Anyone out there using prescription painkillers or designer drugs will be having a tougher time joining the military.  In March, the Pentagon released that it plans to expand the number of drugs it screens for in their drug panel.  This change is in response to the prescription painkiller epidemic throughout the United States and the recent popularity of synthetic marijuana.

The following drugs are being added to the US Military Drug Test

• Heroin
• Codeine
• Morphine
• Hydrocodone
• Oxycodone
• Hydromorphone
• Oxymorphone
• Benzodiazepine
• Other sedatives
• And several synthetic cannabis-like drugs

This change will mean that applicants will be screened for the same 26 drugs that all active duty troops are regularly tested for and per the Department of Defense, the new policy is scheduled to begin on April 3, 2017.

In a recent news release, the Pentagon referenced the change to “the level of illicit and prescription medication abuse among civilians as well as the increase in heroin and synthetic drug use”

The Pentagon expects that this new screening will lead to an increase of approximately 450 additional positives per year.  Currently, of the 279, 400 applicants per year there is about 2,400 that test positive for drugs that were already in the Military Drug Panel.

Applicants who fail the drug test may reapply, however, anyone who fails twice is permanently disqualified for Military Service.  Other Military Branches have stricter drug testing policies and this new drug screening requirement will also apply to Officer Candidates, service academies and enlisted applicants.

 

For more information please contact us at 800-221-4291 or www.accrediteddrugtesting.net/contact

 

NCAA Drug Testing Policy Overview

HOW are NCAA Drug Tests Administered?

The NCAA Board of Governors approved Proposal No. 30 at the January 1986 NCAA Convention and Proposal Nos. 52-54 at the January 1990 Convention, these approvals reaffirmed the NCAA institution’s dedication to the principal of fair and equitable intercollegiate competition including their championships and postseason bowl games.

The NCAA drug- testing program was created to ensure further steps were taken in the protection of the health and safety of the student-athletes competing.  Furthermore, this was done to ensure that no one participant might have an artificially induced advantage and that no one participant might be pressured to use chemical substances to remain competitive, but most importantly to safeguard the health and safety of participants.  The NCAA Board of Governors has final authority over the procedures and implementation of the NCAA drug-testing program.

All NCAA member institutions are subject to NCAA drug testing. The drug-testing program involves urine collection and laboratory analyses for substances on a list of banned-drug classes.

The NCAA Board of Governors have developed a list which consists of substances generally declared to be performance enhancing and/or potentially harmful to the health and safety of the student- athlete.

The NCAA drug testing policy bans the following classes of drugs:

1. Stimulants
2. Anabolic agents
3. Alcohol (Alcohol Link/ETG) and beta blockers (banned for rifle only)
4. Diuretics and other masking agents
5. Street/illicit drugs
6. Peptide hormones and analogues
7. Anti-estrogens and
8. Beta-2 agonists

 

NOTE: Any substance that is chemically- pharmacologically related to these classes is also banned. The institution along with the student-athlete shall be held accountable for all drugs within the banned-drug class regardless of whether they have been specially identified.

Examples of substances under each class can be found at www.NCAA.org/drugtesting. However, there is no complete list of banned substances.

The NCAA utilizes a system of banning substances by drug class, they also include related compounds which are included in the class due to their pharmacological action and/or chemical structure.

No substance belonging to the prohibited class may be used regardless of whether it is specifically listed as an example, unless specifically exempted and it is up to the student athlete to ensure they are not in violation of the NCAA Policy.

Positive Drug Test Levels Examples:

• caffeine, if the concentration in urine exceeds 15 micrograms/ ml;
• marijuana or THC, if the concentration in the urine of THC metabolites is equal to or greater than 5 nanograms/ml;
• testosterone, if the administration of testosterone or use of any other substance or manipulation has the result of increasing testosterone, or the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone, or results in an adverse finding on IRMS.

