Skip to main content

What are Australian Standards Requirements 'REALLY'

Australian Standards for Urine and Saliva Drug Tests


I thought it was about time to clear this one up, as there is just so much misinformation around the internet about Australian Standards compliance and those organisations that try to create the idea that they are the only company that create an Australian Standards drug test and all others are all making false claims and are somehow in breach of the ACCC Fair Trading Act.

Lets get the facts!

Australian Standards cut-off levels for Urine tests (copied straight from the Australian Standards):



ASNZS 4308-2008
TABLE 1
IMMUNOASSAY SCREENING TEST CUT-OFF LEVELS
Class of drug* Cut-off level, μg/L

Amphetamine type substances                                 300
Benzodiazepines                                                      200
Cannabis metabolites                                                 50
Cocaine metabolites                                                 300
Opiates                                                                     300

* For drugs that may be optionally tested within each class, the specified cut-off levels may not apply and other methodologies may be more appropriate.


This is very clear and defines 'exact cut-off levels' that testing units need to comply with!
Don't be fooled when someone says they are compliant but they have cut-off levels of 1000μg/L - 3000μg/L, you could be work tested or incident tested with an Australian Standards test many hours later and be positive!

Australian Standards cut-off levels for Saliva tests (copied straight from the Australian Standards):


AS4760 - 2006

TABLE 3.1
ON-SITE INITIAL TEST TARGET CONCENTRATIONS
Class of drug Target concentration ng/mL

Opiates                                                                        50
Amphetamine-type stimulants                                    50
Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)                                 25
Cocaine and metabolites                                             50
NOTE: These targets represent the undiluted oral fluid concentration.


As you can see above this standard suggests 'TARGET' concentrations!! not exact cut-offs as does the urine standard.
It is important that units meet or are as close as possible to the target concentration.
Last I saw the Victorian Police drug testing unit did not test THC (marijuana) at the standard level, however it is clear that the standard requires the unit to be targeted to the 25ng cut-off

Some organisations state that you should see the NATA certificate of compliance!
However the Australian Standards state that:

"NOTE: Collecting agencies making a statement of compliance with this Australian Standard,
are advised to ensure that such compliance is capable of being verified

Don't be fooled by bold statements of compliance with products that clearly do not meet the standards or the standards targets in the case of saliva tests.
Also do not be persuaded by seemingly qualified and convincing statements about breach of ACCC regulations where the facts are somewhat distorted!

My advice! make sure drug test kits clearly meet the required cut-offs in the case of Urine Tests and are targeted to the required concentrations in the case of saliva tests.

see our range at medinat.com.au and be confident that we are compliant with the requirements of the standards.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

GHB date rape drug is back and pill testing may not help, says ED doctor

GHB the Date Rape Drug Discovered by a Russian chemist in the nineteenth century, used as a general anaesthetic in 1970s Dunedin, picked up by Californian bodybuilders in the 1990s - the drug known as GHB has travelled a long road to its current resurgence in the Australian party scene. On the weekend in Melbourne, more than 20 people were hospitalised after reportedly overdosing at the Electric Parade festival. GHB was blamed - one of the biggest overdoses of the drug since 10 people collapsed outside at a Gold Coast nightclub in 1996. "It's back again," exclaimed Dr David Caldicott, a Canberra-based emergency department doctor who was in Adelaide when GHB hit in the '90s. "I thought we managed to explain to people it was a stupid drug to take. Around Australia there will be emergency doctors everywhere holding their heads in their hands going, 'Oh God!'. "A new generation has started learning the mistakes all over again."

NSW Police overlooked scientific advice about hair sample

NSW Police overlooked scientific advice about hair sample and sacked drug-tested sergeant Eamonn Duff  March 12 2017  A single strand of hair that destroyed the life of a long-serving Sydney police officer has the potential to influence the future of not just the entire NSW Police Force but all workplaces across NSW. Sergeant George Zisopoulos insists he has been wrongly dismissed due to one of his hair follicles which returned a positive drug test reading. But while the state's top cop, Commissioner Andrew Scipione, has determined that, on the "balance of probabilities", the officer knowingly consumed drugs, scientific opinion suggests otherwise. Leading forensic experts have cast doubts over the decision to sack Sergeant Zisopoulos, concluding there is "no evidence" the substances found on his hair were ingested and that the minute readings may have been caused by "external contamination". ergeant Zisopoulos, who is the first NSW

Welfare drug test: the most likely trial sites based on Govt criteria

Wednesday 17 May 2017 11:00am By James Purtill From next January, anyone applying for Newstart or Youth Allowance in one of three as-yet-unnamed areas could be tested for drug use. Not everyone gets tested. Job seekers and students will be profiled to identify the ones most likely to be taking drugs. We don't know what the profiling will be based on, only that it will be "relevant characteristics that indicate a higher risk of substance abuse". That could be anything from age, to income, to gender to school leaving age. But we do know what criteria the government will use to pick the three trial sites: High rates of welfare; High rates of drug use; Available counselling services. That narrows it down a bit. The three trial sites will test 5,000 *new* applicants, so they need to be Centrelink offices with a lot of people walking through the doors. The office with the highest number of payment recipients in December 2016 (the most recent