L.M. SIXEL

Drug tests evolve to outwit cheaters

Copyright 1997 Houston Chronicle

WHEN DRUG TESTING became commonplace a decade ago, urine tests
suddenly became standard practice.

But employees who use drugs have become quite sophisticated about
altering their urine so they'll still pass the drug test.

Employers are frustrated because they're missing many drug users
with a urine test, said Jacqueline Sutliff, product manager for
Pharmchem Laboratories in Menlo Park, Calif., which markets a
drug test patch.

"If you take a drug on Saturday and drink a lot of water Sunday,
you can pass a urine test on Monday," Sutliff said.

Or a few drops of hand soap will dilute a sample, according to
another urine testing expert. And then there's the trick of
getting another employee's urine, putting it in a plastic bag and
taping it to the body.

Those who do urine tests say the drawbacks are exaggerated by
those selling new tests.

With all of these methods and more available, some
employers are looking at other kinds of drug tests that are
harder to manipulate and may be more accurate than urinalysis.

A hank of hair

While hair testing hasn't been approved by the U.S. Department of
Transportation for truckers and pilots, it's becoming popular
among other employers.

In this kind of test, a small hank of about 120 strands of hair
close to the scalp is taken from the back of an employee's head
and analyzed for drug use, said Diane Younghans, marketing
manager of toxicology at Associated Pathologists Laboratories in
Las Vegas.

If the employee is bald, the hair sample is taken from other
parts of his body such as under the arm or on the chest.

Drugs stay in the hair longer than they stay in urine, said
Younghans, whose company markets hair testing.

Hair sampling can detect drug use over the past 90 days, she
said. Typically, urine tests can detect drug use up to the
previous five days for most drugs.

However, it takes up to 10 days after using a drug for it to be
detected in hair, Younghans said.

The Mirage Resorts started using preemployment hair testing in
1992 for its 18,000 employees.

"I like the fact it gives you a threemonth window rather than a
fiveday one," said Arte Nathan, vice president of human
resources for Mirage Resorts in Las Vegas.

It's too easy to cheat on urine tests, he said. "They can abstain
for three to five days; they can't abstain for three months,"
Nathan said.

He said the hair tests are a little weak on confirming marijuana
use but said he's not very concerned about that. It's mostly
heroin, cocaine and amphetamines that would cause employees to
act strangely or steal to support their habits, Nathan said.

The casino only uses urine drug testing when it has probable
cause that an employee is under the influence of drugs, Nathan
said.

Trying to derail bandwagon

Steve Magoon cautioned employers from jumping too quickly on the
hair testing bandwagon.

Suppose you're a competitive swimmer who shaved off all your body
hair, asked Magoon, president of BioChemical Screening in
Houston, which does urine drug testing. "What will you do?"

Hair testing also isn't very fair, said Magoon, who said he gets
a lot of calls from employers who are interested in hair testing.
He tells them it's not defensible in court like urine testing is.

He asked what an employer would do if an employee says he did
drugs three months ago but is clean now.

He'd fail the hair test but pass the urine test, Magoon said,
adding that there are lots of very fine employees who used to be
on drugs.

He disagreed that urine testing is full of pitfalls. Done
correctly, the test is quite hard to tamper with, he said. To
keep his company on its toes, Magoon said he tries to tamper with
his own urine specimens.

Sutliff hopes to interest employers in a skin patch she developed
that can be applied to an employee's upper arm, back or midriff
to test for drugs.

The patch, which is worn for at least 24 hours, is then removed
and the sweat is analyzed for the presence of drugs that were
taken two days earlier.

So far, she's sold the patch test to state prison systems for use
on prisoners, probationers and parolees. She said she's been
approached by companies about using the patch for random drug
testing.

Sutliff said she gets three to four times more people testing
positive for cocaine than urine tests do, and said the positive
rate is even higher for amphetamines.

"I think it's a perfect test for crosscountry truck drivers and
airline pilots," she said. "I have to convince the Department of
Transportation it's a great idea."

To voice comments, telephone (713) 2202000 and dial in code
1002. Send email to lm.sixel@chron.com