The NCAA utilizes an approved laboratory for the analysis and confirmation of the student-athletes’ urine through mass spectrometry in conjunction with gas chromatography, liquid chromatography or isotope mass spectrometry, or other approved methods. The method of testing for erythropoietin (EPO) is isoelectric focusing (IEF) with immuno blotting, and other approved methods.

Here are some key points about the NCAA Program:

• Student-athletes are held responsible for use of all banned substances at all times.
• NCAA year-round testing may test for anabolic agents, diuretics and masking agents, peptide hormones, beta-2 agonists and beta blockers. Stimulants and street/illicit drugs are generally not tested in NCAA year-round testing.
• NCAA championship and postseason bowl-game testing may test for all banned drug classes, and include tests for street/illicit drugs and stimulants.
• Other testing occasions, such as exit tests, follow- up tests and suspected manipulation, may include testing for all banned-drug classes.

A student-athlete will be in breach of the NCAA drug testing protocol and treated as if there was a positive test for a banned substance other than a street/illicit drug as defined in bylaw 31.2.3 if the student-athlete:

• refuses to sign the notification form or custody and control form;
• fails to arrive at the collection station without justification as determined by Drug Free Sport;
• fails to provide a urine specimen according to protocol;
• leaves the collection station without authorization from the certified collector before providing a specimen according to protocol; or
• attempts to alter the integrity of the collection process.

The NCAA is committed to prevention of drug and alcohol abuse. NCAA bylaws require the director of athletics or his or her designee to educate student-athletes about NCAA banned substances and the products that may contain them. As a best practice, athletics departments should conduct drug and alcohol-education

The NCAA provides a drug-education framework for member schools to ensure they are conducting adequate drug education for all student-athletes.

Education Framework (beginning at orientation)

• Ensure that student-athletes sign NCAA compliance forms.
• Provide student-athletes with a copy of the written drug policies as outlined above.
• Verbally explain all relevant drug policies with student-athletes and staff:
• Discuss NCAA banned-drug classes
• Explain NCAA drug-testing policies and consequences for testing positive, including failure to show or tampering with a urine sample.
• Explain the risks of using nutritional/dietary supplements
• NCAA tobacco use ban during practice and competition.
• Conference and institutional drug-testing program policies, if appropriate.
• Street drug use policies and institutional sanctions for violations, if appropriate

The NCAA has approximately 480,000 Student-Athletes, 19,300 Teams, 1,100 Member Schools and 3 Divisions.

The NCAA equips student-athletes with skills to succeed on the field, in the classroom and in life. Graduating from college is as important as winning on the playing field.

 

For more information reading the NCAA drug testing policy or for help on creating and implementing your own drug free workplace policy, contact us today at 800-221-4291 or at www.accrediteddrugtesting.net

 

 

House Republicans are making some major headway in their quest to allow states to drug test people who are unemployed.  Republicans passed a resolution that negates a rule from the Department of Labor under the Obama
Administration that kept any drug testing for unemployment benefits very restricted. The House resolution passed with an overwhelming amount of Republican support and the support of four Democrats.

The rule is directly related to the Nationwide argument over unemployment benefits and whether drug testing should be required.   Since the 1960’s, federal law has banned states from using drug tests to screen unemployment insurance applicants. However, Republicans
desire to amend the federal law which would permit states to require all applicants be screened for drug use.

In 2012 the Democratic party struck a deal as part of a compromise with Democrats to increase unemployment benefits and funding for other programs.  The Democrats ultimately conceded on a provision in a bill that would allow states to drug test applicants who either lost their jobs due to drug use or were applying for jobs in industries where drug tests are already commonly used. However, crafting the final rule and how it would work in practice was left up to the Department of Labor to implement. As a result, when the Department of Labor released its rule last year, Republicans argued that it was so narrow, States would not be allowed to implement drug tests for anyone.

In as much as the rule was released last August which allow Republicans to have the power to nullify it using the Congressional Review Act and thus that is what occurred in the recent House vote.

