As a pharmacist...

[discontention]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

What would be your opinion on recreational use of licit unscheduled substances outside the workplace?

Picture this, your certified PhT pops a false positive for LSD on a random or an initial screening, but he comes clean and tells you the metabolites caught were actually from Lysergic a-hydroxyethyl amide (LSH) that he isolated from ether washed plant material and then synthesized inside the plant material with peppermint oil (because that hydrogen love to move). The sample is rescreened under a test specific environment and as it turns out he is telling the truth.

What is your professional reaction due to him not doing anything illicit?
Do you fire him on principle because at will employment allows it, or if he is being hired do you discriminate against him for a lack of privacy laws?

Just seeking out what the pre pharms and pharms think about licit and responsible use.

Remember: even though this compound is psychotropic it has therapeutic use as a vascular constrictant. He has a right to licitly treat his own ailment.

Also isolates are not covered under most countries analog acts.

 

[pms_testosterone]

You're asking in the wrong forum if you're looking for pharmacists! Most of us are students.

I don't have the answer, but is it really that common/standard for technicians in the US to be subject to drug screens?! Seems like a lot of inconvenience and indignity for a 10-20$/hr job. And why would they test bother testing for LSD, as its presence cannot be due to theft from the pharmacy?

 

[Jibby321]

You're asking in the wrong forum if you're looking for pharmacists! Most of us are students.

I don't have the answer, but is it really that common/standard for technicians in the US to be subject to drug screens?! Seems like a lot of inconvenience and indignity for a 10-20$/hr job. And why would they test bother testing for LSD, as its presence cannot be due to theft from the pharmacy?

It's a shot in the dark here.... But I'm guessing you have no pharmacy experience. Uh.... Yes. It's very common for technicians to be screened. Usually a 12 panel test. They are handling controlled substances. Just because lsd can't be stolen from a pharmacy doesn't mean they won't test for it. It's an illicit substance. You can't by lsd on the grocery aisle in walmart. yet all cashiers and employes are rountely tested before hiring and at random during employment.

 

[pms_testosterone]

@Jibby321 I am Canadian with nearly 3 years' experience. Never had a drug test, and if I was ever asked to take one I'd be quite alarmed and assume that my employer thinks I'm stealing.

If I was ever asked to undergo drug testing for a CASHIER job (ie. minimum wage) I'd quit while laughing my @ss off.

 

[pms_testosterone]

Just different cultural expectations I guess? But seems alarming nonetheless.

 

[Jibby321]

Just different cultural expectations I guess? But seems alarming nonetheless.

Common practice in the states. Hell I don't even know what job you can get that wouldn't require you to at least have a 5 panel screen.

 

[Jbrl]

What would be your opinion on recreational use of licit unscheduled substances outside the workplace?

Picture this, your certified PhT pops a false positive for LSD on a random or an initial screening, but he comes clean and tells you the metabolites caught were actually from Lysergic a-hydroxyethyl amide (LSH) that he isolated from ether washed plant material and then synthesized inside the plant material with peppermint oil (because that hydrogen love to move). The sample is rescreened under a test specific environment and as it turns out he is telling the truth.

What is your professional reaction due to him not doing anything illicit?
Do you fire him on principle because at will employment allows it, or if he is being hired do you discriminate against him for a lack of privacy laws?

Just seeking out what the pre pharms and pharms think about licit and responsible use.

Remember: even though this compound is psychotropic it has therapeutic use as a vascular constrictant. He has a right to licitly treat his own ailment.

Also isolates are not covered under most countries analog acts.

Which employee/random drug screen would test for LSD? Half-life is too low to be cost effective. It's out of your system by the next day if urine, so detection rate will be extremely low if it's your average urine test. Probably would've been better to go with MDMA or marijuana for this scenario, I think.

Anyway, there are two ways I would view and approach this:

Personally: Don't care, even if you are BSing me and actually using LSD, as long as you aren't hurting anyone or a burden to people around you. On a personal level, I'd care more that you are lying to my face. There are many people who use molly, coke, acid, shrooms, and everything else you can think of, pharmacists included, and for various reasons - self-discovery, introspection, socializing, experimentation with altered states of mind, tapping into creativity, whatever else. The law tells you they're bad and different from your addictive narcs - sometimes for good reason, sometimes not. Alcohol is far worse than many illicit substances. Same with cigarettes.

Professionally: If it's clearly a false positive like you stated, firing him would be the wrong choice because he can file complaints and complicate the issue. If there's nothing wrong, why make a problem out of it? However, I also can't quite see a situation where he would prove it was DEFINITELY a false positive. This seems like a very unusual (even theoretical) situation; one would have to wonder what he is doing as a side job and why the employer would be willing to re-test him under a "test specific environment". If he's being hired, I'd sooner hire someone with equivalent credentials/personality and nothing on his/her record - again, to avoid complications. Professionally, if he actually tested positive for any illicit drugs, I would fire him without a second thought if approved by the medical review officer. People get fired for less, like eating a Snickers during lunch break that they haven't paid for. Any oversight here will be on my shoulders.

 

[PolarPop]

It's a shot in the dark here.... But I'm guessing you have no pharmacy experience. Uh.... Yes. It's very common for technicians to be screened. Usually a 12 panel test. They are handling controlled substances. Just because lsd can't be stolen from a pharmacy doesn't mean they won't test for it. It's an illicit substance. You can't by lsd on the grocery aisle in walmart. yet all cashiers and employes are rountely tested before hiring and at random during employment.

Actually they won't test for it. No one will ever test for LSD because there is no standard drug screen that includes LSD, 2C compounds, mushrooms, or any other psychedelic drug that exists. They can be specifically tested for, but you would have to be drug tested while you were tripping and since they are expensive tests that take time to find and schedule, it's not going to happen.

 

[Jibby321]

Actually they won't test for it. No one will ever test for LSD because there is no standard drug screen that includes LSD, 2C compounds, mushrooms, or any other psychedelic drug that exists. They can be specifically tested for, but you would have to be drug tested while you were tripping and since they are expensive tests that take time to find and schedule, it's not going to happen.

I was thinking of MDMA which is tested on a traditional 12 panel screening. Clearly I don't know my street drugs that great. Lol

 

[Rouelle]

If someone peed positive for a drug or its metabolite and I was presented with one of the following 2 explanations:

1. I screwed up and dropped some acid

OR

2. I didn't do anything wrong. I simply extracted an (as yet not illegal) psychotropic substance from the plant source and then packaged it up in peppermint oil and then self-medicated with it

I would probably fire both. I would, however, have sympathy for #1 because everyone screws up. I would probably report #2 to the DEA for investigation into manufacturing +/- the intent to distribute. #2 is a very troubling situation and I would want no part of that situation in my pharmacy, whether illegal or not.

 

[Platypus311]

As other people have stated, there is no test for LSD. If I were in a position of power, and someone tested positive for cannabis. I wouldn't really make a big deal of it.
I see it is really nothing wrong with that. It's not quite harmless, but it's far less harmful than alcohol or cigarettes and I think the law keeping it in schedule 1 is just ludicrous. I also believe it will change fairly soon.

However, if someone tested positive for cocaine, opioids or meth, that would be a far different situation and I would have to axe that person.

 

[SClENCE]

Doesn't matter if it's legal or not... this guy sounds like a nut case so I'd fire him either way.