DRUG TEST FOR HUB OFFICERS STIRS BIAS FEAR

In the three years since the Boston Police Department began a random,
mandatory drug test based on hair samples, nearly twice as many minority
officers have tested positive for drugs as their white counterparts,
prompting advocates for the officers to question whether the test is
racially biased.

According to figures released by the department yesterday, 45 officers have
tested positive for drugs, 2 percent of the 2,178-member force. All
officers are tested annually, but at random times.

Of those 45 officers, 16, or more than one-third, were white, while nearly
two-thirds of those testing positive were minorities. Of the 29 blacks and
Hispanics who tested positive, the vast majority, 26, were black. No Asians
have tested positive for drug use.

In an interview yesterday, Commissioner Paul F. Evans stressed that the
number of officers testing positive was small. He said he would not comment
on the high number of black officers testing positive for drug use, mostly
cocaine.

''The numbers are what the numbers are,'' Evans said. ''Ninety-six percent
of my minority officers all passed the test.''

But in a department where non-whites make up just one-third of the
department, the lopsided numbers have led the NAACP and the department's
association of minority officers to challenge the hair test's validity,
citing studies which have shown that the dark color and texture of black
hair react differently than light hair in drug tests.

Advocates for the officers contend that darker hair tends to absorb and
retain drug substances in higher concentrations, including drugs they may
have been exposed to on the job or elsewhere, increasing the chance for
false positives.

Also, they argue, because drug residue remains in darker hair longer than
lighter hair, officers with lighter hair who have used drugs may escape
detection.

A 2001 study by the Center for Human Toxicology at the University of Utah
showed that drugs, including cocaine and amphetamines, can accumulate in
higher concentrations, binding to the melanin pigment in the hair of rats.
In 1995, a study by the National Institute on Drug Abuse concluded that
dark hair absorbed drug residue from the air more intensely, creating
opportunities for false positive results.

But recent studies of narcotics officers in Miami, who are exposed to drugs
routinely, showed no disparities among light- and dark-haired officers in
connection with drug use.

In Boston, no officers in the drug control unit have tested positive for drugs.

The controversy over the hair-based drug tests, fueled by competing
scientific research, has led dozens of blacks in law enforcement, the
military, and other fields nationwide to cry foul after they were fired or
denied employment based on the results of hair-based drug tests.

In Chicago, seven black applicants to the police department sued the city,
saying they received false positive tests. They lost in court.

So far in Boston, 14 of the department's 552 black officers have resigned
or been fired for drug test violations. The fates of three more hang in the
balance, after they refused the department's policy of drug treatment and
suspension following a first offense.

''We're not naive enough to think there are no minority officers out there
doing something stupid,'' said Larry Brown, president of the Massachusetts
Association of Minority Law Enforcement Officers.

Brown said he supports the concept of random drug testing of officers. The
current policy, which tests all officers randomly inside a 60-day window
around their birthday, was hard-won by the department, agreed to by the
unions in exchange for millions of dollars in salary and benefit increases
under the education incentive program known as the Quinn Bill.

Brown also said he personally vouched for some of the black officers,
insisting, as they do, that they are drug-free. Referring to research by
the University of Utah and the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Brown
said, ''I find it hard to believe that nothing outside of ingesting cocaine
will give you a false positive. There must be some question as to whether
it has an adverse impact.''

Leonard Alkins, president of the Boston branch of the NAACP, who along with
Brown met with Evans earlier this month to debate the validity of the test,
compared the disparities in positive drug tests by race to disparities in
hiring and promotional exam scores when blacks first entered the department.

In both cases, Alkins said, the disproportionate numbers raise a red flag
about the test.

''It just does not make sense that black people have more of a drug problem
than white people,'' Alkins said. ''You are putting a person in a position
where, if they don't sign that paper and take a suspension and agree to
drug treatment, you will be fired.''

Evans said yesterday he was willing to examine any evidence presented by
Brown's organization or the NAACP that refutes the validity of the hair
test. But with a follow-up test and a high threshold for a positive result,
police officials said the chances of false positives were next to impossible.

''The way our hair testing is done, there is an amount of cocaine that has
to be present, and it has to be over a certain level,'' said Alicia
McDonnell, an attorney for the department.

In order to reach that threshold, McDonnell said, requires ''repeated use
of cocaine over a period of time. You cannot consume enough cocaine in one
sitting to test positive. You would die of a heart attack first.''

Many law enforcement agencies and the federal government continue to use
urine tests to detect illegal drug use, including the Massachusetts State
Police. But Boston's police department is one of dozens that have begun
using the more stringent hair test since the early 1990s. Police
departments in New York, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and Chicago also use
hair samples to test officers.

Because human hair can reveal drug use dating back as far as three months,
the use of hair is widely considered to be superior to urine, which only
keeps traces of drugs for about three days. The hair tests not only look
for the presence of drugs, but for unique byproducts that people produce
after ingesting drugs.

Bill Thistle, vice president and general counsel for Psychemedics Corp. of
Cambridge, a leader in hair testing, dismissed past studies connecting dark
hair and greater drug concentrations as bogus.

''The concept that someone will get drugs in their hair because of their
race is asinine,'' he said. He said the studies cited by the minority
police officer's group either only tested animals, such as rats, or tested
a small number of humans in artificial circumstances.