HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit an electronic Letter to the Editor about this paper Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by ElSohly, M. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by ElSohly, M. A. Related Collections Drug Monitoring and Toxicology

Practical Challenges to Positive Drug Tests for Marijuana

ElSohly Laboratories, Incorporated, 5 Industrial Park Dr., Oxford, MS 38655 and National Center for Natural Products Research, The University of Mississippi, University, MS 38677

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

With the advent of drug testing in the workplace and the consequences of a positive drug test, several issues have arisen in defending or explaining a positive result for a given drug of abuse. Marijuana is the illicit drug with the highest percentage of positives in workplace drug testing. Consequently, marijuana was the first such drug for which excuses were provided to explain the positive test result.

Passive inhalation was the first defense offered. This prompted several studies to ascertain whether passive inhalation of marijuana smoke could produce a positive drug test (1)(2)(3)(4). The majority of these studies showed that although passive inhalation of marijuana smoke under certain circumstances could produce detectable concentrations of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) metabolite in urine, those concentrations were not above the cutoffs used under the federal workplace drug testing guidelines (50 µg/L for screening and 15 µg/L for confirmation). One study (5), however, showed that concentrations above these cutoffs could be attained when the exposure conditions were very severe and, hence, unrealistic. Today, passive inhalation is not nearly the issue that it was at the beginning of drug testing in the workplace.

The second issue was passive ingestion. Unknowing ingestion of marijuana tea, brownies prepared with marijuana, or the like was the line of defense that followed passive inhalation. Although studies were carried out to investigate this issue (6)(7), there was no question that if someone orally ingested cooked marijuana, urinary . . . [Full Text of this Article]

The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:

				M Saugy, L Avois, C Saudan, N Robinson, C Giroud, P Mangin, and J Dvorak Cannabis and sport Br. J. Sports Med., July 1, 2006; 40(suppl_1): i13 - i15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Levy, S. K. Harris, L. Sherritt, M. Angulo, and J. R. Knight Drug Testing of Adolescents in Ambulatory Medicine: Physician Practices and Knowledge Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, February 1, 2006; 160(2): 146 - 150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Aharonovich, X. Liu, S. Samet, E. Nunes, R. Waxman, and D. Hasin Postdischarge Cannabis Use and Its Relationship to Cocaine, Alcohol, and Heroin Use: A Prospective Study Am J Psychiatry, August 1, 2005; 162(8): 1507 - 1514. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. de la Torre and S. Pichini Usefulness of Sweat Testing for the Detection of Cannabis Smoke Clin. Chem., November 1, 2004; 50(11): 1961 - 1962. [Full Text] [PDF]