Skip to main content

Drug tests at Immigration a waste of time and money, says expert

Drug tests at Immigration a waste of time and money


Reporter for The Canberra Times
The Immigration Department is wasting its time and taxpayers' money on forced drug tests for thousands of public servants, according to a leading workplace drug and alcohol expert.
The tests will be no deterrent, enormously expensive and might even make matters worse by forcing drug users in the department on to harder substances, according to AOD workplace testing's Dr Donna Bull.
But the department says that it is no ordinary workplace and that illicit drug use by government officials represents an unacceptable corruption risk to the nation's border protection system.
Dr Bull, an independent consultant, says up to 5000 public servants would have to be tested each year to give the department a realistic chance of catching bureaucrats who turn up to work high.

But Dr Bull says a mandatory testing regime in the British Army resulted in soldiers switching from cannabis to LSD, which is harder to detect, and similar programs in Australia's mining industry were fuelling a progression from  cannabis to methamphetamine among workers.
Read the full article here

MediNat Response:

 We are a little concerned that the conversation and claims have no supporting evidence!
Dr Bull seems to think that rapid tests do not detect Ice (methamphetamines) We would disagree with Dr Bull on that one, most rapid tests include MET /MAMP methamphetamines, both in saliva and urine tests and test very accurately at Australian Standards cutoffs (laboratory verified).
We have the feeling that we are visiting last century information and research here, unless Dr Bull can verify new statistics.

Examples:
ASDA  (Australian Sports Drug Agency) operated a cost effective, sports specific and flexible drug testing ... No Advance Notice testing is widely recognised as the most effective deterrent Reference

Using the U.S. military's policy of random drug testing and zero tolerance, we find that a strict employer anti-drug program is a highly effective means of deterring illicit drug use among current users as well as potential users, Reference

Drug and alcohol testing
in its various forms can demonstrate a range of useful impacts – quantifying usage; deterring
usage; as a basis for removing substance abusers from safety-sensitive roles; assessing impact on
accidents and incidents; identifying personnel who use these substances; monitoring personnel
on return to duty from rehabilitation programs and contributing to comprehensive, operator-
driven drug and alcohol policies. Reference

There is also a substantial volume of research from 1990's and early 2000-2004 that will dispute the effectiveness of drug testing as a deterent, most sighting papers from the early 90's.
There is a clear need for current research given the huge increase in technology and subsequent accuracy in testing using the latest rapid testing devices.
Drug Testing today is light years ahead of any of the current research, so we suggest new and informed research is undertaken before throwing negaive conotations on the effect by quoting out of date materials to justify it.

 Not sure what the motivation for that is?

 MediNat Australia supplies some of the most advanced Rapid Tests available in the Australian market today.
 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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."
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more