The House approved a resolution which was authored by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) that voids it. If the Senate passes a vote to void it as well, which only requires a simple majority, Congress can then create its own rule or have the Labor Department draft it.  No matter which agency drafts the rule it will likely give States wide authority to drug-test people who are unemployed.

After the vote, Brady said in a statement, “This legislation places a check on blatant executive overreach that all but prohibits states from implementing important reform to help qualified unemployed workers in their quest to find a new job.”

Although states do not have the authority to drug test most government programs, they can implement testing for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families who require cash assistance.

Thus, far, there have been 12 States which have implemented drug tests for welfare applicants and among those who have had testing programs up and running for the past two years, the results show very few positive test results.

 

 

The new OSHA rule which took effect and has been enforced since December 1, 2016 needed some clarification.  In an effort to summarize the final rule which was created to improve tracking of workplace injuries and illnesses but did not specifically address mandatory post-accident drug and alcohol testing,

OSHA’s view on the new rule clearly specifies the agency’s stance on mandatory or blanket post-accident testing and does not want it to act as a deterrent to the reporting of workplace safety incidents.

OSHA rule CFR part 1904 requires employers with more than 10 employees in covered positions to electronically submit occupational injuries and illnesses, and these employers must ensure that their policies and procedures cannot be construed as retaliatory towards the injured employee.

Along with the electronic reporting, the rule also requires employers of workplace injuries to implement “a reasonable procedure” for employees to report workplace injuries and that procedure cannot deter or discourage employees from reporting a workplace injury.

Furthermore, OSHA stated that “A procedure is not reasonable if it would deter or discourage a reasonable employee from accurately reporting a workplace injury or illness”.  This statement is applied directly to post-accident drug testing and it could be interpreted that a blanket requirement for the drug test could discourage a reasonable employee from accurately reporting a workplace injury or illness.

It is important for all employers to understand that; OSHA is not prohibiting post-accident drug testing but rather specify that it should not be used as a blanket policy or in any method that would deter any employee involved in a workplace safety incident.

As an example, there would be no changes in post-accident drug testing policies for Department of Transportation (DOT) regulated employers or any other employers required to follow drug testing guidelines from the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988.

Additional drug free workplace programs and employers who comply with State workers’ compensation drug free workplaces have no need to amend their post-accident drug testing policies.

Here are some key points employers may want to consider with this new rule.

1. The regulation does not prohibit employers from post-accident drug testing.
2. The regulation does require a “reasonable basis” for employers to perform a post-accident drug test
3. The rule does not apply to drug testing employees for reasons other than injury-reporting.
4. Employers will not be issued citations for conducting drug testing in accordance with a state workers’ compensation law or other state or federal law.

For a citation to be issued, OSHA will need to establish the three elements of retaliation to prove a violation of the new rule.

A protected report of an injury or illness;
b. Adverse action;
c. And causation.

Please review the following Critical steps to take to help avoid issues with this OSHA rule:

1. Review your current drug free workplace policy, specifically your Post-accident policies should be reviewed and updated if needed to ensure that it’s language cannot be construed as “blanket” and therefore be presumed to be retaliatory and deter or discourage reporting.
2. Review your state laws: many employers’ drug free workplace polices specifically govern the enforcement of post-accident or post-injury drug testing. There are several states which have laws that apply to employers in that state. Employers adherence to State Drug Free Workplace Programs and State worker’s compensation laws will not change and OSHA will not find a violation of 1904.35 (b)(1)(iv) when post-accident testing is performed in compliance with these laws.
3. Retrain supervisors on reasonable suspicion drug testing and include training on post-accident “reasonable suspicion/basis”.
4. Implement a policy for a ‘decision tree’ to be utilized for every accident to determine if the accident requires post-accident testing and who involved in the accident should be tested.

