In the evaluation of data for the oil and gas industry, marijuana and synthetic can- nabinoids positive rates are equivalent. Corporations with high public visibility, safety concerns, and significant negative economic impacts due to accidents are including synthetic panels (e.g., oil and gas industry, railroads, and mining) in their test- ing programs. Oſten times the discovery of discarded packaging on company property or inside company vehicles have lead them to the inclusion of synthetic drugs in testing panels. List rates for synthetic cannabinoid tests typically costs around $25.00 and are added to existing panels without additional collection costs or increased sample volume requirements. With such a large number of compounds available there does not appear to be an easy solution to eliminating synthetic drugs from the US and, it appears abuse will continue for years to come. ❚
References
1 Notes from the Field: Severe Illness Associated with Reported Use of Synthetic Marijuana—Colorado, August- September 2013. December, 2013/62(49);1016-1017.
www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6249a7.htm
2 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Advisory. Spice, Bath Salts, and Behavioral Health. HHS Publication No (SMA)14-4858. Fall 2014 Volume 13. Issue 2.
3 David J. Kuntz. Synthetic Cannabinoids Prevalence in the Workplace: A Twelve-Month Evaluation by Clinical Reference Laboratory. DATIA focus. Winter 2013 6(1);18-22.
David Kuntz, PhD, is the executive director for analytical toxicology at Clinical Reference Labora- tory in Lenexa, KS. David is co-responsible for the
SAMHSA laboratory and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) forensic drug testing scientific director. He holds a laboratory director license in a number of states and is an inspector for SAMHSA and
CAP forensic programs. David is a Board Certified Toxicologist and is a national expert in urine adulteration and drug detection in urine, oral fluid, and sweat using GC/MS and LC/MS/MS. He has worked in workplace drug testing for the past 27 years and has testified extensively regarding drug use, interpretation, and adulteration of urine, oral fluid and sweat samples. He is an inspector for the SAMHSA and CAP forensic drug testing programs and a past member of the national Drug Testing Advisory Board and the NLCP MSMS Standards Working Group. He currently serves on the editorial board for Clinical & Forensic Toxicology News and as a consultant to the MRO Examination Development Committee for the Medical Review Officer Certification Council (MROCC) and lecturer for AAMRO training courses.
62
datia focus
spring 2015
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76