family who work in all different fields and many of them have to do random drug screens for their employers for many different reasons. A handful of them have asked about "Why was I watched". It's called a Chain of Custody. Watching is the only way it would hold up 100% in the court of law.

    Example: If you were my employer and requested me to pee (for reason) and I did so, but it was not watched or witnessed, you end up firing me because my urine came back with something in it. I end up getting a lawyer and I end up suing you like no tomorrow, why is that? Because your Chain of Custody was broken. Can you or could you honestly say with 100% certainty that it was MY urine? No you can not and guess what, I win the case and now I am rolling in the bucks. So, do not try to tell me it is illegal or only "Court Ordered" for UDS to be witnessed.

    You might have been around the block on many, many other things. But when it comes to keeping a Chain of Custody linked together, I know my stuff.

    You can claim that watching/witnessing a UDS is a total violation of a person's rights. Well it's not. If you want a job then sometimes, you need to deal with what is required of you to keep that job. And normally if you have a job that is going to require random UDS or even scheduled ones, you know this when you apply for the job. It's not like an employer is going to just toss this your direction 5 years after you were hired.

    Anyways, I am done with this.

    SP
  13. Visit  somenurse profile page
    0
    I have participated in 100s of "chain of custody" urine tests, as i worked ER, and most all companies order any employee who is hurt on the job, to submit to a urine test. I have also collected urine screens in the ER, after accidents, while cops are waiting for results,
    and even those, us nurses were on other side of stall door, and had blue dye in the toliet water, and water shut off to sink, too.
    These are most definitly legal urine tests, i sign my name, that that urine came from that person at so&so date and time, and record temp of the urine, etc etc. Much paperwork with it, it's sealed, patient signs that IS his urine, YOU also SIGN that IS your urine, etc etc. Very very "chain of evidence", very much so.


    We never ever have to watch the person with their pants down for those, nor have i ever given a pre-employment drug test, nor an insurance drug test, where i was visually watched, ("heard" maybe, but never watched)
    nor do i know anyone who has. But, like i said, it's possible some are doing it wrong.

    A quick google, to see if maybe things have recently changed, turns up 100s of sites, all of which back up what i am saying,


    that only court ordered urine tests can be visually witnessed. Employer ordered urine tests can not be visually witnessed.

    but, maybe google is wrong, maybe there IS some brand new law now, that employer ordered or even pre-employment urine tests, can now be visually witnessed.
    Last edit by somenurse on Jan 16, '13
  14. Visit  sirI profile page
    3
    This thread has NOTHING to do with UDS and everything to do with hair follicle testing.

    This thread has NOTHING to do with enabling someone to "beat the system".

    This thread has NOTHING to do with the moral compass and civil laws.

    Anyone enabling another and coming here to AN to admit to it, is something we do not endorse. Period.

    Closing this thread.


Nursing Jobs in every specialty and state. Visit today and find your dream job.

Visit Our Sponsors
Top
close
close