 

No matter the reason, going to court and dealing with legal proceedings can be a headache. It can also feel like a heavy burden especially when courts start issuing requirements such as court ordered drug or alcohol tests. Whether you’re on probation or dealing with child custody, Accredited Drug Testing can make your court ordered drug testing needs painless.

Child Custody Court-Ordered Drug Tests

 To protect children, it’s not uncommon for legal parties to seek court-ordered drug tests in cases involving child custody issues. Test results are often used to prove, or disprove, an individual’s fitness as a parent or may be considered to determine initial custody agreements. Other child custody court-ordered drug tests can also be part of an ongoing random drug testing program. Spouses may be requested to submit to one-time-only drug tests, random drug testing over a period of time, or testing prior to visitation rights.

Child custody proceedings can be stressful especially when there are drug or alcohol related testing requirements. Accredited Drug Testing is here to help alleviate that stress with fast, easy drug testing options for all of your child custody needs.

Customized Court-Ordered Drug Testing Requirements

If you’re on probation or going through any form of litigation, depending on your case, the court may require specific drug and alcohol testing requirements. Some drug or alcohol testing requirements may include hair follicle testing for alcohol, or tests that screen for specific drugs with longer detection periods. For example, the court may require a screening that detects drug use during the previous 90 days.

Court-ordered drug tests will also often carry with them stipulations regarding payment for testing services. One party may be responsible for covering the drug-testing expenses, costs may be divided between multiple parties, or a mutual agreement may be made. Whatever the case may be, or no matter the type of screening requirements, Accredited Drug Testing centers are dedicated to accommodating most arrangements.

Court-ordered drug tests should contain detailed instructions specifying the type of test to be administered and the drugs that should be screened for. If sample collection needs to be witnessed to prevent potential tampering or substitution, those specifications will be stated in the court order.

We Specialize in:

• Court Ordered Drug and Alcohol Testing
• Child Custody Court Ordered Drug Testing
• Customized Drug Testing
• Exceptional Customer Service

Accredited Drug Testing, Inc. provides court ordered drug testing which includes drug and alcohol tests that are utilized for a wide variety of court ordered proceedings including probation and other types of government required tests.

Test results can be submitted for a wide variety of court-ordered proceedings including probation hearings, child custody cases, litigation, and all manner of government required tests.

Accredited Drug Testing is able to meet and exceed your needs, for more information regarding our Court Ordered Drug Tests or to schedule an appointment, Call Today 800-221-4291

 

 

Investigators revealed that all three of the individuals involved in a fatal Amtrak crash near Philadelphia last April 2016 tested positive for drug use.  One of the individuals was the train’s engineer and two members of a railway work crew who both were killed, according to federal investigators.

According to investigators, Alexander Hunter, 48 was the trains engineer and survived the crash, had used marijuana.   Testing also showed that Joseph Carter (61), a backhoe operator, had used cocaine and the supervisor of the work crew, Peter John Adamovich, 59, had used oxycodone, according to test results.

The National Transportation Safety Board stated that both Carter and Adamovich were killed when a southbound passenger train traveling at 106 miles per hour struck the backhoe working on an adjacent track.

The trio of positive drug tests were part of an alarming increase of drug use by railroad workers that was documented last year by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).

The FRA reported that nearly 5 percent of workers involved in accidents in 2016 were found to have used illegal drugs.  The FRA reacted to the Chester crash by requiring that track-bed maintenance workers be included in the extensive drug testing program that has been in place for train crew members for more than 30 years.

The fatal collision between Amtrak’s Palmetto train, with 330 passengers and seven crew members took place early on a Sunday morning and 40 people on board were taken to hospitals with minor injuries.

Railroad workers are amongst the most heavily drug-tested employees in the U.S.  They are required to submit to pre-employment drug screenings, random drug testing and post-accident testing.

In the last several years’ heroin and illegal opioid use has increased dramatically in the general population and it was evident that use of those and other drugs was on the rise in the railroad industry.

