Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not a fan of drug testing except for certain specific jobs where public safety may be a concern (airline pilot, etc). And even then it's questionable. I can't imagine what they hope to gain by this. The whole idea that it will save on health care costs is concerning since so may other things fall into that category and we can't regulate people via their livelihood into being perfect specimens.
I suspect what will happen is there will be a backlash over this, or the next thing they want to test for, and it will come to a head, people will rebel, and it will blow over with this kind of testing going back to where it belongs.
And the justification for that 20 years from now will because they did it with tobacco. Tobacco is an easy target, just as it's considering a stepping stone to hard drug use it's control is another stepping stone to stripping away your rights.
30 years ago you could smoke inside a hospital, granted making these no smoking zones and other public places makes sense however now we are telling private establishments what they can and cannot allow, business's that won't hire someone if they smoke. Next on the list will be telling people they cannot smoke in their own home.
One day many of you that support this are going to wake up to find out something you do or enjoy is the target of someone that wants to control your life.
I don't care if businesses don't allow some kind of behavior on the job. If you know it and don't like it, don't go work for them. Ditto, with the customers of a business. Take your business someplace else if you don't like their policies. But this control business in all facets of our personal life has got to stop. You are right. Today it's smoking (a legal activity) at home to determine your employment, tomorrow they'll be telling you you can't count widgets on the assembly line or develop software because you eat too much ice cream at home or there is no record of you buying condoms and you have an STD. They'll tell you it's for your own good or the good of the collective...like living in a totalitarian society is good for you.
[QUOTE=Ceece;13561195]I'm not a fan of drug testing except for certain specific jobs where public safety may be a concern (airline pilot, etc). And even then it's questionable. I can't imagine what they hope to gain by this. The whole idea that it will save on health care costs is concerning since so may other things fall into that category and we can't regulate people via their livelihood into being perfect specimens.
/QUOTE]
Yeah, I agree. I might check to see if you ski or mountain climb. Maybe you had a baby as a single mom or are a guy paying child support for a one night stand and had unprotected sex. Had two speeding tickets in a year? Played professional football? Can't have those risky behavior people employed here. Hey, maybe it's your kid still on your insurance policy that texts while driving. Maybe you have stairs inside the home and are more likely to fall. Maybe you choose to live in a city with a lot of red alert ozone level days. Maybe you take the subway to work and are more likely to have someone cough on you. It might increase healthcare costs. Where does it stop?
PhillyBurbs.com: *St. Luke's Hospital to screen job applicants for nicotine use (http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/news_details/article/262/2010/march/31/st-lukes-hospital-to-screen-job-applicants-for-nicotine-use.html - broken link)
Yes it's true folks. No longer can you smoke if you work at certain places.
St. Luke's Hospital joins many other institutions that will now do routine nicotine screens with their drug testing pre-employment requirements.
Go ahead and laugh; salts next (or maybe alcohol or sugar or fat).
i guess if it is a private facitlity they have every right to hire whom they want, but I also think this is carrying things to far. They are going to loose a lot of good doctors and nurses..Yes, what is next? As far as I am concerned unless the substance is illegal or can damage the employees ability to do their job no one has a right to discriminate..That is what they are doing..
When I was quitting the smoking habit I smoked a cigarette every once in a while for months. Eventually smoking made me ill and that helped me quit. Tobbaco and marijuana smoke are very irritating to me and I try to avoid them as much as possible. The irritation is my problem and I handle it myself. I would never demand folks stop smoking around me but I will leave anyplace that the smoke is bothering me.
I also happen to believe the society would be far better off if all the currently illegal drugs were made legal and available at government stores like hard liquor in New Hampshire. That way the quality would have to meet minimum standards and the profit would help fund any detox that the voters wanted to provide.
I believe an individual has the right to be able to smoke, eat, drink or make amusements with anything they please so long as no one else is endangered or childern are involved. The individual is responsible for what ever damage his amusements happen to do.
and I couldn't agree with you more. Don't blow it in my face, but I would never discriminate against a smoker...
Drink a ton of water prior to the drug screening. They'll basically just be testing water. However to really pass you have to additionally take a creatine supplement--they test for creatine levels to make sure it's actually urine that's being tested. And also take a vitamin B-12 supplement prior to testing. This will turn your clear watery urine a brighter shade of yellow, which they'll be looking for.
I've passed a few employment drug tests with this method, never failed one--even after smoking green a couple days prior. Don't know much about how long nicotine stays in your system, but it's definitely much longer than marijuana---which is stored in your fat cells and can stay in your system for weeks. I'd say you could probably flush nicotine out in a few days by just abstaining from smoking that long. If you're a heavy smoker that might be tough though--at which case you should probably consider quitting smoking anyways.
If the test is random however, you're out of luck.
Disgusting..I don't see how it's anyone's business what you put into your own body. I oppose drug tests unless it's a job involving heavy machinery, surgery, or flying/driving a vehicle. Drug tests for cube rat type jobs are laughable, and what I detest about them is that they can also find out other drugs you are taking that you might not want an employer to know about..ie rx pain pills, psych meds, etc....that is no one's business. I don't partake in drugs but it's still none of an employer's business. And smoking?! laughable.
I'm split on the issue. On one hand, a workplace should not have total and complete control over what their employees do on their own time. On the other hand... If a workplace doesn't want the place smelling like stale tobacco smoke and loss of productivity from smokers taking numerous breaks then that's their right too. Where I work, we take pride in our surroundings and don't want our work areas smelling like smoke, it's pretty simple. It's not only for us, but for our company reputation as well. Only 2 people out of 58 smoke where I work.
I wouldn't take a doctor seriously if they were telling me to be healthier, but reeked of cigarette smoke...it's a little hypocritical.
"There is evidence that humans and other animals can build up tolerance to the toxic effects of arsenic. A society of "arsenic eaters" who deliberately consumed arsenic-laden soils in their religious practices developed a high tolerance for arsenic. Rasputin was reported to regularly ingest arsenic to build tolerance and to protect himself from poisoning."
"Dietary requirements for arsenic in humans are still controversial. There are trace amounts of arsenic in almost all food and water, air and soil, so it is difficult to find humans who are isolated from all sources of arsenic. There are no known human health effects of arsenic deficiency, if such exist, and the effects observed in arsenic-deficient animals would be hard to detect and characterize in humans. Most investigators believe that it is likely that we receive all the arsenic we need from a normal diet, and there is currently no recommendation for a daily dietary intake for humans.
Nutritionists and toxicologists find themselves on opposite sides of an interesting question when they consider the human health effects of elements such as arsenic. In many cases an element can be toxic at one dose and healthful, even essential for health, at another. If it were somehow possible to eliminate from the environment all traces of elements known to have toxic effects, would this have a negative effect on human health? Because arsenic is ubiquitous in the environment, this question is likely to remain moot."
How about nicotine and tolerance? Does ones heart fail to respond to it after years and years of smoking? Surely you have that close at hand since you seemed to be so hot on arsenic. I thought this thread was about nicotine and use of it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
