DRUG-SCREENING FIRM DEFENDS USE OF HAIR TESTS

There were a number of inaccuracies and innuendoes in the recent letter to
the editor from Ellenese Brooks-Simms, president of the Orleans Parish
School Board, concerning drug testing in schools ("School Board chief
suspicious of DA's motives," Your Opinions, Feb. 17).

Hair testing is utilized by some of the largest corporations and police
agencies throughout the country, as well as in 140 schools in 26 states,
because it is unquestionably the least intrusive, most accurate and most
reliable indicator of drug use over time available today.

There are agencies with laboratory certification programs specifically for
hair analysis and numerous state and federal court decisions upholding the
use and validity of Psychemedics' testing.

Contrary to Ms. Brooks-Simms' letter, the FDA has cleared several tests
utilizing hair for drugs of abuse as safe and effective. These tests were
subjected to far greater scrutiny than many of the original urine tests
still in use.

Ms. Brooks-Simms suggests that Orleans Parish District Attorney Harry
Connick be asked who the principals in the laboratory are and how they are
paid. Mr. Connick need not be asked anything, as the company is publicly
traded and, of course, all information concerning principals and payments
is available to the public.

The letter also asks what happens to the hair or DNA that is collected. The
reality is that blood or urine would be better sources of nuclear DNA than
hair.

It is one thing to take a philosophical position that drug testing is
unwarranted. It is unconscionable, however, to misrepresent science or cast
aspersions through innuendo in an attempt to justify that position. Raymond
C. Kubacki Jr.

President

Psychemedics Corp.

Cambridge, Mass.