Since 2009 there had been no considerable increase in positive test results from the approximate 50,000 random tests conducted each year.  However, in 2015, random screenings of railway workers which includes engineers, train crew and dispatchers increased by 43 percent.

 

 

The American Medical Association’s (AMA) annual State Legislative Strategy Conference held in early January in Amelia Island, Fla., determined several areas of focus to address with state legislators during 2017 which include the opioid epidemic and strengthening public health.

2017 Key Topics

• Strengthening Medicaid: Debating about the future of Medicaid expansion and many states are seeking responsible Medicaid reforms which would improve patient access and quality of care.
• Reducing the U.S. opioid epidemic: Opioid-related legislation is said to focus mainly on mandated prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP), physician education, substance-use disorder treatment, and guidelines or restrictions on prescribing controlled substances.
• Advancing physician-led team based care: Effort to establish a framework for physician-led team-based care.  Many States are moving away from fragmentation and more towards care coordination which will ensure that patients are provided the highest quality care at the lowest cost.
• Provider network issues: Networks continue to narrow and patients’ financial responsibility for their health care continues to increase, the issues of network adequacy and out-of-network care.
• Improving public health:  Several states, including Iowa, Indiana, South Dakota, Vermont and Washington, aim to join California and Hawaii in raising the minimum purchasing age for tobacco products to 21. Missouri will attempt to ban texting while driving and fight against a repeal of the state’s helmet laws. Also, State and National medical associations will be targeting a long list of additional issues such as diabetes prevention, decreasing cardiovascular disease, infectious disease prevention, obesity, student-athlete concussion, cardiac laws, women’s reproductive rights, tanning restrictions for minors and several others.

 

 

This program joins students with scientists and other experts to counteract the myths about drugs and alcohol that teens get from the internet, social media, TV,
movies, music, or from friends.

National Drug & Alcohol Facts week was launched in 2010 by scientists at the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).  NIDA created this in an effort to stimulate educational events in communities where teens could learn what science has taught us about drug use and addiction.

In 2016, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism became a partner and alcohol has been added as a topic area for the week. NIDA and NIAAA are part of the National Institutes of Health.

Here is some information from the 2016 Monitoring the Future (MTF) annual survey. 

This was a survey conducted of 8th, 10th, and 12th graders by researchers at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, under a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, part of the National Institutes of Health.

As of 1975, the survey measured drug, alcohol, and cigarette use and related attitudes in 12th graders nationwide; 8th and 10th graders were incorporated into the survey in 1991.

2016 Highlights:

• 45,4730 students participated from 372 public and private schools
• 4 percent among 8th graders,
• 8 percent among 10th graders, and
• 3 percent among 12th graders.

Although these numbers may seem high, 2016’s survey results are encouraging.  These results illustrate that the past-year use of illicit drugs other than marijuana is continuing to decline to the lowest level in the history of the survey for all three grades.

These rates are down from peak rates of 12.6 percent for 8th graders in 1995, and 18.4 percent for 10th graders in 1996, and 21.6 percent for 12th graders in 2001.

Teen use of many substances is at its lowest level since the survey’s inception, regarding alcohol, cigarettes, heroin, cocaine, methamphetamines, inhalants, and sedatives (reported only by 12th graders).

Other illicit drugs surveyed also illustrated a 5-year decline.

• marijuana (among 8th and 10th graders),
• synthetic cannabinoids (K2/herbal incense, sometimes called “synthetic marijuana”),
• prescription opioids (reported in the survey as “narcotics other than heroin”),
• hallucinogens,
• amphetamines, and
• over-the-counter cough and cold medications

The survey also found a general decline in perceived risk of harm and disapproval of using several substances.

• fewer 8th graders think that taking Ecstasy (MDMA) or synthetic cathinones (“bath salts”) occasionally is harmful,
• fewer report disapproval of taking Ecstasy or inhalants regularly.
• In 10th graders, there was a decrease in the percentage of students who perceive a risk of harm from the following:
  • trying inhalants or synthetic cathinones once or twice
  • taking Crack, Vicodin®, or synthetic cathinones occasionally
  • using inhalants regularly

Marijuana

Marijuana usage has declined amongst 8th and 10th graders and remains unchanged among 12th graders compared to 5 years ago, despite the changing state marijuana laws. Past-year use of marijuana is at its lowest level in more than 2 decades among 8th and 10th graders.

Last Year Results (8^th Graders)

• Daily use declined from 1.1% to 0.07%

Last 5 Years

• Daily use decreased form 1.3% to 0.7% (8^th Graders)
• Daily use decreased from 3.6% to 2.5% (10^th Graders)
• 0% continue to report daily use (12 Graders)

Click here to test your knowledge https://teens.drugabuse.gov/quiz/national-drug-alcohol-facts-week/take-iq-challenge/2016

 

 

As the opioid epidemic continues to sweep throughout America, there is an ever-greater number of drug-dependent newborns being reported in rural areas which are straining hospital neonatal units and draining precious medical resources.

This problem has rapidly grown and shows no signs of reduction.  Researchers have reported and published their study in JAMA Pediatrics, which concludes that the increase in drug-dependent newborns has been disproportionately larger in rural areas.

From 2004 to 2013, the proportion of newborns born dependent on drugs increased nearly sevenfold in hospitals in rural counties, to 7.5 per 1,000 from 1.2 per 1,000. By contrast, the uptick among urban infants was nearly fourfold, to 4.8 per 1,000 from 1.4 per 1,000.  Researchers concluded that these rising rates are due largely to the widening use of opioids among pregnant women.

“The problem is accelerating in rural areas to a greater degree than in urban areas,” said Dr. Veeral Tolia, a neonatologist who works at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas and was not involved in the new report.

Some neonatal intensive care units, called NICUs, now devote 10 percent of their hours to caring for infants who have withdrawal symptoms.

Hospitals in the eye of this storm are commonly under resourced, experts said.

Using data from 2012 and 2013, a recent federal study found states like West Virginia, Maine and Vermont had particularly high rates of what is known as neonatal abstinence syndrome. It includes such symptoms as irritability, breathing problems, seizures and difficulties taking a bottle or being breast-fed.

Babies may be born with symptoms of withdrawal from any number of drugs, including certain antidepressants or barbiturates, after prolonged use by their mothers during pregnancy. But the new report found that rates of infant drug dependency are rising in tandem with maternal opioid use in particular.

Doctors frequently prescribe opioids to mothers-to-be to treat back pain or abdominal pain. Nearly 42 percent of pregnant women in Utah on Medicaid were prescribed opioids, and roughly 35 percent in Idaho, a 2014 study found.

Maternal opioid use was nearly 70 percent higher in rural counties than urban ones, the new report found.

Last year, a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine found that neonatal intensive care units nationwide that used to spend less than 1 percent of their days caring for these infants now must devote 4 percent of their staff hours to the task.

For many, the logistics can be difficult. Methadone, a drug commonly used in treatment programs, must be distributed at a clinic every day, which is “very challenging if you’re talking about a rural community where there isn’t much local health care,” Dr. Tolia said.

Pregnant women may also be treated with buprenorphine, available at certain pharmacies. In theory, Dr. Tolia said, it could be more easily distributed to rural areas.

“Our solutions need to be focused on where the disease is happening in communities,” he said. Once a baby arrives in a neonatal intensive care unit, “it’s too late.”

In July, President Obama signed into law the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA. It stipulated that federal officials should give priority to funding programs in rural areas to improve treatment for pregnant women.

Accredited Drug Testing offers Limit of Detection testing which varies from the standard in toxicology testing is to utilize cut-off levels.  Limit of Detection means reporting any detectable amount of drug.  A test can be performed using Limit of Detection by contacting our corporate office at 800-221-4291.